The Old Hyphenated Domain Name Debate

[NickFitz]

I'm sure it's not common but 'never' is a bit strong. I find it much quicker to type contractoruk.com or diy.com and the like. And obviously you've contradicted yourself with the second sentence.

Many normal people (as opposed to geeks like us) just use Google to get everywhere.

Back in 2010 somebody wrote a long, thoughtful article about the wider implications of using Facebook Login on sites. For a few days it became the top result on a Google search for "facebook login" and the comments on the article were filled with hundreds of complaints from people who wanted to visit Facebook and couldn't work out why they were instead being presented with this long piece of text. Here's a story from the Grauniad about it: https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...k-readwriteweb

And when I was at Yahoo! in 2007, I was told that they got tens of thousands of searches a day for "yahoo"

[woohoo]

I'm not a fan of hyphens in a domain name, always seems a bit ameraturish or small fry, as if the company could not afford the domain they wanted.

I still type domain names in the url address bar, especially if they are easy to remember and spell.

[Man Utd]

I'm sure it's not common but 'never' is a bit strong. I find it much quicker to type contractoruk.com or diy.com and the like. And obviously you've contradicted yourself with the second sentence.

No, not at all. I'm just saying that even with the trend away from typing urls, those 2 are so huge that their misspellings would generate a lot of traffic.

[northernladuk]

Well, because I've read it from various sources and I do it myself too. I either use google or navigate from links save in my favourites.

That said, I'm sure misspellings like wwwfacebook.com or eboy.com still get one hell of a lot of traffic.

I'm sure it's not common but 'never' is a bit strong. I find it much quicker to type contractoruk.com or diy.com and the like. And obviously you've contradicted yourself with the second sentence.

[Man Utd]

IMO I don't see why you've come to that conclusion and I don't believe it anyway. I don't think having a stupidly long or complex one that no one can spell or remember based on that assumption is a wise idea.

Well, because I've read it from various sources and I do it myself too. I either use google or navigate from links save in my favourites.

That said, I'm sure misspellings like wwwfacebook.com or eboy.com still get one hell of a lot of traffic.

[northernladuk]

I was also looking at buying up some misspellings too and came to the conclusion that people don't type urls any more.

Quite an interesting thread here

IMO I don't see why you've come to that conclusion and I don't believe it anyway. I don't think having a stupidly long or complex one that no one can spell or remember based on that assumption is a wise idea.

[TestMangler]

The guy who wanted to register big-bus-tycoons.com had the same issue.

[Man Utd]

I'd focus more on the user experience I.e. people being able to spell or remember you URL rather than a thinly veiled attempt to trick the search engines... which with a decent site you really don't need to do anymore.

The key is your use of the term 'was' as well. Keyword stuffing died a long time ago. Focus on quality, relevant content and good code first.

I was also looking at buying up some misspellings too and came to the conclusion that people don't type urls any more.

Quite an interesting thread here

[northernladuk]

I'd focus more on the user experience I.e. people being able to spell or remember you URL rather than a thinly veiled attempt to trick the search engines... which with a decent site you really don't need to do anymore.

The key is your use of the term 'was' as well. Keyword stuffing died a long time ago. Focus on quality, relevant content and good code first.

[LondonManc]

pen-island.com had the wrong sort of visitors because they forgot the hyphen.

Others that failed without the hypen included sites that should have been called analisa-joy.com, kids-exchange.net and sydney-therapist.com, the latter actually being for victims, not creating victims.

[Man Utd]

Ok, so the conventional wisdom was that your domain should contain your site concept keywords. So, if your site concept keywords were Manchester United Rule The World your domain name would be manchester-united-rule-the-world.com such that the individual kewords could be distinguished by search engine crawlers or whatever.

The someone always comes along and says no - don't do that . Who is going to remeber a domain name with hyphens - manchesterunitedruletheworld.com is much more succinct. And it is. But can the crawlers distinguish your site's keywords without the hyphenation?

And, furthermore, does hyphenation really matter anyway now because I read that hardly anyone ever types a url into the address bar anymore - people just what they're looking for and click the link that is served up.

Be interested in your responses as I'm weighiing up my options for the domain name of a new site I'm putting together.

Oh, and Liverpool fans - it's got nothing to do with Man Utd :