SEOMoz advice on only buying domain if .com version is available

[McTaggart]

RE: "In order to maximize the direct traffic to a domain, it is advised that webmasters should only buy a domain if the .com version is available. "

http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/domain

• I am working for a client who's had a domain live for 5 years or so without a .com version of the domain (just .co.uk) - the domain is also hyphenated (which doesn't look like a great idea).

So, just wondering what research has been done into probs caused by lack of .com domain and by using hyphenated domain. I'm trying to figure out whether it would be worth advising client to switch to a new domain.

Your thoughts would be welcome

[McTaggart]

Thanks guys, much appreciated and very useful. I just found Rand's whiteboard on domains and found it quite useful too - see 3: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-choose-the-right-domain-name

and this on hyphenated domains: http://www.highposition.com/blog/hyphenated-domains-google/ - but it's hard to know. Might set up some of my own tests.

[MoosaHemani]

It literally depends upon many things! Like if you client’s target market is within UK then I would recommend you to stick up to .co.uk domain as this way you will be able to get better visibility in Google UK plus visitors who are directly coming to your website will tend to trust you!

In my opinion single hyphen is fine if it fits the brand name as well but if you have a domain available that contain no hyphen and at the same time if you can afford a bit of a dip in traffic then you cna go for the new domain and redirect 301 the older domain to the new one but if you are not ready for the traffic and ranking dip then it won’t be a good idea!

Just my 2 cents!

[PaddyDisplays]

I agree with the guys above, it less to do with seo (if any) and more about human error.

I used to help with a uk gaming website that had a lot of american visitors, and I notice over the years people (the old time) would link to "sitename".com instead of .co.uk, which was held  by a domain shark, so lost back links.

But I think this is because of an American audience used to everything being .com

Note:  ultimately we bought the .com off the domain shark, I contacted him and originally he wanted $1000s for the domain, I said $300 would be the most I would page for it and said good bye.  2 month later he came back to me and sold it for $300.  So if you have a domain shark with the .com play the long game with them.

[trickshotric]

I don't think that is is much of an SEO problem as long as you are targeting business in the UK.

We have lots of high ranking .co.uk sites that are unaffected by the .com alternative. We have American suppliers of products who own the .com addresses and therefore we are not in direct competition.

The only time that it could be a problem is if you are physically competing the the .com version and they sell the same product and are targeting the same keywords as you.

Your potential customers may end up buying from the wrong company.

So in my opinion this is a branding issue rather than a Search Engine ranking issue.

[simon_realbuzz]

It really depends which markets your client is trying to target. If their target market is UK only then the .co.uk is perfectly fine. If the .com is available then it would do no harm to purchase it to save a competitor getting hold of it and outranking for the domain/brand name. You could simply redirect the .com to your .co.uk site.

Alternatively if the target is wider than the UK then it becomes increasingly difficult (though not impossible) to rank with a .co.uk in other countries. Hope this helps.