What’s In A Name? Web 2.0 Domain Naming Disasters

Make money teaching a class at Prfessor.com

The NYTimes nails it, talking about all these new made-up 2.0 names…

These are all actual Web sites that have hit the Web in the last year or so: Doostang. Wufoo. Bliin. Thoof. Bebo. Meebo. Meemo. Kudit. Raketu. Etelos. Iyogi. Oyogi. Qoop. Fark. Kijiji. Zixxo. Zoogmo.

These startups think that these names will stick in our minds because they’re so offbeat, but they’re wrong. Actually, all those twentysomething entrepreneurs are ensuring that we won’t remember them. Those names all blend together into a Dr. Seuss 2.0 jumble.

About the only neat domain name I like nowadays that fits into that category, sorta, is Xobni.com, which is Inbox spelled backwards. Makes sense because they do email stuff.

The piece continues…

These days, though, you get the impression that today’s startups aren’t even trying. They go directly for the Web 2.0 Name Generator. They think that if Google or Yahoo got away with cryptic names, they can do it, too.

But here’s a little wakeup call: People will learn to love your site’s wacky name only if they fall in love with the site itself. Google and Yahoo became household nutty names only because everyone loved their services. They did not succeed because they had silly names.

And when you name your site Yambo or Roombee, that’s a lot less likely to happen. You’re stacking the deck against your own success.

I couldn’t agree more. I thought the days of stupid made up company names died with the first bubble. I’m unsure why people are trying to bring that idea back; that you can make up a name and have it stick. Where’s the creativity?

Jim Recommends...

The Shoemoney System - Check it out here.


CrowdSpring - Get logos and websites and stuff designed in contests.
Need a logo? Try crowdSPRING!

Disclosure Policy

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  • Um... Fark?

    Fark has been around since 1999 (at least) and the name was intentionally stupid to poke fun at the trash articles that "mainstream media" (with their authoritative names like Time and Newsweek) were producing in order to get eyeballs.

    Fark is as web2.0 as fax machines.

    I'll take a company with a "web2.0" name any day over a tired and regurgitated piece from a major newspaper that doesn't even take the time to fact check.
  • You're overreacting Sam I think. The guy's point does make sense.
  • It's almost come to the point where you need to make up new words or site names to establish a new or unique business. Since many of the new 2.0 startups are new and don't have the massive cash to spend it on a (already owned) domain name, its easier for them to think hard and make something new and weird.
  • 'Gasus' sounds very much like it has something to do with flatulence, 'Goowy' sounds like someone with the lisp trying to say groovy. There is something silly not clever about all those names you mentioned above. Definitely not memorable.
  • Zac, yeah, I agree. But I was thinking about it some more, and you know, "Kodak" probably sounded pretty silly way back when?
  • Not to mention crazy names like "Google" or "Yahoo" or "Pepsi."
  • Yeah...there's something about the 'oddball' established brands that is pleasing, or hints of meaning:

    -Google is an actual word, however obscure and nerdy, that implies massive -scale, as in content indexed
    -Yahoo is an exclamation of joy
    -Kleenex evokes "clean"
    -Yoplait evokes yogurt
    -Cheerios, cheerfulness or a greeting
    -Pepsi evokes 'pep', as in rally
    -Coca and Cola were both known plant names.
    -Kodak, short for Kodachrome, from Autochrome, an early photography method

    In comparison, these web 2.0 names are kinda silly, but I agree with Zac; the good domains are taken. I don't blame these companies for going with their zany names, however silly they sound. The only alternative is either a proper name (McRoger's), which sounds weird for an internet company, a 3 or 4 word generic name, and that sucks even worse (FreeCouponSharingSite.com versus Zixxo.com). Nice angle Zac; I think the Grey Lady missed that one. But give The Times credit for arranging all those names together, pretty funny and good linkbait.
  • Actually, Google is a made up (and mis-spelled) name. The intention was "googol."

    http://graphics.stanford.edu/~dk/google_name_or...
  • You got me, Sam, Google is a made up word. But it does evoke googol, just like kleenex evokes clean.

    With my fact-checking skills, I should get a job at the Times!
  • No worries, RO. I just have a thing for truthiness.
  • I would have to agree with you when coming up with ideas for naming my blog I decided that just using my name was good enough. If you write well and keep your reader or user interested in what you are saying or selling they will come back and remember your site name what ever it is.
  • You can get a web 2.0 domain thats easy to remember. I don't know why people aren't doing it
  • I have found a good web 2.0 domain thats already memorable
blog comments powered by Disqus