Domainlore blog

[Darren]

Maybe, but how much extra are you willing to pay to let it sit for a few months? I'm not going to disclose the revenue share Rob uses because I haven't seen anybody else do so, but to take the previously quoted 60/40 used by Denys, you're going to have to bid on it yourself, then pay 40% of the final price just so that you can *not* sell it. That's quite a premium if your goal is to sell it anyway.

That is the problem with the auction model right there, you are automatically getting a "60%" discount on the sale price, which allows you to bid up the name higher than it would have probably gone. Bidders need to be made aware of this.

I have heard the revenue split could be 70/30 in favour of the registrant.

 

[stitchbob]

You'll be happy with this email I just received from Rob then:

It seems that no matter what I decide to do, accusations of cheating and shill bidding are going to fly at the platform.

As such I am having to take the unfortunate decision of address how people bid on their own domains.
1) If you bid on your own domain and lose you don't get a percentage of the sale at the end
2) If you bid on your own domain and win you pay the full amount - just like anyone else would.

So there you go. The person who uses their quota to catch a domain no longer gets any advantage whatsoever for doing so if it happens to be a domain they wanted - Rob takes 100% of the sale price for any domains where the catcher places a bid.

Fair enough?

 

[dropsnatcher]

You'll be happy with this email I just received from Rob then:



So there you go. The person who uses their quota to catch a domain no longer gets any advantage whatsoever for doing so if it happens to be a domain they wanted - Rob takes 100% of the sale price for any domains where the catcher places a bid.

Fair enough?

only rob could find a way of making it fairer whilst making sure he now gets a bigger cut, if you want it but lose you lose, if you want it and win you lose

anyway all this just takes away from the very fact that rob is still using dac quota of his 5gbp without them knowing to register so many domains on his tag and i hope nominet investigate this and ban him

 

[PoshTiger]

anyway all this just takes away from the very fact that rob is still using dac quota of his 5gbp without them knowing to register so many domains on his tag and i hope nominet investigate this and ban him

I wonder how many calls to Nominet are going to happen today..

 

[Darren]

only rob could find a way of making it fairer whilst making sure he now gets a bigger cut, if you want it but lose you lose, if you want it and win you lose

anyway all this just takes away from the very fact that rob is still using dac quota of his 5gbp without them knowing to register so many domains on his tag and i hope nominet investigate this and ban him

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Rob is using his clients DAC quota.

 

[PoshTiger]

Do you have proof of that or are you just assuming?

I have proof that a specific IP was used in December - should be easy for Nominet to tally it up..

 

[PoshTiger]

Well it’s not hard to determine which tags are using Denys exact system that themselves abuse the DAC. You’re all mad that someone else has got one up on your old code and now your revenue is dropping. Well, I’m glad.

Well I'm not, I can actually write code and know what I'm talking about here - I also just do this for fun, honestly when catching stops (like it certainly will quite soon) I'll take up hunting bug bounties instead with my spare time.

I've no idea why you keep trying to derail this thread Ben - you clearly have a vendetta against Denys and are using this thread to vent - it's boring, stop it.

 

[Siusaidh]

I wonder how many calls to Nominet are going to happen today..

This uproar doesn't really do favours to any group of drop-catchers.

At a time when Nominet is trying to decide how to improve the process of dropping domains, people accosting them, and all the 'he said, she said', and 'it's not fair', which they really can't be doing with... the only thing it will demonstrate is the hassle of the whole drop-catching rigmarole. Until they may get to a point where they decide, 'Why bother with this small group of [perceived] malcontents?'

There are other options on the table that would nuke drop-catching altogether, and you guys think it's a bright idea to besiege them with inter-catcher rivalries? They just don't need this. One of you might win a tactical victory (though I doubt it), and yet end up suffering far larger strategic loss.

I think Nominet would rather things just trundle on, with peace and quiet, until they decide to fix things in a way you may regret. They don't want to be expending time on investigations and intrigue into a failing model that they're going to change anyway.

Personally, yes, I think Nominet should enforce clear protocols and rules. But I don't think that's likely to happen. A point comes when they just think, why bother, and change the model altogether... for the avoidance of exactly this kind of hassle, and an exotic group of catchers (most of us) who they have little sympathy for anyway. You're arguing over a model which is almost certainly going to change. In the meanwhile, maybe: Nominet just don't care about these kind of disputes? I don't think you guys are thinking strategically at all. It's all just turf wars.

While the police are 'hands off' in the neighbourhood, go ahead, play the system and its loopholes however you choose. Keep calm and carry on. I suspect these are the last days (or at any rate months) of 'the old regime'. After that, many will look back, glass in hand, and reminisce 'the good old days'.

It has always been that way.

I remember those old days too, when good names were like fruit hanging on trees, unregistered, just waiting to be picked. Life is full of 'if onlys'. Some things change. Some remain the same. To Nominet, drop-catchers are kind of collateral damage. They just want peace and profit. Causing a rumpus does not contribute hugely to the case for keeping these processes going. Reading this thread, and not having a pony in the race (because I get domains mostly for personal use), but wishing everyone well, it just seems like turf wars to me. I think everyone should back off, cool down, and play the system in the next few months until Nominet makes changes.

 

[Sam]

This uproar doesn't really do favours to any group of drop-catchers.

And you are a new nominet member so you know everything right ?

Nothing will change they won't do anything....

The old days are over yes bring back 2003 when it was easy

 

[PoshTiger]

Well what an odd thing to say, coming from a supporter of Denys and on a topic with regards to a blog post made by Denys himself, in which he CLEARLY has a vendetta against UKBackorder and Rob (which is his competition, and doing much better than DomainLore). So no, I won't stop voicing my opinion. I have no idea who you are and you telling me to "stop it" has no impact on my life. Ironically, your posts about this are becoming boring, now stop trying to converse with me I have no interest in doing so.

You're conversing on my thread - and sending it off-topic.

If you want to start your own thread then be my guest - I have no interest in talking to you.

 

[Siusaidh]

And you are a new nominet member so you know everything right ?

No Wizard, I don't know everything, but I've interacted with Nominet a lot for 20 years, and especially since I became a member a few months ago, arguing the case for auctioning names that drop. I've been involved with domains since 2000, been a member here since 2011 (on a different user name), was an elected rep of ICANN at LARGE. I get how Registries operate. I am admittedly a small player who does domains mostly for personal reasons rather than profit (they did help fund my nursing degree though). I deal respectfully with several people here, and my transactions are good. I have a point of view, that's all. Best wishes.

 

[timter51]

Nothing will change they won't do anything....

I can't imagine after the meetings and putting forward options, that they just won't do anything... I hope that drop-catching in same way stays as the thrill of the chase is good fun, but I'm preparing for some pretty big changes.

 

[Sam]

I can't imagine after the meetings and putting forward options, that they just won't do anything... I hope that drop-catching in same way stays as the thrill of the chase is good fun, but I'm preparing for some pretty big changes.

I was with them in december none of them had a clue what was going on and the idea of the lottery system should be best we all get a win not one person winning all the domains like the old days...

 

[stitchbob]

In a fair system, there would be a 24 hour or so period after the drop where all interested parties can attempt to register the domain. After 24 hours a random registrant is allocated the domain.

Of course, it would actually go the same way as the RoR, with the large players with a large Nominet balance having 30,000 entries each into the ballot, while small individual registrants only get one entry each.

 

[timter51]

I'm inclined to think they'll head for a straight RoR system implementation, tried and tested and all that. Has anyone been given a potential timescale on the phone / email / at a roundtable?

 

[Sam]

I'm inclined to think they'll head for a straight RoR system implementation, tried and tested and all that. Has anyone been given a potential timescale on the phone / email / at a roundtable?

no as far as they told me they had not planned anything as wanted feedback that was it ....

 

[Siusaidh]

You're right - it's still all to play for. Kelly and James may well be inclined to push for set ups which favour the larger registrars - maybe models like James's at Go Daddy, auctioning expiring domains before the drop, or maybe some kind of RoR-type model, where money and scale buy you better access. David obviously knows drop-catching inside out, but does he still have any allegiance to the traditional script-catching approach? Who has the most powerful influence in the corporate decision-making? You'd have to suppose the bigger Registrars and their revenue streams. Personally I have found Nick W-S really open and accessible, but also a realist and pragmatist. My reasoning would suggest that Kelly and James may push the Board towards one of the two options that are good for GoDaddy and Namesco, because why wouldn't they. That depends on them.

Of course, it could all be worked out already, with the Consultation process just a front for PR's sake (as is often the case) but I don't read it that way. That consultation was, by report, disappointing and poorly attended, the survey responses also. I was booked to attend the round-table but I had serious health issues going on that week, so I've been working in my own way since then. I believe they are genuinely reviewing competing options, and it will I suspect depend on which voices swing the board. My paper outlining the auction model in detail will be on the table, so they promise (unless of course they are lying). I don't believe they are. In dialogue, I know they 'get' the arguments and advantages for auctioning dropping domains - and I'm impressed by that, they've thought it through (at least some of them) - but there will be other, more influential voices in the room. Name-catchers get bad rep, on alleged charges of warehousing and cyber squatting, and generally there's little sympathy I suspect.

Nominet just want a working market that supplies domain names as thoroughly (and ideally simply) as possible. They don't want hassle. They want profit. Obviously. The question is: do they need the status quo as it operates at present? Internecine quarrels between name-catchers and their distributors, and time spent responding to quarrels and complaints hardly help those who want name-catching to prosper. It would be great if Anne T who posted here a couple of times (before her election, and at the time of the consultation) would care to come online and set out the situation, the process for decision-making, the likely timing of decisions, and the main options being considered.

Also, are there conflicts of interest that ought to be raised, when board members are also key members of large registrars. It makes sense that their input can be useful, and I get that, but when decisions that could benefit their own companies are involved, do they get to disengage themselves from the decision-making process? I've seen the same symbiotic relationship between Registries and registrars operating in the ICANN context, and how that can go badly wrong, and given that this is the UK's DNS we are talking about - vital for national infrastructure and communities - the highest levels of good practice and transparent process should be followed. Really this should be monitored by government department, but we all know that most people just don't care as long as they can log on and the websites resolve for them. As Wizard mentioned, few followed his (?) example and bothered to attend the consultation, and if even people affected by the decision don't show up, why should we expect anyone else to raise questions really?

For the past 20 years of participation in ICANN's processes and debates, I've seen how a "laissez-faire" attitude prevails, and enforcement/regulation is slack (and slack for a reason - it benefits those with the most vested interest that it should be that way). We saw it with the banks before the 2008 mayhem. Right now, Nominet takes a fairly hands-off approach in issues like those being discussed in this thread. The big Registrars wanted to mass-register .uk domains last June. Nominet did not resist. There were arguments (or cover) for taking that decision. A handful of name catchers squabble over how names are getting caught. I'm not saying Nominet just turns a blind eye, but they are reluctant generally to get drawn in. Laissez-faire means, providing the main revenue streams keep flowing, and benefit everyone in the big tents, a little gaming of systems here and there hardly matters. In fact, that flexibility often benefits the financially strongest at the expense of those who play by the rules more pedantically.

I guess I am a pedant. I want a fairer system, and fairer access for more people. Experience over 20 years, on the wider platform beyond just the UK, has taught me that the domain industry tends to be pretty wild west (which can sometimes be fun) but the big players generally benefit the most. I guess I like the name catching community because of the way guile, and skill, and watchfulness, and cunning sometimes buck the system. And just the love of the chase. However, what I dislike is when name catching becomes dominated by a small number of registrars/catchers. At that point it becomes so annoying, because they can carve out their benefit, but so many other people get marginalised and don't get access. That's why I prefer the idea of auction (I don't believe lottery is a starter - I haven't seen any working models elsewhere - how would it even work... every single dropping name in the lottery? Just ones people bid on?). I think straightforward auction is the simplest supply-and-demand solution. Anyone can bid. The wealthy, of course, will be able to bid more, until a name finds its market price. But that happens anyway, when names get auctioned later.

What Nominet needs is the simplest process to derive the optimal revenue, while being seen to offer access to process that is fair.

 

[LCHappy]

Didn't domainlore used to let domain catchers bid on their own names when they first started? Someone said Denys changed it after people complained about the same issue.

 

[3gmedia]

Could we see Nominet copying the .co model, let the not so good names drop and hold back the premium names with a tiered pricing structure for the best of the premium names.

Who knows how this will turn out.

https://www.go.co/premium-names/

 

[Gill]

Can I just say ...

I guess I am a pedant. I want a fairer system, and fairer access for more people.

Does anyone think that killing drop catching could actually benefit the secondary market by reducing the number of new domains entering the hands of resellers.

A combination of the RoR, these big drops, DomainLore and UKBackOrder have put the market on it's knees. The market is depressed because of over capacity and if it was oil or some other commodity they'd be limiting how much product came to market. Maybe killing drop catching will do that?