New Nominet Policy to Kill Drop Catching

[davedevelopment]

Does being priced out of something arguably make it unfair? I'm priced out of a house in Mayfair but I fortunately, for me, I can still afford a house in an area I want to live. How unfair!



It's fair to all those who have invested in dropcatching systems, those that offer DAC/EPP hosting services and those that offer them their custom. It's unfair to existing Registrars, potentially the Registry and it isn't a level playing field. Your claim that no one entity is picking up all the cherries also cannot be accurately assessed because you don't know which members are colluding to ensure they cover different times of the day, for example, or which members are more closely associated yet appear to be different. If Nominet invited you and a database expert to run queries against their historic DAC and EPP logs I'd be willing to bet that you'd walk away with a different view on how fair the current systems are.

I don't think the money outlay makes it any fairer either way. Currently folk can either pay for a drop catching solution or pay other drop catchers, where as in the proposed plans, pay the big registrars via auction. You have to pay either way. It's where the money goes that matters to me and I'd rather it goes to nominet and independents, than the big registrars.

 

[Edwin]

Arguably participants in the two letter auctions didn't find it a level playing field, being priced out of most auctions. Be careful what you wish for.

The inability to pay for something does not negate the fact that an open and fair auction (anyone can take part, no bid shilling) is a commercially completely level playing field.

In other words, there's nothing wrong or unfair about a "market" if some people can't afford to buy in it - unless you are trying for a fluffy "life's not fair if Peter has even £1 more to spend than Paul" argument.

 

[Edwin]

I don't think the money outlay makes it any fairer either way. Currently folk can either pay for a drop catching solution or pay other drop catchers, where as in the proposed plans, pay the big registrars via auction. You have to pay either way. It's where the money goes that matters to me and I'd rather it goes to nominet and independents, than the big registrars.

Not true. Being able to pay for something is a much much much much lower barrier to entry than being able to successfully drop catch it. Regardless of any specific person on here's ability to do so, millions and millions of people and companies have the financial wherewithal to "win" an auction for a domain. Contrast that with the current drop catching market which requires a HUGE degree of technical expertise and/or time, plus money, plus luck - which is why no more than a hundred or so entities participate in it.

A system where anyone from a technical whizz to a small business owner with no tech background can invest a couple of minutes and receive a dropping domain with 100% certainty (all they have to do is win an auction, something the 100,000,000+ users of eBay are already familiar with) is a much, much, much fairer system.

 

[davedevelopment]

Not true. Being able to pay for something is a much much much much lower barrier to entry than being able to successfully drop catch it. Regardless of any specific person on here's ability to do so, millions and millions of people and companies have the financial wherewithal to "win" an auction for a domain. Contrast that with the current drop catching market which requires a HUGE degree of technical expertise and/or time, plus money, plus luck - which is why no more than a hundred or so entities participate in it.

A system where anyone from a technical whizz to a small business owner with no tech background can invest a couple of minutes and receive a dropping domain with 100% certainty (all they have to do is win an auction, something the 100,000,000+ users of eBay are already familiar with) is a much, much, much fairer system.

I didn't mean to suggest drop catching was as easy as winning an auction, I said you have to pay money either way. For those without the technical expertise, luck and time that you've mentioned, they'd probably buy them from the drop catcher. I agree that *forcing* all domains to auction is fairer, and in doing so may drive fairer prices for dropped domains, so that catchers can't hold on to domains waiting for the right buyer and demand inflated prices.

 

[foz]

That doesn't counter the fact that existing Registrars of expiring domain names see nothing from dropcatching and some of them would like to see that change. They're possibly already doing all of the other things you've listed.

Domainmonster offers .uk back-orders and they regularly catch domains.

 

[foz]

What would you guys say if a registrar engaged in this behaviour with respect to expired domains (monetisation, redemption fees, eventual auctioning off for their own profit) but charged below cost for domain registrations. We could feasibly see this business model evolve because of the cross subsidy of domain registrations through domain expiry profits.

Their wouldn't be enough revenue from auctions to begin with. What drops on a daily basis covers a wide range of TAG's. The ones that would have any chance of profitability are the registrars that have a legacy of old registrations e.g 123-reg.

 

[foz]

I didn't mean to suggest drop catching was as easy as winning an auction, I said you have to pay money either way. For those without the technical expertise, luck and time that you've mentioned, they'd probably buy them from the drop catcher. I agree that *forcing* all domains to auction is fairer, and in doing so may drive fairer prices for dropped domains, so that catchers can't hold on to domains waiting for the right buyer and demand inflated prices.

To start drop catching with zero technical knowledge in the .uk space your looking at an outlay of approximately ~£500 (Nominet membership) with a leased system costing £250-£350 per month.

 

[foz]

The inability to pay for something does not negate the fact that an open and fair auction (anyone can take part, no bid shilling) is a commercially completely level playing field.

In other words, there's nothing wrong or unfair about a "market" if some people can't afford to buy in it - unless you are trying for a fluffy "life's not fair if Peter has even £1 more to spend than Paul" argument.

I don't have an issue with the concept, I just recall members on here not liking the fact they were priced out. Just except more of the same if a central expiring repository site was implemented.

So the definition of "fair" needs to be aligned. To the Registrant, Registrar (Member) or Buyer? Satisfying all groups will not be easy. A Registrar could argue that a central repository site run by the registry is competing against them for registrations.

 

[foz]

It's fair to all those who have invested in dropcatching systems, those that offer DAC/EPP hosting services and those that offer them their custom. It's unfair to existing Registrars, potentially the Registry and it isn't a level playing field. Your claim that no one entity is picking up all the cherries also cannot be accurately assessed because you don't know which members are colluding to ensure they cover different times of the day, for example, or which members are more closely associated yet appear to be different. If Nominet invited you and a database expert to run queries against their historic DAC and EPP logs I'd be willing to bet that you'd walk away with a different view on how fair the current systems are.

I don't think enough mainstream Registrars even bother to catch. Are they complaining because they haven't even tried to compete yet? The entry costs are low, just get on with it.

Gaming the system is speculation on your part. It is policed by Nominet.

http://www.nominet.org.uk/disputes/terms/anti-avoidance/

 

[foz]

Whether they engage in dropcatching is different. They don't see anything from the domain names they eventually let drop and some would like to.

I don't think I've ever bothered catching a Domainmonster Tagged domain. That is, their inventory that does drop doesn't contain prized domains.

 

[foz]

It isn't about competing in dropcatching. It's about being able to offer an alternative solution for domain names on ones registrar tag that are expiring. If they can get away with auctioning them off and making money from that then why wouldn't many of them want to do that?

They can want to, but I think Nominet shouldn't allow it. It's unfair to the original registrant (the time to renew is 90 days). It's still their legal property.

 

[Edwin]

.com has a 6 day "pending delete" period during which nobody (not even the registrar) can prevent the forthcoming deletion. That's plenty of time to hold an auction in, so a similar period tucked onto the end of the current .co.uk expiry process could work.

 

[retired_member33]

If any of this goes through and any of the catchers want to focus their experience on another market, I would be more then happy to have a chat.

 

[monaghan]

Just a reminder that the closing date for comments is Monday, put all those grumbles in an email to [email protected]

 

[DavidL]

If the registrar has any financial interest in letting this go to auction, renewals emails might go a miss, renewal requests fall off the system so names don't get renewed (already happens now with some registrars). Imagine all the mistakes that registrars currents currently make and look at them in the new light that they make money from some of these mistakes in the future. There is going to be carnage and suspicion all over the place. It doesn't really matter if their is skulduggery involved, the suspicion will do the damage to the industry.

But do they really make many mistakes? Isn't it the case that registrants make a lot of noise about not receiving renewals etc but in reality, when investigated, it's them that has made the error with an incorrect/expired email or an over-zealous junk filter?

If I was a Registrar and "debt.co.uk" went to expiry then I would probably be financially stupid to let it go to any public auction. I'd simply "sell" it to an offshoot company or a partner I had an agreement with and profit from it some other way or sell it in the future.

No, it would be financially smart to auction it off. Holding it from the auction would only make sense if the registrar values the domain at more than the market value. Otherwise you take the 100% profit from selling at at market value at a public auction.


Anyway put your comments in while you have a chance!

 

[foz]

Just a reminder that the closing date for comments is Monday, put all those grumbles in an email to [email protected]

Are submissions published?

 

[monaghan]

I've no idea if the individual submissions are made public, they publish the meeting summary, so I'm guessing that they may well publish a summary of feedback

 

[foz]

I've no idea if the individual submissions are made public, they publish the meeting summary, so I'm guessing that they may well publish a summary of feedback

Thanks.

 

[Blossom]

But do they really make many mistakes? Isn't it the case that registrants make a lot of noise about not receiving renewals etc but in reality, when investigated, it's them that has made the error with an incorrect/expired email or an over-zealous junk filter?

For a lot of registrars, the exact opposite happens - the domain gets renewed automatically when the owner wanted to drop it (because of not seeing emails/not taking action/checking or unchecking the wrong box), rather than the other way round.

 

[monaghan]

Just a reminder that the closing date for comments is Monday, put all those grumbles in an email to [email protected]

Note: You don't have to be a member or a TAG holder to respond, input from the widest range of people is required to show the full picture.