.co.uk/.com in the logo?

[bensd]

When you're designing a website do you normally include .co.uk/.com in the logo?

 

[pbryd]

Not usually no.

Can't see why you would, someone might come along and enlighten me tho.

 

[Systreg]

I do, my logos are pretty much always in the form of, Domain Name Here .co.uk

eBay do it, Amazon do it, I think it makes sites addresses easier to remember, visitors see the logo at the top of each page and it embeds in their minds for easy recall. I can't think of any reason, other than saving space, not to do it.

 

[accelerator]

I always include the full domain, because as far as I'm concerned, the full domain name is the site brand, and the full domain name is more brandable (more precise and exact, might get a repeat visitor).

Rgds

 

[Edwin]

If it's a TRUE generic, it's probably a good idea as it will help people remember it even more easily (generics are already intuitive).

If it's a brandable, then what's the point of extra visual clutter - after all, you've already got an uphill struggle on your hands trying to get your visitors to remember the name of your site!

 

[ratboy]

Depends on the domain name quality. Like with the CCTV Guide - I decided to include it - reminds visitors of the name and hopefully reminds end users of it's quality too.

 

[Systreg]

If it's a brandable, then what's the point of extra visual clutter - after all, you've already got an uphill struggle on your hands trying to get your visitors to remember the name of your site!

I thought it would have been even more beneficial for a brandable name, so that visitors see it often and do remember it, works for all names as far as I'm concerned.

 

[pbryd]

I thought it would have been even more beneficial for a brandable name, so that visitors see it often and do remember it, works for all names as far as I'm concerned.

I would agree with this.

One off visitors to an adsense niche site probably no need to try and build the brand.

If you can benefit from repeat custom, then it may be beneficial as a way to build your brand.

But I think the quality of the logo design and banner is more important.

 

[Blossom]

I agree with what's been said above - it's more memorable. Plus it reduces the chance that people will steal your banner.

Negatives - take up a lot of space, particularly if the domain name itself is long to start with. Also affects loading times if it's an image.

I tend to go with the extension.

 

[dta]

I also tend to go with the extension but often make it a little less pronounced then the rest of the domain in the logo.

 

[julian]

If it's a brandable, then what's the point of extra visual clutter - after all, you've already got an uphill struggle on your hands trying to get your visitors to remember the name of your site!

Ohh come off it Edwin I can't let you get away with that nonsense!

Of course joe bloggs would remember microbloggingservices.com rather than Twitter

and

SocialNetworkingServices.com over facebook all day long.

I tell you this keyword stuff is going to die in the future just like price comparison sites are now...best milk it I suppose..

 

[Sussexite]

For a generic, then yes.

Especially if the extension is not .com

Especially especially if the extension is not .com or .co.uk