closed UKportal.net

[TurNIC.com]

What do you think?

 

[Whois-Search]

portal.co.uk

 

[CoolHost.com]

"What do you think?"

Well, for it being a .NET I don't think it's worth much for the type-in's. "Portal" within a domain name for a portal is a little dull. However, it could be workable ... the .NET is much more widely used in the U.K. Mixed feelings to some degree, but not a high valuation. Good Luck.

PS. Whoissearch makes a couple of good points, as well.

 

[TurNIC.com]

It is true that type-ins is a parameter to value a domain name. However, in my opinion it has a smaller coefficient compared to other paramaters like brandability, combination and length. Nobody searches for the word "portal" directly. They write something to browser and reach a portal. So there is no point to look at type-ins for this name.

Let's assume that there was no google. And miraculously I regged google.com instead of some asian-american lap-top totter cool-aid drinker unisex Stanford graduates. And come here and put the name for appraisal. You (coolhost) probably would tell "no type-ins etc.". Correct?

I could say that type-ins are 2 types: 1. real type-ins those are what I write when I open the browser for example "games, asian amateurs etc." and 2. Created type-ins those are branded, advertised type-ins like "google, yahoo, etc."

In terms of above criteria I would say that UKportal.net;

1. Has a good combination,
2. .net suits better for a portal than .com,
3. could be a good starting point for an online shopping market.

SAF

PS: Whois, could you please spare yourself to reply my messages. You make no sense to me. I of course know portal.co.uk is better than UKportal.net. We are not living in 1994. We are in 2002 and you have to do your best when you are getting a domain.

 

[dtobias]

Some good points there... if the famous sites had never been launched, I don't think google.com or yahoo.com would be valued very highly on these boards if somebody posted them... maybe somebody with a large store of trivia knowledge would recall the song "Barney Google has goo-goo-googly eyes," and the Gulliver's Travels reference to the (ugly, dirty) race of Yahoos. The consensus would probably be that those names were barely worth the registration fee.

On the other hand, if amazon.com were posted for appraisal (and that famous site never existed) there would be some glimmerings of interest... the consensus would probably be that it would be a nice name for a feminist site (referring to Amazon warriors) or maybe a site about South American rain forests... probably worth a couple of thousand bucks.

The great value of those domains came when the sites they lead to became popular, not the other way around.

In fact, some of those famous sites became popular long before they even had their current domain name... I'm enough of an Internet oldtimer to recall when Yahoo was found at "akebono.stanford.edu", Lycos at "lycos.cs.cmu.edu", and AltaVista at "altavista.digital.com".