Boo.com is back!

No don't worry they are not looking for funds.

In its short lifespan Boo.com spent £160 million of investor funds (although some reports say it was as low as £125m) for little return except a website that could not be used by potential users because it took too long to upload and a very expensive advertising campaign to a holding page because they were so behind schedule getting the site up.

Boo.com was and is emblematic of the disaster that was the dotcom boom... and bust.

Now it is back in business. It is has nothing to do with the two Swedish entrepreneurs that originally set-up the site. A travel company Web Reservations International has bought the name. Their reasoning?

"Even though we have no association with the previous boo.com, we like the name because it's short, snappy and easy to remember. We hope you like it too."

Surely you do not want the association even if its a name? There must be another catchy name you could use?

If there is someone out there that can explain the whys and the advantages of taking the name of a brand that is associated with disaster please let me know.

I wonder whether they should have used a more positive url: stevemclaren.com or stevenbyers.co.uk or edwinacurry.org

And for anyone who wants to relive those glory days please have a look a CNET's top ten dotcom flops.