new gtlds Speculations on New gTLDs

[atinc]

Speculations on Domain Industry

There is one thing which is crystal clear about domain industry :

• Dot Com investors hate the new gTLDs!

Why? Because before the new G era, "the domain investors" invested on millions of dot Com domains, even a regular domainer today held hundreds of domains in their portfolio.

The new gTLDs have been the biggest nightmare for the serious dot Com investors and will continue to be..

When you see the statistics, dot Com domain sales dropped dramatically since the new gTLDs introduced to the market.

The demand on new extensions excited millions of people all over the world since it is an unexplored land on Web.

There are thousands of generic names available to be registered.

Comparing to dot Com, where people registering 4 letter non-sense domains or ridiculous made up (brandable) names...

Most of you know that travel.agency sold for 3000 USD in the beginning of this year.

Earlier travel.agency sold for $9999 at Flippa in May 2016.

And today Travel.Agency directs to a ridiculous domain name : http://www.jdjdjdjdjdjdj.com/

Search and see yourself...

I personally believe that the owner of travel.agency is still the same person since the day it was registered.

Pure speculation that hits the top news on every domain related media available on the Web.

Ever since the news about travel.agency, there have been dozens of topics created on domain related websites..

Nice move by dot Com speculators against their biggest competitor: the new gTLDs.

But not smart enough..

The first domain was registered back at 1985 and it was a dot Com, yet majority of the Million Dollar domain sales took place between 2007-2017.

The industry needed 22 to 32 years to reach a maturity.

Wait and see the victory of new gTLDs...

 

[Asfas1000]

Why do you think that .COM investors can not pivot and invest in news g's too , if they are worthwhile ?

 

[dordomai]

disagree. Just came back from the funeral. Took a picture

 

[namezest]

Funny pic but it's true sales have declined but the mass drop will boost com sales .com sales reached an average low of $400recently and that now probably is not based on the holiday spending by now, so unless you get a premium gtld or should I say want one, you may be better getting a com it's time anyway really that people were less greedy (domainers) but then again look at the renewals on some of the new extensions, they are crazy saturation point though will be getting worse not better. So based on last few years and this year so far I would say expect sales counts to down , hand regs to be up, but if people lowered their asking prices end users will be more likely to buy right?

 

[atinc]

Why do you think that .COM investors can not pivot and invest in news g's too , if they are worthwhile ?

I would like to start with asking you why are you following the New gTLDs section while you already believe that this market it useless?

For your Question;

I believe the reason is there, they already made their investments on dot Com and their domains are not selling because there is a new market and buyers are flowing towards new gTLDs.

And this is not just for domainers.

Domain Market is a Billion Dollar industry and the war is not only between domainers but also between great registration companies.

I believe it is useless, when the next big thing on internet will named as a new gTLD, it will shut everyone up..

 

[atinc]

disagree. Just came back from the funeral. Took a picture

Nice picture.

Well photoshoped

You better use this talent to develop a new gTLD

 

[Lite]

disagree. Just came back from the funeral. Took a picture

You guys seem to be desperate. GTLD regulation will be coming soon and they are the future.

 

[Lite]

Have a look at Bitcoin Obituaries https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoinobituaries/

 

[dordomai]

You guys seem to be desperate. GTLD regulation will be coming soon and they are the future.

what regulation? You mean ICANN ?

source?

 

[Lite]

what regulation? You mean ICANN ?

source?

Thats the next logical step.

 

[dordomai]

Thats the next logical step. It's sensible hope.

they are already regulated by ICANN. The current framework is not a careless mistake it is there by design.

 

[atinc]

Funny pic but it's true sales have declined but the mass drop will boost com sales .com sales reached an average low of $400recently and that now probably is not based on the holiday spending by now, so unless you get a premium gtld or should I say want one, you may be better getting a com it's time anyway really that people were less greedy (domainers) but then again look at the renewals on some of the new extensions, they are crazy saturation point though will be getting worse not better. So based on last few years and this year so far I would say expect sales counts to down , hand regs to be up, but if people lowered their asking prices end users will be more likely to buy right?

No not right...

 

[atinc]

You guys seem to be desperate. GTLD regulation will be coming soon and they are the future.

It is all about Vision and you got one!

 

[HotKey]

Why do you think that .COM investors can not pivot and invest in news g's too , if they are worthwhile ?

Many of us are. I have holdings in both. A good name is a good name, period, I don't care the extension. But there are a select few who raise alarm bells every chance they get, usually because they have all their flow tied up in .com, and are only protecting their interests. Can't blame them, of course.

 

[atinc]

Many of us are. I have holdings in both. A good name is a good name, period, I don't care the extension. But there are a select few who raise alarm bells every chance they get, usually because they have all their flow tied up in .com, and are only protecting their interests. Can't blame them, of course.

I totally agree with you.

But the ugly face and harsh reality is there are no ethics in this industry.

----------- ----------TRAVEL.AGENCY DIRECTS TO http://www.jdjdjdjdjdjdj.com/----------- ----------

I wonder what people at ICANN doing in the mean time!

There must be a penalty for such speculations.

This should be investigated by .Agency registrar

 

[atinc]

they are already regulated by ICANN. The current framework is not a careless mistake it is there by design.

What is there by design? Could you please be more descriptive?

 

[dordomai]

I totally agree with you.

But the ugly face and harsh reality is there are no ethics in this industry.

----------- ----------TRAVEL.AGENCY DIRECTS TO http://www.jdjdjdjdjdjdj.com/----------- ----------

I wonder what people at ICANN doing in the mean time!

There must be a penalty for such speculations.

This should be investigated by .Agency registrar

why ? if you own a domain you can do what you want with it.

 

[dordomai]

What is there by design? Could you please be more descriptive?

https://www.thedomains.com/2015/09/...ew-gtld-space-goes-to-mind-machines/#comments

George Kirikos says

SEPTEMBER 23, 2015 AT 8:32 AM

Of course, this issue would not exist if there had been pricing caps in place from the start (as I and others argued in the numerous comment periods, etc.). Of course, the insiders at ICANN made sure that this did not happen.

Remember, registry operators of new gTLDs can raise prices at will, with only a notice period requirement. Read the registry agreements for your new gTLDs carefully. I’m guessing most registrars don’t tell their registrants this critical information.

Why anyone would build a website on such a shaky foundation, where future costs are uncertain, is beyond me…….

If highly sophisticated individuals like Mike are seeing their investment turn to dust, imagine the fate of *unsophisticated* domain name buyers….

https://www.thedomains.com/2009/02/...ludes-no-price-caps-your-domains-are-at-risk/

As one of the most knowledgeable people on ICANN matters, George Kirikos points out on on his post on Circleid.com:

“”There continue to be no price caps in place to protect registrants (see section 2.9). “””This is a backdoor way of allowing existing registry operators (e.g. com/net/org/biz/info) to get unlimited pricing power for existing domain names through .tv-style tiered pricing. Obviously ICANN is only listening to registry operators and prospective registry operators, given they’ve even lowered fees for registry operators (see Section 6.1)””

“”Note that price controls were a major source of comments by the public (see page 121-123).””

“”In particular, Neustar (operator of .biz) is on record (see page 123) stating they want elimination of price caps for .biz under the “equitable treatment” clause of existing registry agreements if other registries get it:””

“””Any material changes for the newer, no-price capped TLDs regarding vertical separation and equal access in general must be applied to NeuStar – this is required under the .biz Registry Agreement and ICANN’s Bylaws”””

“”If you are an existing registrant, and Neustar suddenly decides to raise the renewal price to of an existing domain to $1 million/year, that will definitely affect you, and is not something where “competitive forces” are at play.””

“”If VeriSign asked for $1 billion/year as a renewal fee for Google.com, Yahoo.com, or Microsoft.com, there is nothing in the contracts to protect domain name registrants.””

“”Similarly if PIR (the .org registry) wanted to raise the renewal price of Redcross.org to $10 million/yr, or Sex.org to $100 million/yr, or other “elite” domains to any price level they desire, there is simply no language to protect registrants.”””

“”””This demonstrates conclusively that ICANN is simply out of touch with the public interest and knowingly favours the interests of registry operators, to the detriment of consumers.”

It is time for the DOJ to take decisive measures now to prevent further damage through ICANN’s utter disregard for the public interest. “””

https://www.thedomains.com/2009/06/01/icann-guidebook-20-comment-report-price-caps-are-still-out/

On page 159 0f the Guidebook, ICANN states regarding price caps:

•
Absent strict price controls, there are certain price protections for registrants in the proposed agreement: six‐month notice of price increases and a requirement to offer 10‐year registrations.

Given that new TLDs are expected to be distributed across the globe, effective price controls would be difficult to implement and enforce across many different economies.

 

[atinc]

Is it so?

Would you mind to share if you find this ethical?

Remember the sales history of this domain too. The whole situation is a mess up!

But it is okay for you?

Let me guess you are another domainer who has hundreds of dot Com ?

Suffered from New gTLDs?

 

[Wass]

Most of you know that travel.agency sold for 3000 USD in the beginning of this year.

Earlier travel.agency sold for $9999 at Flippa in May 2016.

And today Travel.Agency directs to a ridiculous domain name : http://www.jdjdjdjdjdjdj.com/

Search and see yourself...

[/QUOTE]

Travel.Agency example is everywhere... Those who write on namepros love this example as much.
Travel.Agency is the nGTLD of the century...

 

[atinc]

Most of you know that travel.agency sold for 3000 USD in the beginning of this year.

Earlier travel.agency sold for $9999 at Flippa in May 2016.

And today Travel.Agency directs to a ridiculous domain name : http://www.jdjdjdjdjdjdj.com/

Search and see yourself...

Travel.Agency example is everywhere... Those who write on namepros love this example as much.
Travel.Agency is the nGTLD of the century...[/QUOTE]
Well honestly I don`t find it as a good domain.. But it is true that Travel.Agency will be remembered by domain investors.

 

[atinc]

https://www.thedomains.com/2015/09/...ew-gtld-space-goes-to-mind-machines/#comments

George Kirikos says

SEPTEMBER 23, 2015 AT 8:32 AM

Of course, this issue would not exist if there had been pricing caps in place from the start (as I and others argued in the numerous comment periods, etc.). Of course, the insiders at ICANN made sure that this did not happen.

Remember, registry operators of new gTLDs can raise prices at will, with only a notice period requirement. Read the registry agreements for your new gTLDs carefully. I’m guessing most registrars don’t tell their registrants this critical information.

Why anyone would build a website on such a shaky foundation, where future costs are uncertain, is beyond me…….

If highly sophisticated individuals like Mike are seeing their investment turn to dust, imagine the fate of *unsophisticated* domain name buyers….

https://www.thedomains.com/2009/02/...ludes-no-price-caps-your-domains-are-at-risk/

As one of the most knowledgeable people on ICANN matters, George Kirikos points out on on his post on Circleid.com:

“”There continue to be no price caps in place to protect registrants (see section 2.9). “””This is a backdoor way of allowing existing registry operators (e.g. com/net/org/biz/info) to get unlimited pricing power for existing domain names through .tv-style tiered pricing. Obviously ICANN is only listening to registry operators and prospective registry operators, given they’ve even lowered fees for registry operators (see Section 6.1)””

“”Note that price controls were a major source of comments by the public (see page 121-123).””

“”In particular, Neustar (operator of .biz) is on record (see page 123) stating they want elimination of price caps for .biz under the “equitable treatment” clause of existing registry agreements if other registries get it:””

“””Any material changes for the newer, no-price capped TLDs regarding vertical separation and equal access in general must be applied to NeuStar – this is required under the .biz Registry Agreement and ICANN’s Bylaws”””

“”If you are an existing registrant, and Neustar suddenly decides to raise the renewal price to of an existing domain to $1 million/year, that will definitely affect you, and is not something where “competitive forces” are at play.””

“”If VeriSign asked for $1 billion/year as a renewal fee for Google.com, Yahoo.com, or Microsoft.com, there is nothing in the contracts to protect domain name registrants.””

“”Similarly if PIR (the .org registry) wanted to raise the renewal price of Redcross.org to $10 million/yr, or Sex.org to $100 million/yr, or other “elite” domains to any price level they desire, there is simply no language to protect registrants.”””

“”””This demonstrates conclusively that ICANN is simply out of touch with the public interest and knowingly favours the interests of registry operators, to the detriment of consumers.”

It is time for the DOJ to take decisive measures now to prevent further damage through ICANN’s utter disregard for the public interest. “””

https://www.thedomains.com/2009/06/01/icann-guidebook-20-comment-report-price-caps-are-still-out/

On page 159 0f the Guidebook, ICANN states regarding price caps:

•
Absent strict price controls, there are certain price protections for registrants in the proposed agreement: six‐month notice of price increases and a requirement to offer 10‐year registrations.

Given that new TLDs are expected to be distributed across the globe, effective price controls would be difficult to implement and enforce across many different economies.

Thanks for your post.

I believe this price raising thing will be a good lesson for other domain registrars.

I don`t believe it will help any registrar to raise their renewals.

 

[dordomai]

Is it so?

Would you mind to share if you find this ethical?

What is unethical? The redirect? No I don't think that is unethical. It is not a domain that is expected to receive much traffic if any. Why is it unethical?

Remember the sales history of this domain too. The whole situation is a mess up!

It sold for 10k to a speculator and then it was resold at auction for 3k as speculators were not willing to bid more.

But it is okay for you?

It is unfortunate if someone loses money with a domain investment, (or a gamble) but this happens every day with .com and many other extensions so I don't see what is so special about that case?

Let me guess you are another domainer who has hundreds of dot Com ?

I buy only .com because i think the new extensions are too risky and overpriced.

 

[atinc]

What is unethical? The redirect? No I don't think that is unethical. It is not a domain that is expected to receive much traffic if any. Why is it unethical?



It sold for 10k to a speculator and then it was resold at auction for 3k as speculators were not willing to bid more.



It is unfortunate if someone loses money with a domain investment, (or a gamble) but this happens every day with .com and many other extensions so I don't see what is so special about that case?



I buy only .com because i think the new extensions are too risky and overpriced.

Thanks for your honesty.

Personally I do not find this case ethical..

 

[atinc]

I buy only .com because i think the new extensions are too risky and overpriced.[/QUOTE]

I think every domain and every extension shares the same risk.

If a domain is a good domain than it is a good domain NO MATTER what is the extension.

For the price point yes some of the extensions might be over priced for specific generic words but remember that there are some really cool generic gTLDs out there.