Re: brand domain names

From: Rob Frankel <rob_at_robfrankel.com>
Date: Fri 04 Apr 2003 12:35:05 -0600

At 9:36 AM -0600 4/4/03, Keith Pieper wrote:
>
>
>Rob Frankel said...
>Again, disagree. Generic domains are popular because they are
>catch-alls, not brands. As an example, I own both BrandingExpert.com
>and RobFrankel.com. Both lead to my site, but by far,
>RobFrankel.com
>gets the major traffic. BandingExpert gets the runoff stuff,
>becuase
>some people use generic domains as a shortcut to seraching.
>
>--Define brand how you want, but your school of thought is not the
>single definition. A generic domain name can be a brand for someone
>looking to buy an "instant brand" perse - something with instant
>product benefits inherent within the name. These associations and
>benefits lend well to the start of a brand...albeit a simple brand
>based on a simple product benefit stated within the domain name.

Well, there's an issue right there: people do seem to define
branding the way they want. The reason I have defined it the way I
have is to move branding from an intangible discipline, to a more
tangible, measurable discipline with measurable results.

In today's business environment, theory doesn't cut it.

>
>Rob Frankel said...
>The deal there is that generic domains rarely get to make the sale,
>while branded domains do much better. This is again, because
>branded
>domains make it a point to present the solution to their prospects
>problems more clearly.
>
>--Sounds like a bunch of gibberish. A good domain name can be a
>brand - the seed and start of a bigger brand.

Have to disagree with you again. A generic category name is just
that: a generic category name. The whole purpose of a brand is to
distinguish yourself within the category.

--
Rob Frankel, "Yes, I really do turn users into evangelists for your brand."
Big Time Branding (SM) http://www.RobFrankel.com
How to Send Unsolicited E-Mail and NOT be a Spammer:
http://www.RobFrankel.com/store
The best biz discussion list on the web: http://www.FrankelTips.com




Received on Fri Apr 04 2003 - 12:35:05 CST