More group buying web sites, still more strange group buying domain names

Group buying sites are launching everywhere.  Tuango, Montreal’s first group-buying site founded by Eduardo Mandri, is one of the latest entrants into the group buying market with a not-so-familiar name, but it’s not the only one using a catchy domain to brand its business – there are plenty. 

As more individuals and companies enter the group-buying business, there is a stronger likelihood the web sites will be using a catchy name over a premium generic name more relevant to its business model such as – daily bargains, or deal a day, or any number of the terms used to describe the group buying trend where people group together in order to get the best deals online.

I know I’ve covered this before, but not much has changed.  

Take for example an article published today in The Gazette entitled Group-buying making waves.  The story lists a number of new group buying startups in Canada, that at first glance seem sort of odd names for companies.  But  it’s not really that odd, considering the group buying market is crowded with all sorts of strange names.

Just take a look at some of the latest group buying startups mentioned in the news:

Coucoupon.com
Creation date: 19 Oct 2010

Grooster.com
Created on: 19 January 2010

Campusbargains.ca
Creation date:  5 November 2010

Suchthedeal.com
Creation date: 1 July 2010

Gaggleofchicks.com
Creation date: 8 April 2010

So why the change?

Are startups less worried about premium domain names and more focused on investing in different parts of their business? 

Are they cash-strapped? Do they even “get” domain names?

Or did Groupon change the domain market, at least for group buying sites with its use of “Groupon”? 

Whatever the reason, Groupon has done remarkably well since launching in 2008. 

According to Wikipedia: ‘ Groupon is experiencing phenomenal growth with a projected revenue of $500 million for 2010. No tech company (including Amazon, Ebay, Yahoo, or even Google) has experienced this kind of growth. At just under 2-years old in April of 2010, the company was valued at $1.35 billion.’