Wanted: Domain Appraisal ViralPics.co.uk

[yorkshiredomainer]

Any thoughts? Unfortunately the .uk is owned by someone else, but there must be some potential?

 

[accelerator]

I would say there is a modest amount of value.

However, to start a viral pics website, you are better off having a short, catchy brandable domain, you don't need ViralPics.co.uk to do it and it probably isn't the best name for it.

Good luck!

 

[ian]

Any thoughts? Unfortunately the .uk is owned by someone else, but there must be some potential?

Biggest mistake you can make is registering a domain then asking whether it has any potential or for general opinions. If you don't know what the potential is, most like the domain is worthless, and in this case, I'd say it is less than worthless.

This thread has been created which I sense would benefit you greatly over time; have a read, http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/threads/advice-for-newbies.142596/.

 

[yorkshiredomainer]

Less than worthless?! Gosh that doesn't sound good....

 

[Edwin]

The other thing to think about is the average person in the street doesn't think of viral pics as "viral pics". They probably think of them as stupid/funny photos, or something like that. Viral's a very "internet marketing" sort of term. That's why most of the big sites that specialise in that sort of thing have silly names intended to be catchy (collegehumor.com, evilmilk.com, funnyordie.com etc.)

Yes, you'll find a lot of references to "viral" if you Google it. But when you dig further, you'll see that more often than not the content's been written by somebody "inside" the internet industry. Kids in the playground or people in the office don't go around saying "hey, look at this viral thing!"

Google search data backs this up: "viral pics" gets just 50 searches a month. Even if you ranked #1 for the term, you'd probably get less than 20 visitors a month out of it. "funny pictures" on the other hand gets 110,000 searches.

 

[yorkshiredomainer]

The other thing to think about is the average person in the street doesn't think of viral pics as "viral pics". They probably think of them as stupid/funny photos, or something like that. Viral's a very "internet marketing" sort of term. That's why most of the big sites that specialise in that sort of thing have silly names intended to be catchy (collegehumor.com, evilmilk.com, funnyordie.com etc.)

Yes, you'll find a lot of references to "viral" if you Google it. But when you dig further, you'll see that more often than not the content's been written by somebody "inside" the internet industry. Kids in the playground or people in the office don't go around saying "hey, look at this viral thing!"

Google search data backs this up: "viral pics" gets just 50 searches a month. Even if you ranked #1 for the term, you'd probably get less than 20 visitors a month out of it. "funny pictures" on the other hand gets 110,000 searches.

A very valid and detailed point, thanks