» uk-netmarketing: roundup: 31-03-2000

Is a .com address going out of fashion?
UK-Netmarketing Weekly Round-up - March 31, 2000

A few weeks ago adding a ‘.com’ to the end of your business’ name ensured a valuation on the way up and excited whispers about e-commerce plans around the city. The recent slide in new media companies’ share prices, the explosion of dotcom advertisers, the difficulty of obtaining both ‘.co.uk’ and ‘.com’ domains may be causing marketers sleepless nights.

Andrew Ogilvie asked, "Has anyone done any research on UK consumer recognition of different domain endings, for instance do people perceive any difference between .com and .co.uk? For sites targeting UK consumers I would normally suggest using both endings as follows: .co.uk for use in the search engines - since that's how most search engines determine UK relevancy .com for consumer advertising - it's shorter, the fewer number of confusing dots the better, and a bit trendier. In consumer ads - say poster, radio, TV - I would imagine you'll be lucky if people remember the name, never mind 'the confusing bit at the end with the dots in it'."

Kief Morris questioned whether the general public pay any attention to domain name endings, he wrote, "... if you have yourname.co.uk while yourname.com is owned by someone else you could be losing traffic. I don't know how many people will take the effort (or even *think* to take the effort) to try different variations of the name (‘let's see, maybe it was www.yourname.net, or was it www.yourname.org ... oh, forget about it, I'll just go to www.bigsite.com’)."

It’s hard enough finding the right name, it can be mind boggling trying to fit that to which domains are available. Glen Collins offered some ideas, "A very, very basic (and obvious) rule of thumb that I would apply is get as many of the domains as you can - these days this also includes .uk.com, .net.uk, .net, .gb.net, .ltd.uk etc. ...However, for marketing material (including ads) I still think the .com domain has more credibility ... this is what I would recommend a client actually promotes. The main problem these days is that the full set is not available, and you have to compromise with promoting non .com domains as your preferred domain has already gone. Hence things like .uk.com are now being pushed by people."

Relying too heavily on branding through a domain name could have other drawbacks, as Billy Hasirci pointed out, "For those whose only interaction ... is via WAP or those who will only access Interactive TV; is the .co.uk redundant? How do you promote a 'website' when the internet ceases to be only method of interaction?"

Stewart Dean added, "Okaaay - maybe it may appear cool but in the US companies are starting to _drop_ the .coms from their names.Personally I would advice changing their name but mearly add the .co.uk to their shop names."

Perhaps there is a tendency for new media types to assume too much of their consumers. Glen Collins highlighted how different domains could be used to target different audiences. He emailed, "I think it's debatable whether the mainstream consumer knows that a .com means/originates from the states. All the press/hype is around this intangible ".com" thing - therefore my comment above relates to this, as opposed to geographical location. Sure there will be instances where a local .co.uk is desirable, however, I think for large, mainstream services the .com ending is stronger. Also, for IPO/City reasons (rightly or wrongly) .com definitely holds more credibility."

A stack of press and publicity heralded the first interactive TV ad this week from Chicken Tonite, although there was some debate on the list about whether this was really the first.

Was the whole thing designed to whip up PR? Georgia Cameron-Clarke wrote about the coverage, "Yes, biggish news story on Today programme. PRs rang to see if I'd run it. No way, I'm not doing an ad for their ad. It's a shame that it interactive ads begin with...Chicken Tonight (should that be Tonite?). Apparently you can order some crummy recipe booklet by pressing a button on your remote control. Spectacularly underwhelming. I mean, really, Chicken Tonight. Hurry up future, I'm sure there's better to come."

Just how interactive is the advert? Debbie Caldicott pointed out a bit of a downside, "I totally agree and it's more like 'I fancy chicken tomorrow night' as you are not going to receive the yummy booklet in time to make something delicious and nutritious for dinner are you!"

So, ignoring the hype, what can you actually achieve with an interactive TV ad. Ken Cowley analysed the situation, "You can't get more basic than 'press a button and you'll get a brochure'. This is a cheap way to test it out versus response rates for other stuff on 'proper' TV - phone in on 0800, send an SAE, whatever. ... I'd have thought you'd want such a baseline before trying anything more elaborate like an interactive mortgage calculator or whatever cunning stunts HHCL can think up for Tango."

Interactive TV may conjure up images of targeted advertising more akin to direct marketing than television. The reality is still some way off, as Ken continued, "Chicken Tonite is a great medium for this as it's theoretically a true mass market thang and wouldn't narrow the sample right down to 'those members of the audience for digital who are contemplating buying a car right now' which is where you'd get to if you tried a more 'sophisticated' example. The reaction to interactive, one presumes, is going to be similar to DM, i.e. [proposition] x [relevance at the time] (why you get mailed the same proposition again and again)."

Rory Teeling took a more cynical view, "Is this even new? Does anybody remember when some car company(i think it was nissan) did an ad where you had to rewind it on video for it to make sense, or the recent 'ad for cats'(cant remember that product either). Here's my point - pissing around on the peripheries of an existing media isnt going to make you new communication warriors. It's only us sad marketeers who even find this kind of lazy shit worth talking about. I'll buy a drink for anyone who can find a non industry person who a) even noticed the chicken tonight ad and b) thought it was revolutionary or changed their experience of the brand."

Stewart Dean suggested an alternative tag-line that could have been sued with the ad, "Chicken Tonight should have redone their jingle to 'I feel like clicking tonight...'"

receive uk-netmarketing-roundup by email, every week
Just pop your email address in the form below and receive the uk-netmarketing roundup via email each week. You'll receive an email with details on how to confirm your subscription.

return to top