New nominet pricing

[Edwin]

Stephen, it's not going to be solved by conventional routes. I put it to 2 people at Nominet on the phone yesterday and these price rises are 100% happening.

 

[gimpydog]

An increase in wholesale pricing could also provide further scope for price related discounting

So, the higher the price, the greater the saving. Hmmm.



There has always been a funny smell at Sandford. It now looks like the wind is blowing the other way.

 

[Rob_F]

2019 picture: £18/2 years (£9 for the .co.uk, £9 for the .uk)

Assuming they don't increase prices before then.

- Rob

 

[AlistairM]

I don't agree with it in principle as I think it stinks really but who's really going to notice other than portfolio holders? And shoot me down if you like but maybe it will help somewhat in making people think twice about snapping up and holding onto any domain name that they think might have some value rather than a real end user being able to register it, for a change.

 

[grantw]

And shoot me down if you like but maybe it will help somewhat in making people think twice about snapping up and holding onto any domain name that they think might have some value rather than a real end user being able to register it, for a change.

I think you may have stumbled on to the wrong forum, netmums is over there somewhere >>>

 

[RobM]

I don't agree with it in principle as I think it stinks really but who's really going to notice other than portfolio holders? And shoot me down if you like but maybe it will help somewhat in making people think twice about snapping up and holding onto any domain name that they think might have some value rather than a real end user being able to register it, for a change.

Are you going to decide who a 'real end user' is then? The industry could do with someone to make these decisions for them.

 

[Edwin]

I don't agree with it in principle as I think it stinks really but who's really going to notice other than portfolio holders? And shoot me down if you like but maybe it will help somewhat in making people think twice about snapping up and holding onto any domain name that they think might have some value rather than a real end user being able to register it, for a change.

Since Nominet themselves (historically the domain investor's worst enemy) has deemed domain investment a valid business activity, this particular argument is not only dead and buried, it's so deep there are dinosaur bones mixed in.

 

[AlistairM]

I think you may have stumbled on to the wrong forum, netmums is over there somewhere >>>

Possibly. Maybe that's the point. Looking at it from a non domainers point of view, in reality "normal registrants" won't even notice or care about a price increase. I doubt they even know what a domain costs or know or care who Nominet is. I myself don't really have any interest in Nominet and I'm a member. Not saying I agree with the increase because I don't but £1.25 is less than half a lager so somebody renewing a domain for their business or whatever won't give a stuff, as long as it works that's all that matters.

Are you going to decide who a 'real end user' is then? The industry could do with someone to make these decisions for them.

I've already decided who a real end user is and I'm not concerned of what the industry thinks or does at this point.

Since Nominet themselves (historically the domain investor's worst enemy) has deemed domain investment a valid business activity, this particular argument is not only dead and buried, it's so deep there are dinosaur bones mixed in.

That's fair enough. If people can make a living from it then good luck to them but I've seen one comment on the article linked to earlier I think about somebody trimming their portfolio because of the price increase. That tells me they're obviously just holding domains that somebody else might use just to profit from them which their perfectly able to do but they can't be that valuable if they'll just let them go. They want to sell the domains for inflated prices but complain when Nominet inflates theirs. It's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Edwin]

That's fair enough. If people can make a living from it then good luck to them but I've seen one comment on the article linked to earlier I think about somebody trimming their portfolio because of the price increase. That tells me they're obviously just holding domains that somebody else might use just to profit from them which their perfectly able to do but they can't be that valuable if they'll just let them go. They want to sell the domains for inflated prices but complain when Nominet inflates theirs. It's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black.

No. It's simple maths.

If you take the example of a smallish portfolio (1,000 names)

The current holding cost is £3,000/year (£5+VAT for 2 years)
The holding cost from March 2016 will be £4,500/year
The holding cost from June 2019 will be £9,000/year (.co.uk + .uk)

Now imagine they sell £5,000/year worth of domains. That makes it a nice little earner - perhaps an extra holiday or a few more gadgets under the Christmas tree. But at £4,500/year it becomes a marginal proposition that probably won't repay the effort put in on an hourly basis, and at £9,000/year the business is dead.

There are plenty of businesses in the real world whose business model can't survive a 10% price change (a lot of retailers operate on margins less than that) so it's actually very easy to see how the 50% then 200% price rise could make maintaining existing portfolio levels untenable without really saying much about the average portfolio quality.

 

[Skinner]

What non domainers fail to realise is, while they piss and moan about paying say £100 now, 50% increase on stock holding, for someone like myself with 500-600 names, its adding thousands, if I make 20-30 sales per year, how much do I add on to each sale ? Now who is going to cry when my minimum price of £249 on a low end name is now £319 (made up figures).

Many may say who cares if domainers pay more, well they will care since domainers hold most the names.

 

[anthony]

It's a kick in the mush to domainers, and they know it!

The only way to get back at them is to point out any of their failings, because the membership has no power to do anything else!

 

[Stephen]

£300,000 claim on 1 single portfolio

I don't understand your second paragraph at all. It isn't about all "domainers" because many of those don't actually hold much stock. Those who are affected the most are likely to be portfolio holders (I'm a director of a company that is one) and that will be to widely varying degrees possibly determined by how viable a portfolio is. Some portfolio holders may be minimally affected. Others may be ruined.

When somebody faces ruin or severe change, they don't just lie down.

Where the basis for acting on their business model have changed so drastically they look for a way to reduce there loses or recover their investment.

It is something Nominet should be wary of, as it may come back to bankrupt Nominet itself!

A portfolio who say holds 10,000 UK domains since 2004, so 12 years to 2016 when the price goes up,
may state their business was based on Nominet keeping to its terms as a not for profit organization,
that only changes what it needs to maintain the registry.
An area well covered by posts in this thread.

From 2016 Nominet have broken the terms, so the portfolio owner may let those 10,000 domains expire and want the money back on the fees it has paid to Nominet from Nominet.

10,000 domains x 6 lots of 2 years x £5 = £300,000 claim on 1 single portfolio.

If Nominet cannot show they are acting for the UK namespace, then I can see a lot of claims like this and once one is set as a legal precedence,
then the floodgates would open!

This is only one potential consequence.

The Directors of Nominet (Executive and Non-Executive) should also be looking to get some legal advise,
as I don't believe claims will not stop at just action against Nominet!

 

[Stephen]

performing these services on a cost-recovery basis

Nominet doesn't operate on a cost recovery basis in respect of the registrar agreement, unless you know different? On a number of points, including "cost recovery", the registrant T&Cs are outdated. In reality Nominet's pricing has not been driven by a cost recovery basis for a long time, if ever. It's possible that the cost recovery element related to services other than domain name registration and renewal, which were originally free but Nominet eventually had to charge for and hoped to do so on a cost recovery basis. In reality how can Nominet know its actual final costs until the year end? If at year end its costs were found to be greater than that billed for already would it retrospectively invoice for the difference? Of course not. There was no prospect of that, nor any prospect of them returning a surplus if costs were ever found to have been less than anticipated.

Please look at current Terms and Conditions;


http://www.nominet.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Terms_and_Conditions_of_Domain_Name_Registration_1_Sept_2015.pdf

Opening ;

We are a not-for-profit company limited by guarantee, generally performing these services on a cost-recovery basis

Later:

Fees and payment

6. We are a not-for-profit organisation so our fees (see our website) reflect the cost of the work we do. To make sure that every person
who registers a domain name pays their fair share of the costs of running the central registry, we:

6.1 may make a charge for any of the services we provide under this contract, as long as (where only we can provide the
service) we believe the fee is set at a not-for-profit cost-recovery level only;

Stephen

 

[Edwin]

Nominet doesn't operate on a cost recovery basis in respect of the registrar agreement, unless you know different? On a number of points, including "cost recovery", the registrant T&Cs are outdated. In reality Nominet's pricing has not been driven by a cost recovery basis for a long time, if ever. It's possible that the cost recovery element related to services other than domain name registration and renewal, which were originally free but Nominet eventually had to charge for and hoped to do so on a cost recovery basis. In reality how can Nominet know its actual final costs until the year end? If at year end its costs were found to be greater than that billed for already would it retrospectively invoice for the difference? Of course not. There was no prospect of that, nor any prospect of them returning a surplus if costs were ever found to have been less than anticipated.

Nominet are opening a consultation on changing the T&C, including the part about the cost recovery basis. Until then the version that Stephen linked to remains in force.

David, is what you posted official Nominet policy? Because there's some great ammo there to challenge them on past behaviour if so. The T&C still apply until they're changed - Nominet don't get to pick and choose the bits they like.

 

[Edwin]

Some interesting reading here...

9. As a director, what should I do if I feel that the board is acting improperly?

http://www.lawdonut.co.uk/law/owner...tes/shareholder-and-boardroom-disputes-faqs#9

This was also instructive...

15. Can the shareholders dismiss a director?

http://www.lawdonut.co.uk/law/owner...es/shareholder-and-boardroom-disputes-faqs#15

Finally, probably the most relevant here...

19. How can I enforce my rights as a shareholder?

http://www.lawdonut.co.uk/law/owner...es/shareholder-and-boardroom-disputes-faqs#19

 

[Edwin]

Fair enough. Opinions can still be incorporated into legal cases. Thanks.

 

[Edwin]

Here's the rub, David.

To paraphrase Yes Minister, it was your job to bang the table and say "If you're going to do this damn silly thing, don't do it in this damn silly way."

And then give them a fair alternative, or keep pressing until they at least acknowledged that what they were proposing wasn't fair.

 

[humble pie]

I understand its annoying to say the least for large portfolio holders - especially with the double whammy price increase, but surely it would be naive to have expected this pricing structure to remain constant forever - a bit like when everyone who said .UK would never happen about 10 years ago because .co.uk was 'too embedded'.

I think they should have at least given a full year before the change to allow for maneuver.

 

[Edwin]

I understand its annoying to say the least for large portfolio holders - especially with the double whammy price increase, but surely it would be naive to have expected this pricing structure to remain constant forever - a bit like when everyone who said .UK would never happen about 10 years ago because .co.uk was 'too embedded'.

Agreed. But if they'd have done it like this it would have been proportionate and "fair" to every possible customer segment.
http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/nomin...itable-registration-price-rise-mechanism.html

 

[Edwin]

Nominet advances the worn out "cup of coffee" comparison in The Independent, blithly whistling past the fact they're selling 11,000,000 "cups of coffee"...
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...net-registry-hikes-prices-by-50-a6750496.html