31–40 of 60 posts
Speaking of names, can anyone identify the current trend of $arbitrary_number + $arbitrary_noun? I saw '80Legs' in a different thread, then there's stuff like 20Cans, 32Tractors, 99RedBalloons, and god knows what else.
The most crucial point is to not obsess over names. Obsess over product, not name. Companies prosper or fail because of their product, not their name. Consider Amazon. It outshines competitors in e-commerce, even though one rival -- Buy.com -- owns the perfect name for online shopping. Would you care if Google renamed itself to Moogle? Probably not. Google's search engine is the best, independent of name. To paraphra…
Using Amazon, Yahoo, Google, ebay etc., backed by years of free traditional media publicity (90's style) to validate a strategy I certainly take issue with that. I'm not saying it's not possible to develop a made up name but using those legacy companies and the advantages that they had at the time is not in itself justification for thinking any startup can do the same.
Similarly news.ycombinator.com is very successful in spite of the fact that the domain is highly unusual. It's an outlier.
And obviously you have to build something of value. But naming does matter and certainly deserves a great deal of attention.
"Four Seasons" - This contradicts your point. Do you really think any old name could be used by a luxury hotel brand? What if it was called "Roomsville Hotel"?
A recent article made the case against disregarding domain names: while Square used to be SQUAREUP.COM, and Facebook used to be GETDROPBOX.COM, neither is today; both have acquired the bare domain name corresponding to their name and use them exclusively. The issue here is then, once you make the decision to be "getFOO.COM", the better you do, the more expensive FOO.COM becomes. There is no guarantee the price for th…
Having such a successful startup that domain squatters will charge more for your domain is a good problem to have. The most any domain squatter will earn for the domain is the most they can get from you anyway--they can't sell it to a competitor since it'll be subject to immediate trademark dispute, and they can't sell it to anyone else since no one else will pay as much as you would. I don't think it would ever actually become intractably expensive--the business model doesn't even make sense that way.
Best of luck to the OP with their strategy and advice. But I wouldn't say "myonepage.com" was a big success by any stretch.
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/myonepage.com/
I'd also like to know specifically why the OP feels they have the long term experience to offer advice in this area? I'm seeing someone who is a few years out of college and doesn't really have the depth of experience in this area to write an article titled "How to name your domain name". Maybe "my experience with how I named my startup" would be more appropriate.
Add: Some of the things he says I agree with somewhat (stick to two syllables) and some I don't (see reply to tptacek below which hmm, by the way I can never remember how to spell lest you think naming doesn't matter) The problem with advice like this is that if you know nothing you won't know what is correct and what isn't.
Speaking of names, can anyone identify the current trend of $arbitrary_number + $arbitrary_noun? I saw '80Legs' in a different thread, then there's stuff like 20Cans, 32Tractors, 99RedBalloons, and god knows what else.
A recent article made the case against disregarding domain names: while Square used to be SQUAREUP.COM, and Facebook used to be GETDROPBOX.COM, neither is today; both have acquired the bare domain name corresponding to their name and use them exclusively. The issue here is then, once you make the decision to be "getFOO.COM", the better you do, the more expensive FOO.COM becomes. There is no guarantee the price for th…
When you're a kid in a dorm room (even a Harvard dorm room), the cost of "facebook.com", low as it might have been at the time, is already intractable. When you're a funded Silicon Valley startup, the cost of "facebook.com" is higher in absolute terms, but relative to your buying power is more affordable. Having such a successful startup that domain squatters will charge more for your domain is a good problem to have…
As long as they aren't infringing on a trademark it is a legitimate and legal business.
While I don't really even like the word speculation that would more accurately describe what is going on. People might not like it or get frustrated that they can't buy the domain at the price they would like. That's simply entitlement. And they also assume that if the "squatter" didn't buy the domain it would be just sitting waiting for them to purchase for $10 for their startup. In a free market system that would simply not be the case.
Someone thought of an idea and purchased domains at the going rate (or more later on if not the original owner) and now the domain has value. If it was so apparent the domain had value to everyone then everyone would have done the same thing and they didn't. This is really no different than any type of gamble or investing someone does in business or in real estate.
You can come up with any scenario to try limit domains to "actual use" and it will fail on it's face. There is no way to have the growth of the Internet that we have and police how someone uses their domain. This is not gas or war time rationing. There are many options if the domain that you think is perfect for your company is taken by someone else. Find a different domain. Get over it.
The most crucial point is to not obsess over names. Obsess over product, not name. Companies prosper or fail because of their product, not their name. Consider Amazon. It outshines competitors in e-commerce, even though one rival -- Buy.com -- owns the perfect name for online shopping. Would you care if Google renamed itself to Moogle? Probably not. Google's search engine is the best, independent of name. To paraphra…
"Consider Amazon." Using Amazon, Yahoo, Google, ebay etc., backed by years of free traditional media publicity (90's style) to validate a strategy I certainly take issue with that. I'm not saying it's not possible to develop a made up name but using those legacy companies and the advantages that they had at the time is not in itself justification for thinking any startup can do the same. Similarly news.ycombinator.co…
Speaking of names, can anyone identify the current trend of $arbitrary_number + $arbitrary_noun? I saw '80Legs' in a different thread, then there's stuff like 20Cans, 32Tractors, 99RedBalloons, and god knows what else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you're a kid in a dorm room (even a Harvard dorm room), the cost of "facebook.com", low as it might have been at the time, is already intractable. When you're a funded Silicon Valley startup, the cost of "facebook.com" is higher in absolute terms, but relative to your buying power is more affordable. Having such a successful startup that domain squatters will charge more for your domain is a good problem to have…
Domain "squatters" buy domain names and keep them to sell. As long as they aren't infringing on a trademark it is a legitimate and legal business. While I don't really even like the word speculation that would more accurately describe what is going on. People might not like it or get frustrated that they can't buy the domain at the price they would like. That's simply entitlement. And they also assume that if the "sq…
Have to disagree with this article. There are three qualities that override everything else for a good name: 1) Being memorable 2) Easy to spell when you hear it said out loud (and conversely: easy to pronounce when you see it written) 3) Not being cheesy or otherwise embarrassing to say when you introduce yourself to people I just can't believe it every time I hear a company name that, if I remember it a few days la…
As a random example based on the tabs I have open, RockPaperShotgun is probably the most popular blog that focuses specifically on PC games. That's a lot of letters and five whole syllables, but it's also easy to remember. It's a good name.