No, it's not a sub-domain - those go at the beginning of a URL, for example; blog.domain.com - search.sitename.uk.com And if you're opening a UK-based site with a UK audience in mind then the .co.uk TLD is your best choice as it is the most common UK TLD. Note, however, that a new shorter UK TLD has been introduced - .uk - so you might want to consider this one instead (with the caveat that if the .co.uk is already registered you won't be able to get the .uk version as they are reserved for those who already own the .co.uk to give them an opportunity to migrate) Cheers, Shaun
Wow! Sometimes people just don't know what they're talking about. I never would have imagined there would be any controversy about whether UK.COM is a TLD or not. It's not. There's no debate. .COM is a TLD. .UK is a TLD. .CO.UK is NOT a TLD. But it is the dominant extension of the United Kingdom. UK.COM is a domain name registered in .COM just like HA.com or any other website consisting of 2 letters. Its business model is selling subdomains as if .UK.COM were itself an extension like .CO.UK. Compared to the actual extensions of the UK, UK.COM subdomains are infrequently used. And most people would consider them to have little or no resale value.
.co.uk is a second level domain but it is the dominant domain in the uk so I would still go for that.
I didn't. You need to re-read the sentence you quoted. The sentence was: "Compared to the actual extensions of the UK, UK.COM subdomains are infrequently used." "UK.COM subdomains" are such things as Literacy.uk.com BasicReadingSkills.uk.com PayingAttention.uk.com BeingCareful.uk.com AdmitWhenYoureWrong.uk.com
As others have said .uk.com, gb.com and similar are not proper domain extension. You buy a subdomain from them. They aren't terrible - at time people have managed to get them to rank really well. However you are better off going for a .co.uk or even a .uk. Cheers
There isn't a term known as TLD subdomain, .uk.com is not a sub domain, but a second level extension.