The .UK revolution

I see you haven't added BL.uk to the list yet .

 

Done! Whilst it hasn't technically switched because it predates the .UK free for all, it's still a notable one.

 

BL.uk is the British Library and it is one of the oldest domain names in the ccTLD.

I've run a complete survey on the rest of the .UK ccTLD. The data is being crunched and I should have some figures on redirects from other subdomains to .UK sites in the next few days.

Regards...jmcc

 

https://nationalparks.uk/

 

Historically, it is the small sites that change that make the difference for a new TLD. With large brand name sites, the extension is invisible to most users because they associate it with a brand. This means that people think of Google rather than the .co.uk. When the small sites begin to change en masse, this is a good thing for a new TLD. Though attempts to publicise sites that are switching may be jokingly referred to as propaganda, this kind of activity is extremely important for a new TLD because the sites and people publicising this information are promoting the TLD (or .UK). It would be far more worrying if this kind of activity was absent as it was for the launch of most of the new gTLDs.

Regards...jmcc

 

It's notable only in the sense that it has always used .uk. "Not technically switched" really mreans "it hasn't switched".

I think it's wrong to include sites that have used .uk for years on a site dedicated to sites that have supposedly abandoned .co.uk in favour of the .uk.

 

Just looking at some of the redirects being processed now. There are .UK redirects from .co.uk, .org.uk and .me.uk sites but the volume is, at the moment, quite low.

Regards...jmcc

 

Approximately 50% of locations processed. 2,562 sites redirecting to the equivalent .UK site (same domain name stub). Haven't checked the redirects to non-equivalent .UK sites yet.

Regards...jmcc

 

From the latest data crunch on all the non .UK .UK domain names:
6,550 domain names redirecting to their .UK equivalent.
10.91% of redirects are to the HTTPS version of the site.
17.42% No site/no site response.
9.33% Not found/forbidden etc.
11.47% Holding pages.
2.94% Internal site redirects.
12.75% PPC
1.44% Sales

The active % is 21.54% but the real processing has not begun on this set.

Regards...jmcc

 

Wow... uploaded in 2014... only 344 views... talk about not "getting" how to build awareness online!

 

thanks for the info - worth noting that on that link godaddy are showing godaddy.uk for contact emails

 

It's an alias because it's easier to alias an email address than it is to schedule downtime to change DNS settings. I would imagine.

 

It will only take one major transition from a major UK online force from .co.uk to the far sleeker .uk and the tide will start turning.

Someone will do it just to f with their rivals sooner or later. It only takes after that for .uk to be seen as 'fashionable', and away we go. You can see the scenario, young new CEO turns up, wants to make a name for him or herself and decides to 'freshen things up'.

Any technical advantage to the change? Nope. But that's not how humans think.

I think it's a more isolated scenario. It's literally changing for the simpler version of exactly the same thing. It's simple reductionism. People might trust .co.uk more as things stand but I've still yet to meet anyone who can explain what the actual point of the '.co' is in that tld.

Reg is the same price. Over time, assuming domain names stay relevant there's only gonna be one winner.

 

I don't see the connection between .co and .com. Is there one? I do see that we live in the UK and we don't live in the CO UK.

.fr, .de, .uk it isn't .co.fr, .co.de... is it?

 

You've focused on one point. Its 'sleeker'. The rather more important point is .uk represents well.... the UK. What it should have been in the first place.

Quick mini survey with Joane Bloggs on the street.

Ma'am which domain name do you trust/recognise?
Blahblah.co.uk or Blahblah.uk

JB: Blahblah.co.uk

Ma'am which of these best represents the United Kingdom. .co.uk or .uk?

JB: .uk it's simpler.

 

The writing is on the wall, brands that are sizeable enough to make a slight difference in the mindset of your everyday Joe Bloggs are switching to .uk every day. Krystal is a great example. A domain registrar but more importantly a host serving tens of thousands of end users on a daily basis. Their branding is now going to be advertising their .uk domain name to all those end users. There will come a point in time when people will start to catch on and think "Hm, every one else is using .uk now" and the snowball will roll.

 

I didn't think the point was about switching. Didn't nominet release the .uk extension so that *new* people could get the domains they wanted....? That was how they started and what they told us. Of course that turned into 'register uk and make sure people don't steal your domains'.... then that morphed into 'better the registrars register the uk domains on your behalf.' Originally though when nominet were bullsh...*cough*... informing us all it was basically to have different people developing the uks and thus increase the diversity and popularity of the namespace as a whole. Otherwise there would've been no point at all introducing the extension and it would've just seemed like a money making scam for nominet. So where are these new people?

 

I deal a lot in religious domains. In this category the .co.uk ending has always seemed a bit incongruous because the association of business/company with religious content doesn't quite fit, though I concede that at present most punters doing a spontaneous type-in name are likely to use co.uk as the go to. But .uk is much more attractive for, say, Christ.uk rather than Christ.co.uk - admittedly if I could get hold of Christ.co.uk I would get it, but I'd use it as a re-direct to the .uk

I think geo's also lend themselves well to the .uk because it's so short and neat. It just sounds good.

But I guess we're being a wee bit old-fashioned, because these days search etc is more likely to be the access point, rather than the few who 'type in' names on the off chance.

Does google favour .co.uk over .uk in search lists?

In the end, content is king. But I like .uk more and more.

 

There are a shed load of domains I would like to register but can't, because Fasthosts and 1&1 are 'cybersquatting' them until next June. When Registry and Registrar sort of endorse an action that actively *prevents* other people registering the names, that doesn't sit well with me. Yes, plenty of people 'cybersquat' and I accept that is part of domain culture and business - in one sense we almost do that to some extent - but the mass registration of 100,000s of names last June, on the back of a Registry free reg / open door did seem to me to be, well, the opposite of "releasing the .uk extension so that new people could get the domains they wanted".

Not to mention, it contradicted the policy that had been defined, that gave right of registration for FIVE long years, before release to the public. 100,000s of domains were NOT released to the public, and they were NOT renewed with the domain owners' consent. They were registered by a third party, the registrar, independent of the actual .co.uk owners choice or consent. I just don't see that as congruent with the original intent or declared policy of the registry.