231–240 of 355 posts
>Don't believe a domain is for sale unless the owner has already told you an asking price. One of my favorite examples: http://nissan.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You completely ignored PG's argument about it signaling weakness. This is one of those perception versus reality things, where people's perceptions (those who are judging a startup) ARE the reality, whether those perceptions are theoretically refutable or not. In other words, let's say you're right, and owning the .com domain name is becoming less meaningful (an argument that PG already addressed, by the way). That d…
re:Signaling weakness. True, but to whom. Most people don't know the difference between getDropbox.com and Dropbox.com.
Great names are made not found. I think Paul for once have it the wrong way around. If you become big enough and happen to have enough of a market you might need to .com name to optimize your numbers. If you happen to find a good name you can afford that you still think represents you and is .com you should most probably change your name. But for most people just like their logo it's it's not that important until you…
> Great names are made not found. > But for most people just like their logo it's it's not that important until you become big Exactly this. If you look at the most successful companies in all sectors out there, most of them have logos that range from plain to just ugly, and many of them feel like they were initially created as a formatted company name on top of some document, back when the company's secretary first…
Patio11 has actually A/B tested two different logos. His conclusion was that "Your logo could potentially add or subtract 10% from enterprise value"[0].
[0] http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/08/04/does-your-product-logo-a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Couldn't agree more. Google, Yahoo, Twitter. Three global brands that aren't dictionary names, and don't have to be. You don't need a dictionary word .com to survive either.
Twitter and Yahoo are dictionary words, and Google is just a misspelling (intentional or accidental, it's unclear) of a dictionary word. All three did own their .com domain names from the very beginning.
Twitter did not; it started out as twttr: http://techcrunch.com/2006/07/15/is-twttr-interesting/
I'm fairly good at coming up with names, and wouldn't mind offering my services, but I'm not sure how to secure my idea before selling it.
I would also be open to testing my skills for anyone looking for a company name.