4 out of 5 people in the UK prefer to click through to a .co.uk website - source?

eddieb · Oct 23, 2013

I'm with Systreg, I also click on the country filter so I dont end up looking at sites who price in dollars. This is particularly important if I'm looking for a service where locality is more important.

Retired_Member38 · Oct 23, 2013

eddieb said:
I'm with Systreg, I also click on the country filter so I dont end up looking at sites who price in dollars. This is particularly important if I'm looking for a service where locality is more important.

You're in a tiny minority - most people just hit Google.co.uk and type whatever they look for. Personally I don't think having a .com is an issue at all - there is no way 8 out 10 top car insurance sites haven't done research into this so I would just piggy back off what they're doing (they all own the .co.uk variants of their domains so nothing stopping them using them if they wished)

Edwin · Oct 23, 2013

Monkey said:
You're in a tiny minority - most people just hit Google.co.uk and type whatever they look for. Personally I don't think having a .com is an issue at all - there is no way 8 out 10 top car insurance sites haven't done research into this so I would just piggy back off what they're doing (they all own the .co.uk variants of their domains so nothing stopping them using them if they wished)

From my link of a few posts back...

"All 10 of the top selling car brands in the UK operate from .co.uk websites, as do 12 of the 13 largest newspapers. 63 of the top 100 UK advertisers are on .co.uk domains and 142 of the top 250 brands in the UK chose .co.uk domains for their websites."

(For the original sources of data, see the document I linked to, which lists them all)

Retired_Member38 · Oct 23, 2013

Not sure what your point is?

You can say 12 of the 13 biggest newspapers use .co.uk... anyone else can then say well 8 out of 10 car insurers use .com. Easy enough to pick a specific example to prove one is more popular than the other

63 of the top 100 advertisers will be speculation at best - nobody knows who those 100 are. I reckon eBay and Moneysupermarket must be the top 2 but I really have no idea...

Edwin · Oct 23, 2013

All the data sources are available if you bother to check the endnotes including the 100 top advertisers reference... Actual data is much more productive than groundless speculation.

Edwin · Oct 23, 2013

Nominet reference the 80% figure again on p5 of this document:
http://www.nominet.org.uk/sites/default/files/57813_Nominet_Report_and_Accounts_2010.pdf

Retired_Member38 · Oct 23, 2013

Edwin said:
All the data sources are available if you bother to check the endnotes including the 100 top advertisers reference... Actual data is much more productive than groundless speculation.

I would bother to check the source if you hadn't referenced a parked domain

(bradtop100.co.uk)

Edwin · Oct 23, 2013

Monkey said:
I would bother to check the source if you hadn't referenced a parked domain (bradtop100.co.uk)

https://web.archive.org/web/20121005105122/http://www.bradtop100.co.uk/

martin-s · Oct 24, 2013

Why do you think so many searches end in " UK". Because Google sucks at filtering out irrelevant US websites. That's why people feel reassured by .co.uk.

spiderspider · Oct 24, 2013

Edwin said:
From my link of a few posts back...

"All 10 of the top selling car brands in the UK operate from .co.uk websites, as do 12 of the 13 largest newspapers. 63 of the top 100 UK advertisers are on .co.uk domains and 142 of the top 250 brands in the UK chose .co.uk domains for their websites."

(For the original sources of data, see the document I linked to, which lists them all)

Just because they may operate a .co.uk website, does not explain why 4 out 5 people prefer to click a .co.uk The major players in any industry have .co.uk and .com sites, normally with one diverting to the other.

To get the true answer, as to why (apparently) 80% of people prefer to click a .co.uk, you need to ask alot of people, and publish the results, or the ASA will have your arse for it.

Look at shampoo, cosmetic, toothpaste and other adverts where they say '4 out of 5 people think our product makes them looks dead sexy' at the bottom, in small print, it always says something along the lines of '80 people out of 100 surveyed agreed'.

Bailey · Oct 24, 2013

I for one am getting really fed-up with those who feel, supplying 'Selective' data sources as their supportive arguments for pro .co.uk.

And then choose words like "Lazy" - "Bother To" etc For anybody that feels it appropriate to question the validity. I'm still amazed by the 'Source' (Nominet) apparently taken at 'face-value' that concluded that one in every 25 of the UK population operates an active UK website. (including babies, near death and the hospitalised apparently) Yet still felt quoting that supporting data here on Acorn and NOT questioning that ridiculous conclusion.

Some of the supporting arguments here on Acorn seem to Come back that that old saying "He doth Protest too much"

Brassneck · Oct 24, 2013

Bailey said:
I for one am getting really fed-up with those who feel, supplying 'Selective' data sources as their supportive arguments for pro .co.uk.

And then choose words like "Lazy" - "Bother To" etc For anybody that feels it appropriate to question the validity. I'm still amazed by the 'Source' (Nominet) apparently taken at 'face-value' that concluded that one in every 25 of the UK population operates an active UK website. (including babies, near death and the hospitalised apparently) Yet still felt quoting that supporting data here on Acorn and NOT questioning that ridiculous conclusion.

Some of the supporting arguments here on Acorn seem to Come back that that old saying "He doth Protest too much"

Well said. As I said somewhere else this place is a bit like the "Emperor's New Clothes" - if something is repeated enough times it becomes the 'truth' when actually it is based on a particular way of analysing the data which in reality is quite easy to contradict.

Stephen.

Edwin · Oct 24, 2013

Brassneck said:
Well said. As I said somewhere else this place is a bit like the "Emperor's New Clothes" - if something is repeated enough times it becomes the 'truth' when actually it is based on a particular way of analysing the data which in reality is quite easy to contradict.

I see very few people citing real hard-and-fast data (regardless of bias) and a lot of "it seems" "it looks" "it feels like" type posts.

It generally would make discussion a lot easier and more producting if more people could reference supporting data to back up their points of view. Of course, there are always competing data sources but at least then it's data vs data, and not data vs hand-waving...

Edwin · Oct 24, 2013

Bailey said:
And then choose words like "Lazy" - "Bother To" etc For anybody that feels it appropriate to question the validity. I'm still amazed by the 'Source' (Nominet) apparently taken at 'face-value' that concluded that one in every 25 of the UK population operates an active UK website. (including babies, near death and the hospitalised apparently) Yet still felt quoting that supporting data here on Acorn and NOT questioning that ridiculous conclusion.

"There were 2.17 million enterprises registered for VAT and/or PAYE in March 2013"
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/bus-r...ty--size-and-location---2013.html#tab-Summary

"At the start of 2012: There were an estimated 4.8 million businesses in the UK which employed 23.9 million people"
http://www.fsb.org.uk/stats

"There were an estimated 4.9 million private sector businesses in the UK at the start of 2013, an increase of 102,000 compared to the start of 2012."
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...-population-estimate-2013-stats-release-4.pdf (p1)

Why is it so hard therefore to believe there are several million business websites operating on .co.uk domains? Around 70% of all businesses have websites, and some have more than one/several/lots...

Bailey · Oct 24, 2013

Edwin said:
" Around 70% of all businesses have websites.

your source for this one Edwin ????? - Guess that's Nominet as well

Lets not keep reiterating the ridiculous, Now if you where to say an 'email' contact - I think we could accept that

You can attempt to paint any picture you choose , I think most of the Internet Savvy understand a well argued discussion and have a realistic picture of Business presence on the internet..

I also think questioning data - is the best use of 'hand-waving' - shame it doesn't happen more often

Brassneck · Oct 24, 2013

Edwin said:
"There were 2.17 million enterprises registered for VAT and/or PAYE in March 2013"
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/bus-r...ty--size-and-location---2013.html#tab-Summary

"At the start of 2012: There were an estimated 4.8 million businesses in the UK which employed 23.9 million people"
http://www.fsb.org.uk/stats

"There were an estimated 4.9 million private sector businesses in the UK at the start of 2013, an increase of 102,000 compared to the start of 2012."
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...-population-estimate-2013-stats-release-4.pdf (p1)

Why is it so hard therefore to believe there are several million business websites operating on .co.uk domains? Around 70% of all businesses have websites, and some have more than one/several/lots...

Ok - I don't have time to get the figures however I do understand how important data is as I have actually worked as a Govt Statistician for 25 years.

Would you agree though that there are a lot of small businesses which don't have and will never need a website. For instance, barbers / hairdressers, most backstreet mechanics, most painter/ decorators, window cleaners, butchers, newsagents, card shops, taxi drivers (many will be self-employed working for taxi firms), etc.

My gut feeling is that a much smaller than 70% of businesses have websites.

Stephen.

Edwin · Oct 24, 2013

Bailey said:
your source for this one Edwin ????? - Guess that's Nominet as well

No. And neither were any of the links for the estimated number of businesses. Nothing to do with Nominet.

You can find all manner of estimates for the number of UK businesses with websites - I chose 70% as being one of the most conservative I've seen recently.

If you want higher figures they're easily available... without involving Nominet

For example:
"In 2011, 93% of businesses had broadband Internet and 81% had a website."
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/rdit2/ict-activity-of-uk-businesses/2011/stb-ecom-2011.html

Brassneck · Oct 24, 2013

Edwin said:
No. And neither were any of the links for the estimated number of businesses. Nothing to do with Nominet.

You can find all manner of estimates for the number of UK businesses with websites - I chose 70% as being one of the most conservative I've seen recently.

If you want higher figures they're easily available... without involving Nominet

For example:
"In 2011, 93% of businesses had broadband Internet and 81% had a website."
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/rdit2/ict-activity-of-uk-businesses/2011/stb-ecom-2011.html

Edwin - problem is that you need to look more carefully at definitions. You are correct the figure there is 81% but it refers to business with at least 10 employees.

See "http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/rdit2/ict-activity-of-uk-businesses/2011/stb-ecom-2011.html#tab-background-notes"

It says there

"Estimates in this release relate to businesses with 10 or more employees. No information is collected relating to businesses with fewer than 10 employees as these are not within the coverage requirements defined by Eurostat. Until the 2004 survey, businesses with fewer than 10 employees were included in the survey, due to a specific user interest from the then Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). When this user interest ended the coverage of these businesses was discontinued, leaving the coverage from 2005 onwards as being just what was required by Eurostat under EU Regulation 808/2004. The decision to cease collection of information from these businesses was made on the grounds of resources available to run the survey and the burden placed on the businesses in requiring them to take part in the survey.

Since the DTI interest in monitoring businesses with fewer than 10 employees ended, no other specific user interest in their activity has been identified. A user survey conducted in April 2011 did not receive any feedback requesting the resumption of coverage of this group of businesses.

It is not possible to estimate what the current survey results would be if the businesses with fewer than 10 employees were still covered by the survey. However, in 2004, the last year that these businesses were included, ONS estimated that their sales represented 6.6% of total sales over the Internet. Until the 2004 survey, these businesses also had lower proportions of ICT adoption and usage than the larger businesses. This meant that estimates of the proportions of "all businesses" carrying out an ICT activity were lower in the 2004 results than in the 2005 results and onwards, when "all businesses" were defined as businesses with 10 or more employees."

Bailey · Oct 24, 2013

"70% is my chosen "

I'll guess we can also be calling that hand-waving then Edwin I don't want anything to be taken personal. but it seem to me that their is a lot of selective reporting going-on.

One can include the millions of self-employed as "active businesses" but then choose to omit this massive presence when talking about percentage of business with active websites.

Ie when the whole just becomes a quarter of the whole when selective reporting takes over

Edwin · Oct 24, 2013

Find your own statistics then, but find STATISTICS i.e. third party data established by some sort of sampling/empirical process. They don't have to match mine. They don't have to even come close. But they have to EXIST.

Hand waving benefits nobody. Just a total waste of time.

I'm very, very tired of having ungrounded accusations of bias thrown at me. Pathetic!