I approached the registration of domains pretty naively when starting out a few years back. At the time it cost half as much for a .co.uk (compared to a .com) and registration was for twice as long.
I've quickly begun to realise that whilst I don't really link casual sites to their domain suffix many others do (so my pages were consider UK specific which is a problem because at lot are focused on American and Australian topics).
As things stand the keyword.com versions of the domains are being used. They seem to be snapped up fairly quickly when dropped (I attempted to put a back order in for one of the bigger .com's and a capture failed when it dropped a few months back).
My options are too pick up the .org versions of the domains (which in most cases have been overlooked, with the .net and .com's being taken) or to add extra words to the domain and purchase a .com.
The keywords aren't too competitive so the decision is more about branding and choosing the strongest domain for use.
[edited by: Webwork at 2:04 pm (utc) on June 8, 2008] [edit reason] "Parked" or "Domain Parking" is what the practice is called here. [/edit]
I was waiting to see if anyone would respond since it's not really clear what you are asking. The subject matter line suggests you want to poll members about whether they would choose .Net or .Org. In the thread you include the option "to add extra words" and use .Com.
I'd stick with .Org if the extension fits your website development plans.
The obvious answer is "choose anything" but based upon your statements and implied purpose I'd lean towards a 2 or 3 word .Com.
I'm a fan of keywords IF the "keyword is 1 word". When you get beyond 1 word I might pursue a 2 or 3 or even 4 word / keyword domain IF the 2+ words had a very high "web population" (popular commercial generic phrase for industry).
I have some 3, 4 and 5 word domains that are so robust that folks type them into their browser address bar every day and advertisers are quite happy to target the domains since the "search intent" is quite high.
I doubt that mere keyword stuffed domains will have longevity but not all longer domains are of that ilk.
Essentially Keyword.com and Keyword.net have been taken in several instances of domains which I have the Keyword.co.uk variations. As these pages are parked it hasn't been an issue but it's starting to get a little crowded and I've seen a few visitors comment that they feel .co.uk represents a UK specific take (which is a issue as the pages cover US and Australian areas).
Keyword.org is available in some cases so I'm unsure whether to try and secure the .org or attempt to affix letters to a .com (so something like KeywordNet.com or KeywordOnline.com).
Adding a little more to the problem, the sites are fairly small fan sites so in most cases the options are either CelebrityName.org or something like CelebrityNameFan.com.
I can't really tell which is favoured by Google (would having just a name help or would a .com instead or a .org be more beneficial). In some cases the CelebrityName.com domains are being actively developed so would having the .org push my pages into the background and would Google compare CelebrityName.com and CelebrityNameFan.com and rank the former highest?
[edited by: Idris at 9:08 pm (utc) on June 9, 2008]
either CelebrityName.org or something like CelebrityNameFan.com
If you have celebrityname.org and you're making money from the domain then Mr/Ms Celebrity Name can come along and take it from you on the grounds that their famous name is their trademark. This has happened plenty of times. celebritynamefan on the other hand is clearly a fan site.
Thanks. I think I'm leaning towards CelebrityNameFan.com (CelebrityName.org is trickier if someone does develop CelebrityName.com). I'm only unsure as I seem to have made persistent mistakes when choosing domains (such as choosing .co.uk's and choosing hyphenated domains). Recently competition has increased and other sites have taken advantage of these poor choices (which has seen me struggle for search engine rankings regardless of content or page quality).