Membership is FREE, giving all registered users unlimited access to every Acorn Domains feature, resource, and tool! Optional membership upgrades unlock exclusive benefits like profile signatures with links, banner placements, appearances in the weekly newsletter, and much more - customized to your membership level!

A look at a "real world" scenario.

Status
Not open for further replies.
If that is done only the domainers and some business that understand the workings of domains will take it up, the rest of real .co.uk businesses will be at the mercy of cyber squatters and security issues, for years to come.

If you were giving advise to a business that had a .co.uk would you advise them to take up the rights to the equivalent .uk?

If the answer is yes, why not let them all have it and save the millions of £'s it will take to educate them to take it up and save the UK namespace the damage of having 2 tld's serving the same purpose with all the problems that brings.


This will not be like when biz and info were introduced and people were advised to take up the equivalent in these extensions to protect their online interests ( the industry was not that stupid ). This is virtually a twin of the .co.uk you arleady own, all website owners and all owners of quality domains will take up the option.
It was reaching a point where when registering a new co.uk it may have been
prudent to register the org.uk due mainly to it's growing business use.
The .uk will become a must have for co.uk owners.
 
Real World - past the numbers

Originally Posted by Edwin in other thread
And I'm saying your assertion regarding domain investors has absolutely no basis in reality.

Did you see my thread about a real cross-sectional sample of businesses? Using Nominet's proposed V2 release mechanism, 99% of them would get the matching .uk.

In my book, 99% has never been "a small number". It's a landslide, an almost total majority.

And that's the rub, isn't it? The same formula that rewards (across a test sample) 99% of the sample base made up of actual businesses also rewards early investors who are into the UK namespace.....

The result of Edwin's "real world" test are very interesting (and thanks for doing it):

Remind ourselves of the results, based on current Nominet proposal:
The Results
- Of the 899 .co.uk domain owners, 890 (99%) will be automatically eligible for the matching .uk.
- Of the 47 .org.uk domain owners, 40 (85%) will be automatically eligible for the matching .uk.
- The sole .me.uk owner won't get the .uk (no real surprise there).

The trouble is with stats it doesn't tell the whole story.

I have tried to look at the winners and losers in the sample
and how they would fair under the alternative 100% pairing of .co.uk and .uk.

  • some of the .org.uk sites did not resolve at all
  • 3 of the .org.uk sites had moved to .co.uk and the .org.uk was FTR
  • the .me.uk is no longer used, either out of business or realized they needed a different tld for business
  • the majority .org.uk sites that where actual businesses would not get the .uk under either method
  • the larger .org.uk sites also owned the equivalent .co.uk
  • the majority of the .org.uk had FTR equivalent .co.uk
  • the majority of the .org.uk would be able to get the .uk under the pairing release method
  • looking at those .org.uk sites that are truly no-profit that would not get the .uk, I don't think they would want it, as they made it clear about being non-profit to help and provide credibility to what they do on their websites

I have always thought that there will be some genuine (within the rules set out by nominet that .org.uk owners should be non-commercial orgainizations) .org.uk owners
that are non-profit that would loose out under .co.uk owners get .uk,
my view is find out how many and try to help them get the .co.uk and hence the .uk, that is so preferably to the problems created by the current proposal.

The alternative Nominet .uk V2.0 is just bad for UK business and the UK namespace.
 
Last edited:
I have always thought that there will be some genuine .org.uk owners
that are non-profit that would loose out under .co.uk owners get .uk,
my view is find out how many and try to help them get the .co.uk and hence the .uk, that is so preferably to the problems created by the current proposal.

Not sure why you're using the word "genuine" again here when it was debunked on the other thread?
 
I do think this method is much better, I have check all my important .co.uk domains and I would have the chance of getting the corresponding .uk domain for all of them due to them being registered first. The only high value .org.uk domain I own, would be awarded to the .co.uk, which is what I would expect anyway and I think this is fair as I knew when I bought it, I was buying the second rate domain rather than the premium .co.uk.

As people have mentioned, this method is still slightly flawed, as there are many people dropcatching high value .co.uk domains, where they would now lose out to the .org.uk owners.

So I think the most sensible way would be to award the .uk to the .co.uk owner, as afterall .co.uk is the premium uk domain and everyone knows that, especially nominet. Nominet should still be able to charge the new owner for this privilage. The only circumstances where .org.uk owners should get the .uk is brand owners, but they will already own the .co.uk domains anyway. Anyone who was stupid enough to build a business on a .org.uk, must be clever enough to realise they bought a second rate domain name for their business, and they don't deserve the new premium .uk domain.

Its good that people on here are discussing the best ways forward. Obviously nominet board members are reading this to find out how to progress with the .uk rollout, as they havent got a clue how to do it on their own.
 
Is the solution not what the .nz are talking about ? i.e. a 2 yr grace period for first refusal, surely if you can't see the benefits of taking the .uk in 2 yrs its probably not worth it to you ?


If that is done only the domainers and some business that understand the workings of domains will take it up, the rest of real .co.uk businesses will be at the mercy of cyber squatters and security issues, for years to come.
 
As people have mentioned, this method is still slightly flawed, as there are many people dropcatching high value .co.uk domains, where they would now lose out to the .org.uk owners.

So I think the most sensible way would be to award the .uk to the .co.uk owner, as afterall .co.uk is the premium uk domain and everyone knows that, especially nominet. Nominet should still be able to charge the new owner for this privilage. The only circumstances where .org.uk owners should get the .uk is brand owners, but they will already own the .co.uk domains anyway. Anyone who was stupid enough to build a business on a .org.uk, must be clever enough to realise they bought a second rate domain name for their business, and they don't deserve the new premium .uk domain.

Why is that more "sensible"?

It's more desirable for drop catchers, sure. But why is it fairer (taking all competing interests into consideration) than an oldest first approach?

Please remember that Nominet hit "reset" after V1. What we have to concern ourselves with going forward is what V2 will be (we have clues right now, and on July 1 we'll get the full text) and not what V1 used to say. V1 is a historic irrelevance now (except that it led us to V2).

In V2, it looks like Nominet has taken a big step back from representing ".uk" as a "better than .co.uk" business domain and repurposed it as a domain for everyone (much like the DNCL are doing with .nz)

Nominet (from their press release) now says:

Combining a shorter suffix with the trust of the ‘.uk’ brand will offer a wider choice for both existing .uk registrants and the millions of consumers and businesses who are not yet online, and now want their own online space.

Nominet sees the revised direct.uk product as an addition to the existing portfolio. The high levels of awareness, recognition and trust associated with the current .uk namespace will continue to be attractive for millions of registrants, and Nominet is committed to offering, supporting and investing in all existing domains, including .co.uk, .me.uk and .org.uk.
http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/press-releases/evolving-uk-domain-name-space

At this point, therefore, any argument that revolves around "but you said .uk was for businesses" is quite literally yesterday's news.
 
I do think this method is much better, I have check all my important .co.uk domains and I would have the chance of getting the corresponding .uk domain for all of them due to them being registered first. The only high value .org.uk domain I own, would be awarded to the .co.uk, which is what I would expect anyway and I think this is fair as I knew when I bought it, I was buying the second rate domain rather than the premium .co.uk.

As people have mentioned, this method is still slightly flawed, as there are many people dropcatching high value .co.uk domains, where they would now lose out to the .org.uk owners.

So I think the most sensible way would be to award the .uk to the .co.uk owner, as afterall .co.uk is the premium uk domain and everyone knows that, especially nominet. Nominet should still be able to charge the new owner for this privilage. The only circumstances where .org.uk owners should get the .uk is brand owners, but they will already own the .co.uk domains anyway. Anyone who was stupid enough to build a business on a .org.uk, must be clever enough to realise they bought a second rate domain name for their business, and they don't deserve the new premium .uk domain.

Its good that people on here are discussing the best ways forward. Obviously nominet board members are reading this to find out how to progress with the .uk rollout, as they havent got a clue how to do it on their own.

I think if the only two choices are earliest registered on date, or give it to the .co.uk owner, earliest registered on date is fairer. Neither are perfect... but earliest reg date is the least worst of the two. In the method you're suggesting, someone came along and bought the .co.uk for £5 on a drop catcher when they already knew there was a business thats paid however many thousands for a .org.uk they have developed. In this instance the .co.uk was late to the party, and they should be treated as such when dealing out the .uk's
 
Edwin/Monkey, in regard to the domains that have been dropped and caught. I wasn't really thinking about the people who have caught the domains, but rather the people who have bought the domains from the drop catcher for several thousand pounds. Its these people that would then loose out. They would have bought the .co.uk domain thinking it was THE premium domain over the existing .org.uk, but they would loose out on the .uk.

This doesn't effect any of my domains, but I can see it from their point of view.
 
They still bought knowing someone had one before them, so I would say that if someone has to lose out, if should be the last one in. Neither solution brilliant... but for me its the least worst of the two.
 
They still bought knowing someone had one before them, so I would say that if someone has to lose out, if should be the last one in. Neither solution brilliant... but for me its the least worst of the two.

I hadn't thought of it that way, this does make some sense.
 
In V2, it looks like Nominet has taken a big step back from representing ".uk" as a "better than .co.uk" business domain and repurposed it as a domain for everyone (much like the DNCL are doing with .nz)

Nominet (from their press release) now says:


http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/press-releases/evolving-uk-domain-name-space

At this point, therefore, any argument that revolves around "but you said .uk was for businesses" is quite literally yesterday's news.



This bit worries me quite a lot. How can nominet suddenly change what they are offering and the target audience. They are obviously hellbent on rolling the .uk out at any cost and in any format they can, where they get the least resistance. This is just going to confuse people on the intended use of the new extension. Nominet 100% know that by rolling out the .uk, that EVERY existing .co.uk owner is going to want the .UK domain (even if they don't know they want it initially). Would nominet be happy for someone else to own Nominet.uk ? or do you think they would have a problem with this, if someone else built a website on it.

I do think that in the scenarios where new people manage to buy .uk domains where there is already an existing .co.uk or .org.uk website but the owners didnt want the new .uk initially, there are going to massive issues down the line. Most likely the buyer of the .uk bought it purely for profit by intending to sell it to the .co.uk or .org.uk owner down the line for a large profit, effectively holding them to randsom if the .uk domains takeoff and become the most popular. The other bad scenario, is where the new .uk owner builds a confusingly similar website to the original .co.uk or .org.uk website and starts to steel some of their trade. This is just going to end up in thousands of legal battles.
 
I have always thought that there will be some genuine .org.uk owners
that are non-profit that would loose out under .co.uk owners get .uk,
my view is find out how many and try to help them get the .co.uk and hence the .uk, that is so preferably to the problems created by the current proposal.

The alternative Nominet .uk V2.0 is just bad for UK business and the UK namespace.

That's the thing, .org.uk has a defined and widely accepted use as an extension for the not-for-profits, clubs, etc. They wouldn't be losing out if they didn't 'get' the corresponding .uk. There'll be a much greater uptake by commercial entities of .uk which will inevitably (as Nominet has accepted) define the space as an extension for commercial, commerce, business, etc.
I agree that it's going to be bad for business, I'm really stuggling to find a real world example of a charity, club, etc. that's going to lose out by not getting the .uk.
 
or put it this way.

Business looks for a domain. They notice both the .org.uk and .co.uk version of the domain listed for sale. Both are up for a fixed price. The .co.uk is £10000 and the .org.uk is £500.

They wonder about the discrepancy, but visit the nominet site and see the reason why. Nominet tell them the .co.uk domain is the 'must have' domain for a business and they follow that advice and pay 20 times more for the .co.uk version as they want the very best domain for their business sector.

Two years later they've developed their site, spending tens of thousands on development and marketing. But the £500 .org.uk domain was registered two weeks before their .co.uk. Their business decision has cost them dear - but they were guided into making that decision by nominet who have always championed the .co.uk domain for businesses. That's why .org.uk domains have always been ten to twenty times cheaper than the .co.uk equivalent. This situation will be encountered by many businesses who decided to play by the rules that nominet had clearly set out.

My advice to nominet is to put this consultation out to every domain owner. I do not believe that the data protection act provisions are more important than the public interest. A simple set of questions, without any leading, need to be asked, with the very first answer being about keeping the status quo i.e.

a) should the current system remain unchanged?
b) do you favour the opening up of the second level with priority registration being offered to .co.uk domain owners?
c) do you favour the opening up of the second level with priority registration being offered to the oldest registered domain (including all extensions)
d) there needs to be a question about the short domain auction fiasco. It won't be easy to sort out but in my mind the .co.uk domain owners should be first in line - compensation might be another alternative based on the original price paid plus interest.

I personally think that most domain owners would opt for the status quo (as nominet would need to explain clearly the consequences and expense of having to register two domains) - and that would be it sorted - decided by the people that matter.
 
or put it this way.

Business looks for a domain. They notice both the .org.uk and .co.uk version of the domain listed for sale. Both are up for a fixed price. The .co.uk is £10000 and the .org.uk is £500.

They wonder about the discrepancy, but visit the nominet site and see the reason why. Nominet tell them the .co.uk domain is the 'must have' domain for a business and they follow that advice and pay 20 times more for the .co.uk version as they want the very best domain for their business sector.

Two years later they've developed their site, spending tens of thousands on development and marketing. But the £500 .org.uk domain was registered two weeks before their .co.uk. Their business decision has cost them dear - but they were guided into making that decision by nominet who have always championed the .co.uk domain for businesses. That's why .org.uk domains have always been ten to twenty times cheaper than the .co.uk equivalent. This situation will be encountered by many businesses who decided to play by the rules that nominet had clearly set out.

My advice to nominet is to put this consultation out to every domain owner. I do not believe that the data protection act provisions are more important than the public interest. A simple set of questions, without any leading, need to be asked, with the very first answer being about keeping the status quo i.e.

a) should the current system remain unchanged?
b) do you favour the opening up of the second level with priority registration being offered to .co.uk domain owners?
c) do you favour the opening up of the second level with priority registration being offered to the oldest registered domain (including all extensions)
d) there needs to be a question about the short domain auction fiasco. It won't be easy to sort out but in my mind the .co.uk domain owners should be first in line - compensation might be another alternative based on the original price paid plus interest.

I personally think that most domain owners would opt for the status quo (as nominet would need to explain clearly the consequences and expense of having to register two domains) - and that would be it sorted - decided by the people that matter.

You may be whistling in the wind. Self interest is starting a steamroller that might be difficult to stop. I even think the second proposal and other things related to it may have been written before the first proposal was published (sorry to sound cynical but we all know what goes on in these establishments)
The potential initial windfalls for so many make it impossible to really trust anyone's opinion.
.
 
The potential initial windfalls for so many make it impossible to really trust anyone's opinion.
.

The nominet board members should either individually or collectively agree not to accept any bonuses or monetary benefits related to .uk if it goes ahead. Obviously this wont prevent people on the board who run companies that set to profit from it. If the nominet board where to agree to this, then we would see their real motives and be able to trust them more.
 
The nominet board members should either individually or collectively agree not to accept any bonuses or monetary benefits related to .uk if it goes ahead. Obviously this wont prevent people on the board who run companies that set to profit from it. If the nominet board where to agree to this, then we would see their real motives and be able to trust them more.

Impossible. A profit-related bonus mechanism is already in place. They're never going to row back on that and say "ok, we'll just take a basic salary".
 
.nhs.uk and .co.uk

It would be interesting to see from the sample site chosen for this exercise,
who would be entitled to Cambridgeshire.uk

Would "Cambridgeshire" be a reserved word so nobody gets it?

Would it be the NHS as .Cambridgeshire.nhs.uk does resolve to some sort of website and is a pre nom registration according to the Whois?

Would it be Cambridgeshire.gov.uk as they have proper site and need for it?

Or would it be Cambridgeshire.co.uk owner, if NHS and gov did not take up their rights?
 
.gov.uk

What happens when a .gov.uk website exists for a domain? I presume they wouldn't have the option to get the .uk ?
 
What happens when a .gov.uk website exists for a domain? I presume they wouldn't have the option to get the .uk ?

Only the full V2 will give us the answer.

Until then, we can only speculate.

With that in mind...

Personally, I would limit the release mechanism to the 2 1/2 "open" SLD i.e. .co.uk, .org.uk and .me.uk pre 25 October 2004, since Nominet intends .uk to sit alongside them as another "open" SLD, and all other SLDs are "closed" with special rules and restrictions.
 
Only the full V2 will give us the answer.

Until then, we can only speculate.

With that in mind...

Personally, I would limit the release mechanism to the 2 1/2 "open" SLD i.e. .co.uk, .org.uk and .me.uk pre 25 October 2004, since Nominet intends .uk to sit alongside them as another "open" SLD, and all other SLDs are "closed" with special rules and restrictions.


that's what I thought, they have the .gov.uk and don't need the .uk. Otherwise they would have attempted to take the .co.uk off the current owner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The Rule #1

Do not insult any other member. Be polite and do business. Thank you!

Members online

Premium Members

Acorn Domains Merch
MariaBuy Marketplace

New Threads

Our Mods' Businesses

Laskos
*the exceptional businesses of our esteemed moderators
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • Helmuts @ Helmuts:
    Admin said:
    Hello. So, do anyone happen to know anything about Whois and how it can be accessed?
    ;) you are leaking info ;) :D :D
    • Funny
    Reactions: Admin
  • D AcornBot:
    Darren has left the room.


      You do not have the permission to use the chat.
      D AcornBot: Darren has left the room.
      Top Bottom