Um,.......hmmmm, a flag up the pole to see who salute you think? Assuming the posting it is sanctioned as official view, what is the end game here? Afterall, they are gifted ownership of every name, known and hitherto unknown, in the .com space! The domainers merely 'rent' them! Hmmm....we have a saying in my corner of empire, 'o*ne hand alone can't clap*'. Gotta follow the money. https://domainnamewire.com/2018/11/02/holy-sht-verisign-just-called-out-doma... ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================
We'll, it's not particularly easy to take them back. Blog raises some good points about where the money goes. The ICA rhetoric about small business is pretty silly. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.Innovatorsnetwork.org> ________________________________ From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 2:59:12 PM To: cpwg@icann.org; lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Verisign Dissing Domainers? Um,.......hmmmm, a flag up the pole to see who salute you think? Assuming the posting it is sanctioned as official view, what is the end game here? Afterall, they are gifted ownership of every name, known and hitherto unknown, in the .com space! The domainers merely 'rent' them! Hmmm....we have a saying in my corner of empire, 'one hand alone can't clap'. Gotta follow the money. https://domainnamewire.com/2018/11/02/holy-sht-verisign-just-called-out-doma... ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
This post is actually taking aim primarily at REGISTRARS who buy huge numbers of .com domains at wholesale ($7.85 per domain) and then hold them, in order to try and sell them later for a premium price. That’s not really dissing domainers in the general sense, just these registrar-domainers. The writing is a bit sloppy on this point, and the blog pivots to ICA toward the end, but even there, the focus is on the registrar-domainers, not on the general domaining public. Look again at the post, and you will see references to “speculators” who buy at a “regulated price.” That’s the Verisign price they are talking about. Regular registrants don’t have that opportunity — only registrars. The “Domainer Name Wire” article largely misses this point — partly because the post is vague and partly because of a tendency to “rush to judgment” in the domaining press. As Jonathan notes, ICA argues it’s protecting the little guy, when they are actually providing loads of protection for some very “big guy” registrar-domainers. While this is not “insider trading,” it is really a form of diversion based on insider access — the registrars abuse their privileged position to buy cheap and to buy before any “regular” registrant (even a domainer) can, and then they hold this portfolio and charge secondary-market prices for domains that are not really in the secondary market. Registrars’ unique ability to buy domain names directly from the registries was never meant to produce this result. This is a bug, not a feature. The end user domainers should really be pissed off at the registrar-domainers, not at Verisign. (Of course, they are permanently pissed off at Verisign, especially with a price increase in their “commodity.”) Maybe registrars should be prohibited from buying for their own account for investment purposes. GoDaddy apparently has 2.5 billion reasons to oppose that idea. I don’t know if I would call them scalpers (though it’s a fair comparison). I see domainers more like the folks in Boston who get up in the morning, sit down in a lawn chair in a prime parking spot near the Fenway Park baseball stadium, and then sit there until game time approaches. Then they charge you $20 or more to get out of the way so you can park there. This is not entirely accurate either since this is a lot more work than a domainer would put in (at least for a single domain name. Greg On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 3:10 PM Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> wrote:
We'll, it's not particularly easy to take them back. Blog raises some good points about where the money goes. The ICA rhetoric about small business is pretty silly.
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org
------------------------------ *From:* GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 2, 2018 2:59:12 PM *To:* cpwg@icann.org; lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org *Subject:* [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Verisign Dissing Domainers?
Um,.......hmmmm, a flag up the pole to see who salute you think?
Assuming the posting it is sanctioned as official view, what is the end game here? Afterall, they are gifted ownership of every name, known and hitherto unknown, in the .com space! The domainers merely 'rent' them!
Hmmm....we have a saying in my corner of empire, 'o*ne hand alone can't clap*'. Gotta follow the money.
https://domainnamewire.com/2018/11/02/holy-sht-verisign-just-called-out-doma...
============================== *Carlton A Samuels*
*Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
Hmmm, by your reckoning the horse seems to have already bolted? Still following the money....Verisign is and always was on the other side of the transaction, no? Special dispensation required to say 'not selling these 'greedy' registrars', you think? -Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 2:43 PM Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org> wrote:
This post is actually taking aim primarily at REGISTRARS who buy huge numbers of .com domains at wholesale ($7.85 per domain) and then hold them, in order to try and sell them later for a premium price. That’s not really dissing domainers in the general sense, just these registrar-domainers.
The writing is a bit sloppy on this point, and the blog pivots to ICA toward the end, but even there, the focus is on the registrar-domainers, not on the general domaining public. Look again at the post, and you will see references to “speculators” who buy at a “regulated price.” That’s the Verisign price they are talking about. Regular registrants don’t have that opportunity — only registrars. The “Domainer Name Wire” article largely misses this point — partly because the post is vague and partly because of a tendency to “rush to judgment” in the domaining press.
As Jonathan notes, ICA argues it’s protecting the little guy, when they are actually providing loads of protection for some very “big guy” registrar-domainers.
While this is not “insider trading,” it is really a form of diversion based on insider access — the registrars abuse their privileged position to buy cheap and to buy before any “regular” registrant (even a domainer) can, and then they hold this portfolio and charge secondary-market prices for domains that are not really in the secondary market. Registrars’ unique ability to buy domain names directly from the registries was never meant to produce this result. This is a bug, not a feature. The end user domainers should really be pissed off at the registrar-domainers, not at Verisign. (Of course, they are permanently pissed off at Verisign, especially with a price increase in their “commodity.”)
Maybe registrars should be prohibited from buying for their own account for investment purposes. GoDaddy apparently has 2.5 billion reasons to oppose that idea.
I don’t know if I would call them scalpers (though it’s a fair comparison). I see domainers more like the folks in Boston who get up in the morning, sit down in a lawn chair in a prime parking spot near the Fenway Park baseball stadium, and then sit there until game time approaches. Then they charge you $20 or more to get out of the way so you can park there. This is not entirely accurate either since this is a lot more work than a domainer would put in (at least for a single domain name.
Greg
On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 3:10 PM Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org> wrote:
We'll, it's not particularly easy to take them back. Blog raises some good points about where the money goes. The ICA rhetoric about small business is pretty silly.
Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org
------------------------------ *From:* GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 2, 2018 2:59:12 PM *To:* cpwg@icann.org; lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org *Subject:* [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Verisign Dissing Domainers?
Um,.......hmmmm, a flag up the pole to see who salute you think?
Assuming the posting it is sanctioned as official view, what is the end game here? Afterall, they are gifted ownership of every name, known and hitherto unknown, in the .com space! The domainers merely 'rent' them!
Hmmm....we have a saying in my corner of empire, 'o*ne hand alone can't clap*'. Gotta follow the money.
https://domainnamewire.com/2018/11/02/holy-sht-verisign-just-called-out-doma...
============================== *Carlton A Samuels*
*Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
Greg, If I remember correctly, the Registries are prohibited from keeping large chunks of domain space for themselves. Therefore, it makes sense to prohibit Registrars from doing it, as you suggest. Cheers, Roberto On 02.11.2018, at 20:43, Greg Shatan <greg@isoc-ny.org<mailto:greg@isoc-ny.org>> wrote: This post is actually taking aim primarily at REGISTRARS who buy huge numbers of .com domains at wholesale ($7.85 per domain) and then hold them, in order to try and sell them later for a premium price. That’s not really dissing domainers in the general sense, just these registrar-domainers. The writing is a bit sloppy on this point, and the blog pivots to ICA toward the end, but even there, the focus is on the registrar-domainers, not on the general domaining public. Look again at the post, and you will see references to “speculators” who buy at a “regulated price.” That’s the Verisign price they are talking about. Regular registrants don’t have that opportunity — only registrars. The “Domainer Name Wire” article largely misses this point — partly because the post is vague and partly because of a tendency to “rush to judgment” in the domaining press. As Jonathan notes, ICA argues it’s protecting the little guy, when they are actually providing loads of protection for some very “big guy” registrar-domainers. While this is not “insider trading,” it is really a form of diversion based on insider access — the registrars abuse their privileged position to buy cheap and to buy before any “regular” registrant (even a domainer) can, and then they hold this portfolio and charge secondary-market prices for domains that are not really in the secondary market. Registrars’ unique ability to buy domain names directly from the registries was never meant to produce this result. This is a bug, not a feature. The end user domainers should really be pissed off at the registrar-domainers, not at Verisign. (Of course, they are permanently pissed off at Verisign, especially with a price increase in their “commodity.”) Maybe registrars should be prohibited from buying for their own account for investment purposes. GoDaddy apparently has 2.5 billion reasons to oppose that idea. I don’t know if I would call them scalpers (though it’s a fair comparison). I see domainers more like the folks in Boston who get up in the morning, sit down in a lawn chair in a prime parking spot near the Fenway Park baseball stadium, and then sit there until game time approaches. Then they charge you $20 or more to get out of the way so you can park there. This is not entirely accurate either since this is a lot more work than a domainer would put in (at least for a single domain name. Greg On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 3:10 PM Jonathan Zuck <JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org<mailto:JZuck@innovatorsnetwork.org>> wrote: We'll, it's not particularly easy to take them back. Blog raises some good points about where the money goes. The ICA rhetoric about small business is pretty silly. Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation www.Innovatorsnetwork.org<http://www.innovatorsnetwork.org/> ________________________________ From: GTLD-WG <gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:gtld-wg-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com<mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com>> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 2:59:12 PM To: cpwg@icann.org<mailto:cpwg@icann.org>; lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG] Verisign Dissing Domainers? Um,.......hmmmm, a flag up the pole to see who salute you think? Assuming the posting it is sanctioned as official view, what is the end game here? Afterall, they are gifted ownership of every name, known and hitherto unknown, in the .com space! The domainers merely 'rent' them! Hmmm....we have a saying in my corner of empire, 'one hand alone can't clap'. Gotta follow the money. https://domainnamewire.com/2018/11/02/holy-sht-verisign-just-called-out-doma... ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org<mailto:CPWG@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
participants (4)
-
Carlton Samuels -
Greg Shatan -
Jonathan Zuck -
Roberto Gaetano