Nominet announces programme for evolving the .uk domain name space

[Murray]

No it is domainers 'fault' for taking advantage of the situation and using it to their advantage

Domainers didn't create the game they're just playing it, if there is a chance to make money and you aren't hurting anyone, it would be silly not to take advantage.

By choosing to quote just part of what I said, I am going to take it that you agree with the rest of it

Talking about what is fair and not fair, there are going to be losers however which way it's released, I personally think it would be more fair for co.uk to be given .uk but obviously you disagree so there was no point going over it again because you've explained your standpoint.

I'm not arguing btw for my own gain, I barely own any domains so I don't stand to lose out in any significant way whatever happens.

 

[GreyWing]

Domainers stand to win fewer domains under "oldest first" than under either ".co.uk first" or "pairing".

Edwin are you seriously reading what is written?

I wrote

"Domainers will be the winners under your plan, regardless of the release mechanism it's going to be a massacre for the general public. Whatever anyone of us wins and loses on the launch it's going to be messy to watch the next 4-5 years."​

 

[domainseller200]

Domainers didn't create the game they're just playing it, if there is a chance to make money and you aren't hurting anyone, it would be silly not to take advantage.



Talking about what is fair and not fair, there are going to be losers however which way it's released, I personally think it would be more fair for co.uk to be given .uk but obviously you disagree so there was no point going over it again because you've explained your standpoint.

I'm not arguing btw for my own gain, I barely own any domains so I don't stand to lose out in any significant way whatever happens.

I play the game myself so I get it totally. I am just happy to admit my agenda and say it as it is, without dressing it up pretending I am looking out for others when it clearly isn't the case.

The post that 'sound' made is spot on and exactly what I mean - people can't complain what is fair and unfair in one way and then argue the opposite in a different scenario, when in theory the scenarios are the same to a degree.

 

[Retired_Member42]

Out of interest Frank. How does the .uk introduction via the current oldest first proposal render some of your .org.uk only worth reg free? I assume that most of the .org.uk have value because of the SEO benefits which shouldn't change with the introduction of another extension?

 

[Edwin]

Edwin are you seriously reading what is written?

I wrote

"Domainers will be the winners under your plan, regardless of the release mechanism it's going to be a massacre for the general public. Whatever anyone of us wins and loses on the launch it's going to be messy to watch the next 4-5 years."​

Yes. Most people other than you are currently arguing about "oldest first" vs ".co.uk first"/"pairing". That's what I was addressing. Not the basic ".uk or not .uk" question.

 

[domainseller200]

Here is another scenario for you all to think about then, and is a purely hypothtical situation :

The .uk proposal goes ahead, and you know of a .co.uk name which was bought for a decent figure as it was in the public as being sold previously, and you found out that the .uk name was available to register.

Would you email the person / company who bought the .co.uk domain to tell them the .uk name was free to register or would you register it yourself with a view of possibly selling it to them or someone else further down the line ?

Genuine question and one I would really like to see some honest answers to.

 

[Edwin]

3%-6% represents roughly between 300,000 and 600,000 domains and that is a BIG number that your use of percentages fails to convey. In real terms, it could mean a lot of businesses who have already paid through the nose to own the .co.uk because it's the premium uk extension, will be forced to pay the secondary market a second time for the new premium extension.

Not so, because a lot of the .org.uk "winners" will be uncontended (just like most of the .co.uk ones will) My use of percentages was accurate. The number of .org.uk registrants who would get the .uk bears no relation to (and is much, much larger than) the number of contentious cases.

 

[GreyWing]

I play the game myself so I get it totally. I am just happy to admit my agenda and say it as it is, without dressing it up pretending I am looking out for others when it clearly isn't the case.

Can I suggest that anyone on this forum could make £20-£30k pretty easily over a year or two from cybersquatting just their own local area when this is launched. £10 outlay, sell at £500 or the .co.uk owners try to DRS at £750. Also earn out of traffic leakage. Domainers dream come true.

I don't think anyone on this forum would lose any amount of domains that couldn't be made up by black hat domaining. I really don't think people are looking out for themselves. We have Guard.co.uk, Genuine.co.uk, That.co.uk Avoid.co.uk, DashCams.co.uk and more all survive. We'd only lose one at this point.

Another motive could also be argued that if .uk is filled mostly with cybersquatters then .uk won't rank well in Google. I'd be more concerned with that at this point from a selfish point of view.

 

[Nigel]

Yes I am invested heavily in .org.uk names, but I am actually heavier invested in .co.uk names from a financial point of view as it stands. If the proposal went ahead in it's current format (oldest registrant first) then I stand to be in a better position with my .co.uk names than my .org.uk names, and would lose out hugely and render some of my .org.uk names as reg fee value, yet I still feel that the earliest date approach is much fairer as a whole. You could even compare it to a war - 2 million people die to save 20 million people.

Regardless of my own feelings, direct.uk will not be scrapped and I think we all know that. I feel V2 proposals are much fairer than V1 (as an overall for everyone NOT personally) especially from the TM angle being scrapped.

I agree v2 is fairer than v1 - but the fairest version is to not launch .uk at all. Then everyone is happy. If nominet sidestepped the alleged data protection issues (which I believe are simply an excuse and probably don't apply to public interest issues like this) and consulted all existing registrants, and honestly provided all the facts, then I think the vast majority would ask that the present system remains unchanged. But I don't think it serves nominet to consult existing registrants as they'll get the answer they don't want. So we'll see another consultation answered by a tiny fraction of existing registrants and then they'll plough ahead with their money making plan.

 

[domainseller200]

Out of interest Frank. How does the .uk introduction via the current oldest first proposal render some of your .org.uk only worth reg free? I assume that most of the .org.uk have value because of the SEO benefits which shouldn't change with the introduction of another extension?

Sorry, I meant reg fee in the terms of a domain alone in domainer / end user values NOT SEO / development potential values etc.

 

[GreyWing]

Yes. Most people other than you are currently arguing about "oldest first" vs ".co.uk first"/"pairing". That's what I was addressing. Not the basic ".uk or not .uk" question.

Well why quote me and answer someone else's questions? Confuses the hell out of me mate.

 

[foz]

Here is another scenario for you all to think about then, and is a purely hypothtical situation :

The .uk proposal goes ahead, and you know of a .co.uk name which was bought for a decent figure as it was in the public as being sold previously, and you found out that the .uk name was available to register.

Would you email the person / company who bought the .co.uk domain to tell them the .uk name was free to register or would you register it yourself with a view of possibly selling it to them or someone else further down the line ?

Genuine question and one I would really like to see some honest answers to.

I think a lot may back the truck up on .uk big time. e.g. 100,000's registered on the first day of public release. No time will be spent analyzing one domain at a time, not for the cream anyway.

 

[Edwin]

Well why quote me and answer someone else's questions? Confuses the hell out of me mate.

Because you said domainers would win under "my plan" which I took to mean "as opposed to other competing plans for releasing .uk". A fair interpretation, I think.

 

[GreyWing]

Because you said domainers would win under "my plan" which I took to mean "as opposed to other competing plans for releasing .uk". A fair interpretation, I think.

That's exactly what I was thinking, .co.uk's have always been more expensive than .org.uk's.

Lots of us have explained that several times.

(See how confusing it gets when we do that)

 

[domainseller200]

Can I suggest that anyone on this forum could make £20-£30k pretty easily over a year or two from cybersquatting just their own local area when this is launched. £10 outlay, sell at £500 or the .co.uk owners try to DRS at £750. Also earn out of traffic leakage. Domainers dream come true.

I don't think anyone on this forum would lose any amount of domains that couldn't be made up by black hat domaining. I really don't think people are looking out for themselves. We have Guard.co.uk, Genuine.co.uk, That.co.uk Avoid.co.uk, DashCams.co.uk and more all survive. We'd only lose one at this point.

Another motive could also be argued that if .uk is filled mostly with cybersquatters then .uk won't rank well in Google. I'd be more concerned with that at this point from a selfish point of view.

Graham, so are you saying that not a single person on here is flying the flag for 'other uneducated businesses' when really they are flying it for themselves but dressing it up differently ? You seem to have a very black / white view where as I have a more grey one.

 

[GreyWing]

Graham, so are you saying that not a single person on here is flying the flag for 'other uneducated businesses' when really they are flying it for themselves but dressing it up differently ? You seem to have a very black / white view where as I have a more grey one.

You could never say everyone no, but because anyone of them could benefit more under the current v2 plan if they wanted. I think that it is probable that +90% of them and their concerns are honourable when compared to those that support v2.

 

[Edwin]

I have set up 2 separate threads:

Subject-specific thread: NO to direct.uk
http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/uk-do...002-subject-specific-thread-no-direct-uk.html

Subject-specific thread: Fairest .uk release mechanism?
http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/uk-do...ific-thread-fairest-uk-release-mechanism.html

Perhaps we could keep the two aspects of the discussion separate using the above? I think it would ultimately be a lot more productive.

 

[Retired_Member42]

Here is another scenario for you all to think about then, and is a purely hypothtical situation :

The .uk proposal goes ahead, and you know of a .co.uk name which was bought for a decent figure as it was in the public as being sold previously, and you found out that the .uk name was available to register.

Would you email the person / company who bought the .co.uk domain to tell them the .uk name was free to register or would you register it yourself with a view of possibly selling it to them or someone else further down the line ?

Genuine question and one I would really like to see some honest answers to.

I wouldn't be contacting anyone telling them they should secure the .uk version of their .co.uk. It's their responsibility and whether they have it or not makes no difference to me.

As for me buying it up, it'd depend on the name. If it were a well known brand I wouldn't waste my time buying it up in an attempt to sell to the the .co.uk owner. I have enough legal issues as it is and wouldn't fancy another one for the sake of a domain flip.

If however it were a keyword domain or a generic word/phrase then I'd buy it and use it or sell it for a price I considered it to be worth personally rather than who is on the .co.uk or how deep their pockets are.

I'm all for people buying domains and profiting from them. I've done it myself, a lot. I don't agree with people buying up brand names on lesser extensions with a blatant attempt to get money out of the established .co.uk or pricing domains based on how deep the pockets are of the interested party.

 

[domainseller200]

I think a lot may back the truck up on .uk big time. e.g. 100,000's registered on the first day of public release. No time will be spent analyzing one domain at a time, not for the cream anyway.

Agreed for seasoned domainers, but with regards to newbies / people who have only been involved for 6-12 months, they won't mind spending some time looking for half decent names which may have been missed on the first day of release. I don't think any "domainer" would alert the relevant .co.uk / .org.uk owner to the fact of it being unregistered unless they had previously sold them the .co.uk / .org.uk themselves (but even then some would seize the opportunity and contact them and say they have 'aquired it on their behalf at a knock down price' etc)

Some of the today's comments in this thread are total rubbish, and this is why the question is so hard to answer for people as it will show their true agendas and impossible to answer as a 'domainer' who argues what is fair and unfair.

 

[domainseller200]

If it was my customer I'd register it and give it to them, if it was your customer (or anyone else's) I'd register it and milk them dry.

Thankyou for your honesty Sean - this is exactly my view too.