Direct.uk is ongoing.....

[Edwin]

Remember, 10,000 names is £30,000 a year in renewal fee's, many people on here wince at spending £30!

And that's just for 1 year. Some people have been in the market 10, 15 years or longer (my first domain reg was in 1995 for example). So the sums of money we're talking about just on "maintaining inventory" could easily buy a house in many parts of the country. And if you're playing in .com or other extensions, they're that much more expensive come renewal time, and consequently the sums get eye-watering that much more quickly.

I wrote a series of blog posts a couple of years ago that I think touch quite usefully on some aspects of this issue:

The "if only you weren't using it, it would be available to register" fallacy
http://www.webmastering.co.uk/domain-names/the-myth-of-the-domain-name-queue-of-one/

The "it's not worth that much" fallacy
http://www.webmastering.co.uk/domai...to-redefine-sea-level-in-domain-name-pricing/

The "it only cost you regfee" fallacy
http://www.webmastering.co.uk/domain-names/deconstructing-domain-name-industry-math/

 

[namealot]

Replace the word 'name' with 'property' or 'boat' and then tell me what's wildly wrong with the statement.

But they do with houses at least with cpo.s not just empty properties but those they consider under-occupied?

 

[websaway]

If there are premium names available, I will be happy, however I will be shooting slightly lower and have already been collating lists based on domainers holdings, their sales patterns, the tone of their posts on Acorns and anything else available in the public domain to give me an edge.

Its not scientific but it doesn't hurt to do a little homework.

I don't really remember you as firestars but welcome back.

 

[lee]

Replace the word 'name' with 'property' or 'boat' and then tell me what's wildly wrong with the statement.

The cut throat business part of me understands however the soft side of my brain does actually say "well bloody well put a website on it so the rest of the internet get use out of it"

Dont get me started on Any-Web and their shit UK geo-domain websites. :-|

 

[websaway]

As you say, fill yer boots

Personally I'll protect perhaps 5-10 of my names but the rest can go to hell in an handcart along with the Nominet board. I've done alright over the years but the market has changed and doesn't suit my strategy these days and domains for me have turned into a very expensive hobby.

did you mean 5 to 10 % of your names ?

 

[aZooZa]

The cut throat business part of me understands however the soft side of my brain does actually say "well bloody well put a website on it so the rest of the internet get use out of it"

Dont get me started on Any-Web and their shit UK geo-domain websites. :-|

What a load of crap. More to add to the buckets you've dumped here since your renaissance.

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[retired_member29]

... removed.

 

[Edwin]

I do hope the domainers who have done quite well out of domains are not becoming greedy pigs in the influence of this outcome.

Greedy pigs? Has it still not sunk in that this industry represents the livelihood of a lot of people, and a very significant investment for many others? What reaction would you expect them to have?

 

[foz]

The only Greedy pig is Nominet. Doubling up renewals for all registrants to protect their name or brand.

They got a taste of raising a very large sum with the short domain auctions and now are trying to replicate that moment again.

 

[websaway]

I do hope the domainers who have done quite well out of domains are not becoming greedy pigs in the influence of this outcome.

Where there is profit there is inevitably a degree of greed ( depending on your interpretation of greed ). Perhaps you could elaborate where you see the "greedy pig" syndrome relating to domainers in their quest to prevent Nominet selling off the uk business namespace for a second time ?

 

[Nigel]

The only Greedy pig is Nominet. Doubling up renewals for all registrants to protect their name or brand.

They got a taste of raising a very large sum with the short domain auctions and now are trying to replicate that moment again.

Agreed - just one year ago Phil Kingsland of Nominet was at the Domaining Europe 2012 conference in Valencia, Spain talking up .co.uk to domain investors and portfolio owners. DNJournal.com reported:

"In Nominet, Kingsland represents the administrator of one of the world's most popular ccTLDs in Great Britain's .co.uk and he expects the extension to remain dominant in the UK, regardless of what new gTLDs are introduced."

No doubt some portfolio owners followed his advice and added .co.uk domains to their portfolio. Bad mistake if they did. But you can't blame them and not fair to call them 'greedy pigs'. Here's the report. Phil Kingsland is in the photo half way down the report.

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2012/dailyposts/20120429.htm

 

[retired_member29]

Sorry the greedy pig comment was over the top.

 

[Skinner]

My investment is banging well into 6 figures now (100k not millions which is 7 figures but people still think a million is 6 figs).

if I invested 6 figures in any business antiques/art/number plates/property would I want a good ROI ? F' Yeah.

If you work hard to generate your seed income, take risks which pay off then you should be rewarded, simple as that, greed plays no part.

Admittedly some people who exploited the system and now demand insane figures, kinda piss me off as they used unfair advantage but that's not much different that "its not what you know, its who you know" in business anyway.

If wanting to take out more than I put in makes me greedy, I'll accept that along with the 16 digit card number, expiry date and security code off you card, you worked hard for the money, but don't be greedy now and share it

 

[retired_member29]

I wasn't on about 99% of domainors. I was more concerned about half a dozen of the domainors with the largest portfolios having to much power to sway any decision. But i need to read more into the subject before making anymore comments. I guess its a balancing act trying to keep most people happy.

And Skinner, absolutely if you work hard and take risks then there should be a reward, like with many other jobs.

 

[Systreg]

I wasn't on about 99% of domainors. I was more concerned about half a dozen of the domainors with the largest portfolios having to much power to sway any decision.

Those holding most domains aren't domainers, they're the big registrars, some of whom are heavily connected to Nominet, such as being current and past members of the Nominet board, they're the ones who sway decisions, as it's in their benefit for direct.uk to go ahead, so that they along with Nominet can make millions.

 

[Skinner]

As far as im aware no domainer FULL STOP has any power to sway a vote not a hugh, steve jackson, edwin, foz who between them hold less than 1% of the voe yet.have around 100k names between them.

 

[foz]

As stated the voting power is with the large Registrars. Domainers are small fry when viewed through Nominet eyes. Domainers account for only single digit percent of holdings in .co.uk.

If it does happen(?) big portfolio owners will dump .co.uk (retain the cream) and buy heavily into .uk. It's the transition that will be choppy and expensive, 3-4 years of pain. No recognition of .uk in the public arena, .co.uk known through 15 years use, domainers holding great swaths of .uk. Sounds like a recipe for stagnation and poor uptake.

 

[namealot]

Why are so many surprised at the proposed “uk” has nom ever shown it is anything else than in it for profit…? I remember regging names with the naming committee it was antiquated on the whims of few those also choose the nom route I remember like many others thinking why the f should I change and pay them? That along with the favorable climate made many sell off in early 2000

The self appointed and others decided to choose over what it should have been .gb for co.”UK” Introduced the bs administration charges of co.”uk “ some will think oh they never increased or charge as much as others just standard business practice get em in hooked then charge them? 50 million? P/A how much does the software offices, workers, hardware etc cost unless of course it’s just about profit?
The BS Scotland, Wales etc a general consensus that they are needed or again profit? (Wouldn’t be surprised if .gb rolls out again either)

The signs have never been that nom would not take any further revenue enhancing routes look at what they have done in the past me, org, ltd, plc etc they have a monopoly you’ve rented from a landlord whose always been a developer a property with fields all around and expected them not to develop ? It was always ever only a matter of time? Those not in the domain game maybe you could forgive there naivety lack of understanding but those in it? Many have known for years domains were and still are Wild West and early exit strategies are ignored at your peril?

Personally never liked the many rods strategy as sustainable although it can make good revenue the risk of over fishing, taste changes, wims of the tide combined with fishing a small pond that new species could be introduced by the owners at any time meant risk were always there?

 

[Nigel]

Why are so many surprised at the proposed “uk” has nom ever shown it is anything else than in it for profit…? I remember regging names with the naming committee it was antiquated on the whims of few those also choose the nom route I remember like many others thinking why the f should I change and pay them? That along with the favorable climate made many sell off in early 2000

The self appointed and others decided to choose over what it should have been .gb for co.”UK” Introduced the bs administration charges of co.”uk “ some will think oh they never increased or charge as much as others just standard business practice get em in hooked then charge them? 50 million? P/A how much does the software offices, workers, hardware etc cost unless of course it’s just about profit?
The BS Scotland, Wales etc a general consensus that they are needed or again profit? (Wouldn’t be surprised if .gb rolls out again either)

The signs have never been that nom would not take any further revenue enhancing routes look at what they have done in the past me, org, ltd, plc etc they have a monopoly you’ve rented from a landlord whose always been a developer a property with fields all around and expected them not to develop ? It was always ever only a matter of time? Those not in the domain game maybe you could forgive there naivety lack of understanding but those in it? Many have known for years domains were and still are Wild West and early exit strategies are ignored at your peril?

Personally never liked the many rods in the sea strategy as sustainable although it can make good revenue the risk of over fishing, taste changes, wims of the tide were always there?

If .co.uk domains are the wild west then why wasn't Phil Kingsland dressed in cowboy attire at Domaining Europe 2012. This domaining event occurred just 5 months before Nominet announced the direct.uk proposal and consultation. There he is talking up .co.uk domains to an eager audience. A few months later he's promoting a new extension .uk.

http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2012/dailyposts/20120429.htm

 

[monaghan]

What is also being missed here is that many early adopters of the Internet have good .co.uk domains which have not been DRS'd, yet the proposals were to offer .uk domains to trademark holders first, holding a .co.uk would count for nothing, this in turn would lead to consumer confusion trying to determine whether to go to myshop.co.uk or myshop.uk potentially crippling the "little guy" who invested early in myshop.co.uk.

If you then choose to offer .uk to the .co.uk holder, then for the most popular terms what does anyone other than Nominet get out of .uk?

Many existing .co.uk owners have the matching .com and other TLD's so would just reg the .uk resulting in it being just another TLD to reg for brand protection. Yes there may well be a few medium quality names back in the pot, but these are just as likely to be taken by the smaller domainers than companies or "real users".

Domainers will always duck & dive between deals, so most of those making big money will survive the .uk introduction, yet despite this they still stand against .uk, that's got to suggest something!