great info all...thanks so much

I think the main reason to go with .com is to give people less to remember; the dotcom craze created an indisputable link in everyone's mind. The next best choices in my opinion are .net and .org simply because they are the ones I see the most. You are right in respect to Google though; almost everything we do as marketers revolves around keywords. Here's my suggestions:

1. Make a list of your favorite domain names and throw them at a few people to see which ones stick (maybe do it in a survey style?).

2. If you can't get a .com out of the top three names, check them on .net first then .org. I'm just getting an intuition spike on the .net vs .org; .net seems to be closer to .com in that they have a common link to the "internet". Call me crazy but that's just the way I think :)

3. Think about your content and how well you can relate it to the domain. Although Google is supposedly doing a change-up on the Exact Match Domain, you never know when they are going to Google-Flop with a brand-new algorithm! I swear, they do things just to keep us on our toes.

Oh, one more thing on content. Considering how much we should be generating and how often we should be getting fresh stuff up on our sites, if only half (or a 1/4 for that matter) relates to the domain name, as long as our link skills (all forms of them) are solid I don't think EMD will matter one way or the other.

Am I right on that last? Please correct me if I'm wrong (I'll hate you, but only for a millisecond).

Another thought about the extension of your URL. Extensions were originally created for determining the type of site you were broadcasting on the World Wide Web ( the internet.) For instance, the dot com extension referred to a site that was commercial in nature, whereas a dot org extension meant your site reflected a particular organization of some kind. Obviously dot edu was an educational website, and so on and so forth. Furthermore, just to confuse the issue even more, country codes were used at the ends of URL's to differentiate where the domain name originated.

Here's a novel idea that I am wondering about now. Why not do away with extensions all together. The World Wide Web has evolved so much over the past 20 years, that it seems to me that extensions on domain names are almost useless. The only benefit is to sellers of domain names and registrars who host your site for you. They want these different extensions because it is more money for them. Do you agree with this idea? Is there another way to identify a website URL or is it even necessary anymore, given that site names will rank for SEO regardless of the extension used. Hmmmm... this is just a thought that came to me, and I wonder if you feel it is valid or just spurious on my part.

Ok, here is my take on domani name extensions. Too many people get hung up on what extension to use with their domain name. This causes a lot of frustration and consternation for many people. In my opinion, I would not worry so much about whether to use dot com, dot org, dot net or any of the others. I think it is more important to have your keywords in your domain name.

Exact domains are more important than the extension you use I think. For example if you have a site about arthritis treatment and your exact keywords that are ranking for " new arthritis treatment" are getting a lot of hits with low competiton, then your site URL should be named accordingly. Call it newarthritistreatment.com or .net. or dot org. It really doesn't matter because you will still be ranking highly in the search engines, regardless of the extension. If the domain name you want is already taken, change it up slightly. Use words like My or The or maybe your name at the beginning or review or blog or some other qualifier term at the end of the main keywords and go with that. Chances are you will get yourself a dot com extension by doing this also. I hope that helps.

I just went and typed in "domain name" here in WA to see what might come up. It does have a lot of info and maybe you could check through some of it before deciding.

I have some sites that are EMD and they do okay. I have some that are not EMD and they do okay. I also have siterubix and blogspot sites and they do okay. I mean in rankings on all of them.

So, maybe content is what counts and not the domain name? Just my opinion.

.com is more know around the globe and if you pick a domain name that already taken from .com then choose . net or .org

If I was going for www.InternetMarketing.com and it was taken on .net and ,org.

Then I would go for www.InternetMarketingNow.com or www.GoInternetMarketing.com, .net, .org, etc.

The video below talks about EMD's and branding and lately there has been alot of talk about penalties or downgrading the value or weight for Exact Match Domains (EMD's).

http://snipurl.com/26nkn7c

Nonetheless, what choices do we have? Do we get creative with something that has no baring on what the business is about?

Branding is a whole new animal as far as I'm concerned. Over optimizing is scorned upon by Google now, but there definitely still is a relationship with the keyword in a domain as would keywords in posts/pages/content.

Thin content will not help your keyword efforts as opposed to fat rich content with those same keywords.

But without keywords, period, whether it's in domains, pages, links of allsorts (internal, external, backlinking) Google will have a heck of a time putting their algos together.

The EMD update has changed things to some extent, no doubt! But all in all.

Keywords are King and content is Queen. They are equally important semantically speaking.

.info, .biz, .us have not proven to be the winners as yet!

Kal

I can say I only use .com and .net. I used .org in the past but I think it just confused people for what I was doing but I do know a lot of people use it. I buy the .info's to house images and test sites but not for the real deal. They will all rank, but there is a theory .info is considered spam. I have absolutely nothing to verify that and my .info that house nothing but images was actually indexed for a trial site I had. But I will say you should be able to get a .com for about the same price as a .info. I say, never pay full price for a domain of any kind. Google "godaddy coupon" and find a code at fatwallet or retailmenot. I just registered 5 .com's this month at under $4 ( I think they only give you two at $3.99 with different codes but I never pay more than $8 with all fees.) Godaddy has a $3.99 .com until the end of March with code LKSRTL399F . If you're using a different registrar like 1&1, google them for a coupon code or just go to retailmenot. There are too many deals out there to pay full price for a domain.

I'm not a fan of EMDs, I prefer brands. I'd rather have http://www.boohoo.com than http://www.buycheapwomansclothesonline It's memorable and flexible. You can drive traffic to any name, after all Apple doesn't sell fruit, Amazon doesn't sell rivers, etc. Rich.

I recommend .com .org .net only. That's what has always been suggested to me.

Some say the other extensions don't rank, some say they do if your content is good enough. I don't have enough experience to say one way or the other.

You'd be amazed at what .coms are still available, be creative with your idea but don't get too hung up on exact match domain names.