Type-In Names vs The Search Engine
An interesting question was asked on a forum I visit today. It was part of a bigger thread, but it went like this:
"Between the type-in visitors and the rest which are more inclined to buy something?
It was such an interesting question that it got me thinking.
For those who don't know, a type-in is when somebody types the domain name directly into their browser, hoping to find the exact product or service they are looking for.
This is the most pure of all traffic and is the absolute backbone of all parking services, since without direct type-ins (some call it Direct Navigation), there would be no revenue, so we know that plenty of people must be typing names directly into their browsers.
It's almost embarrassing to admit therefore, that personally, I have never yet speculatively typed in a domain name when looking for any kind of product or service. Not once.
My kids do. I've watched them. It could be a generation thing.
So for me, the answer was quite simple. Search is the more likely to result in a sale.
Except that it isn't that simple really, because with a great web site, a type-in domain can be just as powerful as a search engine result - providing that the visitor is getting exactly what they expect after typing in the domain name.
The problem though, is that so many premium names that you'd expect to have good information, products or services on them are simply parked, so all the visitor sees is a bunch of links.
Is that a great experience? Does the visitor care? Would the visitor come back again?
For that reason, and partly because only a handful of my domain names could be classed as type-ins, I still stand firmly on the side of search engine results.
Here's an example:
Last week, I took a sales enquiry by telephone from a company I'd never heard of.
As always, I asked where they'd got our details from and was told that both my contact and his colleague had gone on line to search for somebody to do this particular job. One used Google, the other MSN, but they'd both independently chosen us because we were number one in the search results of both engines.
What does this prove? Nothing at all, it just interested me this morning.
I do believe though, that type-in names should be developed if they are to retain their value. The days of PPC look numbered to me.

1 Comments:
Nice article David.
I think the real point of your article is that a good "typein" domain that receives decent traffic isn't the only value of a domain name, nor the type of website you can create on the domain, nor the quality of prodserv your company offers through the site.
It has been apparent to many domainers for several years that an essential part of monetizing their portfolio is to proportion their "deadwood" domains to some sort of content built website. (A "deadwood" domain is a brandable domain that gets no typein traffic nor makes any revenue because it's mistakenly allowed to linger at a traditional parking service.)
The advantages of having even a small amount of relevant content on a domain's webpage can get the domain indexed with search engines. At that point, the domain name becomes a 'brand' if it pulls in visitors from a search engine result.
Putting content on deadwood domains turns them into "foundations" that brand your domains and allows sales to be generated from content growth and prodserv offered, or from CPA, your own adfeeds, or others.
The biggest roadblock to achieving the conversion of deadwood domains to become brand foundations has been the cost of developing each of the domains with content and optimizing them.
Once you find a domain monetizing service that provides you this opportunity at an affordable price, you need to pull your domains from traditional parking (not the ones making revenue!) and point them to this new content-providing service.
It is inevitable that this will become the norm for all domain investors.
Stephen Douglas
Successful Domain Managementâ„¢
Blog: Successclick.com
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home