Although I personally like the neatness of .uk and the way it is 'what it says on the packet' - eg: it clearly states it's the national domain - my instincts suggest to me that for very many businesses, less informed people still regard .co.uk as the "official" and most important suffix, with .uk as an afterthought. This may change over time, I have absolutely no idea.
That said, as I have mentioned before, I believe .uk is better for various non-corporate websites - particularly in my own field, which is religious domains. Jesus.co.uk just sounds a bit "off" because of the clash between the religious theme and business/money. In contrast Jesus.uk cuts loose from that slightly jarring clash with business, and is a better match for a site about religion in the UK. Same with prayer, same with the Holy Spirit, same also with various other terms beyond the religious ones.
In most cases, it's the business domains that are more likely to generate the big money, and therefore be in greater demand, so I think .co.uk is likely to remain more valuable in most cases, for the foreseeable future. I say that, even though I personally prefer the compact .uk
For domainers late to the party, .uk offers the opportunity to invest in names that may still generate some profit. The likely release of hundreds of thousands of .uk domains this coming September (the ones mass registered without the authorisation of the .co.uk name holders by registrars like Fasthosts and Ionos 1&1) offers some very decent names likely to fetch £100s or in some cases £1000+.
Of course, Nominet has questions to answer on that one:
(a) Why they gave the go ahead for those mass-registrations, where the "registrant" hadn't agreed to the Nominet terms or the acquisition at all? And why those mass registrations were facilitated by a 'no cost' period, allowing the names to be registered for free?
(b) Whether any steps will be taken to tighten rules, to prevent any cartels gaming the system, and sweeping up so many names at the expense of other people?
Anyway, I think .co.uk will generally be more valuable than .uk for the coming years.
That said, as I have mentioned before, I believe .uk is better for various non-corporate websites - particularly in my own field, which is religious domains. Jesus.co.uk just sounds a bit "off" because of the clash between the religious theme and business/money. In contrast Jesus.uk cuts loose from that slightly jarring clash with business, and is a better match for a site about religion in the UK. Same with prayer, same with the Holy Spirit, same also with various other terms beyond the religious ones.
In most cases, it's the business domains that are more likely to generate the big money, and therefore be in greater demand, so I think .co.uk is likely to remain more valuable in most cases, for the foreseeable future. I say that, even though I personally prefer the compact .uk
For domainers late to the party, .uk offers the opportunity to invest in names that may still generate some profit. The likely release of hundreds of thousands of .uk domains this coming September (the ones mass registered without the authorisation of the .co.uk name holders by registrars like Fasthosts and Ionos 1&1) offers some very decent names likely to fetch £100s or in some cases £1000+.
Of course, Nominet has questions to answer on that one:
(a) Why they gave the go ahead for those mass-registrations, where the "registrant" hadn't agreed to the Nominet terms or the acquisition at all? And why those mass registrations were facilitated by a 'no cost' period, allowing the names to be registered for free?
(b) Whether any steps will be taken to tighten rules, to prevent any cartels gaming the system, and sweeping up so many names at the expense of other people?
Anyway, I think .co.uk will generally be more valuable than .uk for the coming years.
