I just received word that my website, Bahamas.CO, has been nominated for a Bulby Award for Best Content on a .CO web address. I put quite a bit of time and effort into researching and writing articles for the site, and it’s a cool honor. There are a number of other categories for the Bulby Awards, and you can see all the nominees at Bulbys.CO, where you can vote for Bahamas.CO!
Congrats and good luck to the nominees.
“In less than a year, over a million new ideas have been registered using a .CO web address. To celebrate, our UNDER THE BULB campaign will offer a closer look at the creativity and ingenuity of our community by recognizing the individuals behind the ideas and companies on .CO. At the heart of our effort will be a worldwide invitation to vote for our inaugural Bulby Awards.
These awards are celebrating the trailblazers, day-dreamers, innovators and insomniac entrepreneurs that are helping to create the .CO global community. We want your fans, followers and voters to say “I wish I would have thought of that!” show their support of your work and cast their vote for you.
As a nominee, you’ll get prime real estate on the Bulby Awards homepage, www.bulbys.co, where your fans and friends can vote for BAHAMAS.CO as the BEST CONTENT on a .CO web address.”
I prefer the bahamas.com
Bulby Award is heavily sponsored by the CO registries.
From now, we are going to hear tons of CO “good”news to drive up sales but in actually we are seeing many dropping.
cool, r u getting any search traffic from your content?
.co’s have been hit or miss with the serps in my experience
@ Bull S
Why have they included loadout in this award? 1/2 of the site links have blank pages.
And congratulations @ Elliot!
@Richards—my source…just click on “BullS”
A 5 page bs mini site nominated for a content award? Wow .co must have a lot of crap sites out there.
Domaining world circle jerk is more comical than ever
Congrats, Elliot! Just left my vote 😉
but, still i don’t see bahamas.co in first few SERPs i tried.
Your website is okay (you paid for articles, theme etc) but they are doing it on purpose as your blog is well-known among domainers. They simply want to encourage other domainers to build something on .co.
My answer to them: 🙂
Elliot tell us about bahamas.co traffic
Great for your site but to be honest, your domain bahamas.co deserve a better site. Your website is just some content like we see on article sites hundreds all over the web. Build something more interesting, check and get in touch with associatedcities.com members and try to make (outsource) site like chicago.com, sandiego.com…. then you will win!!!
Wish you all the best but need more to WOW
P.S.: Not hiding behind anonymous because it’s a honest comment and want you to do favor so you will do a better site then you will come back to me and say thank you.
“Your website is just some content like we see on article sites hundreds all over the web. Build something more interesting, check and get in touch with associatedcities.com members and try to make (outsource) site like chicago.com, sandiego.com…. then you will win!!!”
Agree with you.
Saw your Chicago.com site. Good site with full of information from business to tourism in Chicago etc. I think Chicago.com has been more than 7 years history and has developed to full potential.
Whereas Bahamas.CO is only 1 year old. More work to be added as time comes and updated with more information to full capacity. Bahamas.CO has a clean and neat design, and can be improved gradually.
Check out ParisFrance.com and Lizardisland.com.au
I like the design of these sites especially Lizard Island, clean, modern, clear, uncluttered yet simple…with all information provided for visitors…
You know the Bahamas Tourism Board touts the “700 islands of the Bahamas” right?
Eventually all .com will migrate over to .Co company corporation commercial
like many companies are beginning to do.
and will eventually be a requirement.
Look at it this way.
Upgrades are a commonality
we see this in HDTV
in DVD to Blue-Ray
operating systems, software
so it should not come as a surprise that shorter is better and meaningful
so an upgrade from .com to .Co is only natural
and should not be a surprise to any of us
to have to do this.
“…so an upgrade from .com to .Co is only natural…”
Sound like upgrade from iPad to iPad2…
3G smartphones to 4G smartphones…
local computing to Cloud computing…
hdtv to 3dtv…
Remember all upgrades cost money…
Upgrade from .com to .CO also cost money as well…may be tax deductible…lol
Wondering where bahamas.co shows in google/bing search. Bahamaas.com 1st page, can’t seem to find the .co at all. Hopefully this isn’t an indication with all .co seo. You’d probably have better search results with a .com even with something like bahamasvacationspots.com or something, though not as lucrative as simply bahamas.
But, the .co is a much better website, much more pleasant to view, congrats on the award.
Went to that Bull S website, quite ironic that it’s a BS website itself so closed it up quickly.
.CO is shaping up to be a solid investment for the people that snapped up the good names (10% or less).
I look forward to see where it is at in 5 years. Such a small investment for the potential of a massive return.
Shame so many missed out / snoozed. Those are the trolls that repeat the same old “.com is king”.
Thnaks the lord that that .mobi fool is not in this forum. What’s his name. Lord of the Idiots? Someone needs to let him know .mobi is redundant. Just put an m. on your domain name like this… http://www.m.mobiisdead.mobi
Much cheaper than buying a .mobi, don’t you think?
What I don’t like about .CO.
The Pro’s outweigh the con’s so I’m not jumping ship yet, but I can’t deny a few obvious problems with .CO.
Visual: .CO and all two character domains appear to be missing something. It looks off. Take http://www.apple.com. Compared to http://www.apple.co. The three character .com balances the www at the front. If Apple suddenly switched to using .co, imagine the reaction it would create. Solution(?).CO might look better without using the www, but I’ve always thought the www was better in the url than not.
It’s balanced with .com, take away the m and it looks off somehow. Put http://www.apple.com in your url and then take away the m. Am I right?