IT.COM

My question to Godaddy's CEO at NamesCon: Domain Liquidity for the industry

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

Was Rob Monster's question at NamesCon out of bounds or bad form?

  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.
  • The industry needs to be having that conversation and Godaddy should engage

    84 
    votes
    63.2%
  • No, we don't need domain assets to become more liquid or bankable

    votes
    2.3%
  • What's NamesCon?

    votes
    3.0%
  • This thread is stupid

    42 
    votes
    31.6%
  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.

Rob Monster

Founder of EpikTop Member
Epik Founder
Impact
18,389
Earlier this morning, I wake up to seeing a lovely comment from Shane Cultra on his blog:

upload_2020-2-5_8-47-38.png

To my eyes, that comment from Shane is actually pretty crazy. Ironically, many people told me unsolicited, that my question was the highlight of the Q&A. This is not the first time that Shane has spoken out of school against me with trash-talk and it probably won't be the last since it shamelessly drives up his page views for his affiliate site. I don't know if anyone has a video of the Q&A section of Aman's keynote but if so, would be great if someone would upload the actual video clip. I believe anyone who objectively reviews my question will find it to be rather selfless. It was a question about domain liquidity. There were 2 parts, and I believe they were reasonable and sincere.

Part 1: Domain Liquidity via Loans

As some folks know, Epik provides interest-free loans secured by domains. This is popular but we cannot lend to everyone in the amounts that everyone might like. Compared to Godaddy, we are a relatively small company without access to the vast pool of capital that Godaddy has access to. I asked if Godaddy would consider extending domain loans to its customers. The lending model is proven. Godaddy has the ability to scale it to a much greater degree. Rather than forcing Godaddy customers to abandon domains to their expiry stream, why not allow Godaddy customers with liquid names to borrow against their portfolio? It seems reasonable to me.


Part 2: Working with US Congress to make domain names a bankable asset.

I have also been a long-time believer in the potential for domain names to be a respected asset class. The challenge there is that the banking industry does not recognize domains as a bankable asset class. People can donate domains to non-profits and can get a write-down for their investment basis, but if you go to a bank and ask to borrow against a 3N.com, they have no idea what you are talking about. The House subcommittee on banking could engage here but we would need some lobbying power to make that happen.

For anyone who has ever studied the history of the housing market, the correlation between the availability of borrowing capacity and the prices of the associated asset is indisputable. When credit is available, asset prices go up. If domain owners could more methodically borrow against their domains at conventional banking rates rather than only from hard money pawnshops that dominate the landscape today, it would be a game-changer for making the pie bigger for everyone.

I will be interested to hear what folks have to say on this very reasonable topic about domain liquidity that can greatly impact the future of the industry.
 
Last edited:
35
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
I think you underestimate Aman. If he is sincere about empowerment, and lifting up people in places like India where many folks live on $100 per month, then I think he will experiment.

I believe that Aman has a rare opportunity to be the Grameen Bank of the Digital Age. He will secure his place in digital history, and it could be an enormous catalyst for prosperity.

I have seen the impact with my own eyes to not know for 100% sure that the impact is transformative. We need this type of empowerment program and we need it at scale, and worldwide.

It can be done. It should be done. It will be done. The only question is who will do it. Epik has started. Our next move is to add peer to peer lending to attempt to scale it responsibly.

So, wish us luck, but also let's keep hoping that Aman will bring true empowerment, and not just serve up a bunch of DIY tools with a heads-I-win-tails-you-lose economic model that has dominated Godaddy for years.
I have never heard Aman talk about empowering any domain investor with micro loans. I think that is more your mandate, and I believe Aman’s is empowering results for Godaddy shareholders, and like he did at Expedia with orbitz and a few other acquisitions it is through growth, and integrations of these units to supplement niches where they fall short to encourage growth.

Godaddy wants paying customers who want to maybe start their own business online, and they want to offer the total package tool set to start, and maintain those businesses, along with the monthly revenue stream of those services.

They are not looking to make 1000% trying to sell you a domain, and be done with you, They want you to get your right domain at a fair market price, and use their services to run your company online. They want to be that full package partner; and once they have you. It’s impossible to shift anything anywhere else, you just get comfortable with their email, hosting, bookkeeping etc...

Your passion for liquidity thru domain loans is more self inflicted, you won’t get them on board,
today, just keep innovating, and chipping away, at those developing country user bases, and hopefully they notice, but loaning on domains is still high risk, and defaults leave bad tastes; and bad reviews online.
 
Last edited:
8
•••
I have never heard Aman talk about empowering any domain investor with micro loans. I think that is more your mandate, and I believe Aman’s is empowering results for Godaddy shareholders, and like he did at Expedia with orbitz and a few other acquisitions it is through growth, and integrations of these units to supplement niches where they fall short to encourage growth.

Godaddy wants paying customers who want to maybe start their own business online, and they want to offer the total package tool set to start, and maintain those businesses, along with the monthly revenue stream of those services.

They are not looking to make 1000% trying to sell you a domain, and be done with you, They want you to get your right domain at a fair market price, and use their services to run your company online. They want to be that full package partner; and once they have you. It’s impossible to shift anything anywhere else, you just get comfortable with their email, hosting, bookkeeping etc...

Your passion for liquidity thru domain loans is more self inflicted, you won’t get them on board,
today, just keep innovating, and chipping away, at those developing country user bases, and hopefully they notice, but loaning on domains is still high risk, and defaults leave bad tastes; and bad reviews online.

First of all, I greatly appreciate your strategic insights. I find your comments on NP to be full of strategic perspective and pragmatic understanding of the realpolitik that pervades much of commerce.

As for the future of Godaddy under Aman Bhutani, I would be less presumptuous. The man chose the logo that most people rejected as ugly. Why? Because it looks like a heart. It spoke to HIM.

So set aside for a moment what you think analysts are telling him to do, and consider the possibility that the aspiring monopolist is run by a benevolent dictator. It is possible.

As for microloans and domain lending, I have the evidence that the business model works. I have shared anecdotal examples as well. The domain industry is about to become a lot more like commercial real estate.

As for what to expect from Aman, I think we'll get a much better sense in the coming weeks, starting with today's investor conference call that will add context on the pieces that are being moved on the chess board.

Thanks
Rob
 
Last edited:
4
•••
Robert is right on point. Our industry needs liquidity like roses need rain.
 
2
•••
The reason I had trouble voting in the (in my opinion, ill-designed) poll is that the option said the following. I totally agree with a more liquid domain world (and a few recent innovations, including NameLiquidate and @Josh R new wholesale market) are working towards that. I personally am not sure that I agree with assets being more bankable, although I do see logic in those that argue for that, like @Rob Monster. I would have preferred the poll separating the two ideas. More liquid can be good on its own, with or without more bankable.
"No, we don't need domain assets to become more liquid or bankable"

While on the topic of the poll, I also had difficulty with the wording of the first response. I might agree that the industry should talk about valuations, liquidity and bankable assets, I do in fact, but it is possible to believe that without saying that GoDaddy necessarily should engage. Or even if we think GD should engage, by making this the poll in a thread on the appropriateness, or not, of asking the question at the end of the GD CEO keynote, I think the wording sort of slants responses, in my opinion. One might think GD should engage but responding off the cuff to a question from a competitor after a keynote is probably not the place.
"The industry needs to be having that conversation and Godaddy should engage"

The other two possible answers are essentially meaningless, I would argue, so to me the poll was not nearly as useful as a four-response poll could have been. I think you do a much better job in innovative ideas, industry co-creation, and personal support, than you do in poll response construction, Rob :xf.wink:

Just my opinion. And yes, I do realize how difficult good poll construction is :xf.eek:.

Bob
 
Last edited:
2
•••
The reason I had trouble voting in the (in my opinion, ill-designed) poll is that the option said the following. I totally agree with a more liquid domain world (and a few recent innovations, including NameLiquidate and @Josh R new wholesale market) are working towards that. I personally am not sure that I agree with assets being more bankable, although I do see logic in those that argue for that, like @Rob Monster. I would have preferred the poll separating the two ideas. More liquid can be good on its own, with or without more bankable.
"No, we don't need domain assets to become more liquid or bankable"

While on the topic of the poll, I also had difficulty with the wording of the first response. I might agree that the industry should talk about valuations, liquidity and bankable assets, I do in fact, but it is possible to believe that without saying that GoDaddy necessarily should engage. Or even if we think GD should engage, by making this the poll in a thread on the appropriateness, or not, of asking the question at the end of the GD CEO keynote, I think the wording sort of slants responses, in my opinion. One might think GD should engage but responding off the cuff to a question from a competitor after a keynote is probably not the place.
"The industry needs to be having that conversation and Godaddy should engage"

The other two possible answers are essentially meaningless, I would argue, so to me the poll was not nearly as useful as a four-response poll could have been. I think you do a much better job in innovative ideas, industry co-creation, and personal support, than you do in poll response construction, Rob :xf.wink:

Just my opinion. And yes, I do realize how difficult good poll construction is :xf.eek:.

Bob

Thanks.

I got the conversation started. That was the goal. Mission accomplished.

As for designing polls, did I tell you that I used to run a market research company, sold to WPP Group for 9 figures cash and spent 9 years at P&G where we ran tons of consumer research?

The poll was just a part of starting the conversation. Shane took the bait and recruited his buddies to vote in it and they did it faithfully under the cloak of anonymity.

It's all good -- this is the #1 new thread of 2020 and we are still talking about practical solutions for making the domain industry more liquid at a time when Aman is crafting the foundation of his legacy.

So, yes, the poll was trash but it confirmed my hypothesis that there are 2 primary groups: (1) people who are serious about solving problems, (2) people who prefer to throw rocks. And (1) is winning. Cool.

Regards,
Rob
 
3
•••
I agree that controversy drives popularity on NamePros, but I would have thought, given your background with a market research company (no I did not know that!), that a better designed poll might have not only started the conversation, but also derived a more accurate feeling on the topics as well. Anyway, I said my 2 cents worth.
Bob
 
Last edited:
0
•••
I agree that controversy drives popularity on NamePros, but I would have thought, given your background with a market research company (no I did not know that!) that a better designed poll might have not only started the conversation, but also got a more accurate feeling on the topics as well. Anyway, I said my 2 cents worth.
Bob

It was not about controversy.

It was just Hegelian dialectics applied to NamePros:

- Problem: Maverick blogger speaks out of school

- Reaction: Outrage, discussion, debate

- Solution: Some type of industry consensus around liquidity either peer to peer or major underwriter.


Or said another way:

Thesis: Rob is a crazy MoFo

Anti-Thesis: Rob is not crazy, and we need a solution

Synthesis: Here's a co-created solution conceived on NamePros


The end-result is not division. The end-result is progress. The vocal critics that are sincerely engaged in the debate and not just devil's advocates (literal meaning) help shape the outcome.


This community is a treasure. You need thick skin here at times, but on balance, I cannot imagine the industry advancing to the next level without the town square.
 
4
•••
Last edited:
0
•••
1
•••
So, yes, the poll was trash but it confirmed my hypothesis that there are 2 primary groups: (1) people who are serious about solving problems, (2) people who prefer to throw rocks. And (1) is winning. Cool.

Regards,
Rob

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/cgi-bin/uy/webpages.cgi?/logicalfallacies/False-Dilemma

When only two choices are presented yet more exist, or a spectrum of possible choices exists between two extremes. False dilemmas are usually characterized by “either this or that” language, but can also be characterized by omissions of choices.

For instance, a third option. People who don't think domain loans are practical for a large number of reasons from valuation to a very small % of domains actually having resale value.

I have asked some specific questions that you did not answer. Instead you just continue with the trendy buzz words and platitudes.

Brad
 
Last edited:
1
•••
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/cgi-bin/uy/webpages.cgi?/logicalfallacies/False-Dilemma

When only two choices are presented yet more exist, or a spectrum of possible choices exists between two extremes. False dilemmas are usually characterized by “either this or that” language, but can also be characterized by omissions of choices.
What is it you don't like? It seems you are making a generalized case that loaning people money is a bad thing. You seem to be making a case that loans are evil, because debt is incurred and debt leads to default. You seem to be arguing more about social economics and capitalism than what this thread is about.......of course maybe I am wrong.:xf.smile:
 
2
•••
0
•••
0
•••
This community is a treasure. You need thick skin here at times, but on balance, I cannot imagine the industry advancing to the next level without the town square.
I agree 100% with this part at least, Rob.

I find NamePros an incredible online community, and see the more industry co-creation and interaction the better.

Have a good day.

Bob
 
3
•••

Feel free to read all my posts in the thread. It outlines the reasons why I don't think domain loans are that practical, as well as why I don't feel debt is some magical solution without risk.

It might be right in some situations, but for many it is not. Substitute domains for any asset like portfolio based lending instead. It can end up being a complete disaster for the borrower.

I feel like the potential negative issues are just being glossed over.

Also, when I asked specifics Rob just ignored them.

On the $2K loan, how much value did you put on the collateral?

Also what type of domains are we talking about? 4L .COM, 2 word .COM, single word NET/ORG, new extensions, etc.

I would love to talk specifics. It is more helpful that just giving a single example with limited details.
 
1
•••
It is. But, do top level "decision makers" @ GD visit us? Anonymously?

I am sure many of them do from time to time, and/or their staff pass the highlights.

As some now, I am here by accident actually but now that I am, no regrets.

Looking ahead, I expect to see a lot more C-level engagement in the town square.
 
2
•••
Feel free to read all my posts in the thread. It outlines the reasons why I don't think domain loans are that practical, as well as why I don't feel debt is some magical solution without risk.

It might be right in some situations, but for many it is not. Substitute domains for any asset like portfolio based lending instead. It can end up being a complete disaster for the borrower.

I feel like the potential negative issues are just being glossed over.

Also, when I asked specifics Rob just ignored them.

Brad
Loans are are an important part of economics, more specifically important to capitalism. Loans allow or empowers people and businesses to grow at a faster pace with more capital to reinvest.

Sure, there are some stories where defaults happen and hurt. The 2008 mortgage crisis is an example. Many people lost their homes as a result. However, when the dust settled it was loans, on the assets of homes, that pulled us out of the recession.

Giving loans on domains creates an asset pool that grows the market cap. A higher market cap establishes an asset to be more secure, more trusted and most importantly, more liquid. Something we all could live with.
 
1
•••
I agree that controversy drives popularity on NamePros, but I would have thought, given your background with a market research company (no I did not know that!), that a better designed poll might have not only started the conversation, but also derived a more accurate feeling on the topics as well. Anyway, I said my 2 cents worth.
Bob

That is how many market research & polling companies operate. They frame a question and the options in a way that will get a specific outcome. Famous Fox pollster Frank Luntz, and others, have talked about this before.

Brad
 
Last edited:
3
•••
I voted against loans as well. Didn't read the whole thread, just wanted to say that loans only remind me of all the financial crises that have been happening till today. It's never good no matter how anyone structures them. If you don't learn to make profits from scratch, then you'll only burn yourself endlessly. All the early age domainers never needed loans anyway, only patience and foresight. So should domainers now.

IMO @Rob Monster if you have time/resources to lobby for such a thing then I suggest that you instead lobby against VRSN/ICANN. No point lobbying for "bankable" domains if the powers that be in the domain world can just some day jack up .com prices to $1mil/year/domain, or implement TM policies that allow companies to simply and instantly steal domains from investors with just a notice (eventually..........).

Over and out.
 
0
•••
IMO @Rob Monster if you have time/resources to lobby for such a thing then I suggest that you instead lobby against VRSN/ICANN. No point lobbying for "bankable" domains if the powers that be in the domain world can just some day jack up .com prices to $1mil/year/domain, or implement TM policies that allow companies to simply and instantly steal domains from investors with just a notice (eventually..........).

Good point. I checked the ICANN comments and did not see one from Epik or Rob Monster.

I figured someone so interested in digital empowerment, and developing countries surely would have something to say on the subject.

You can see my comment here -
https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-com-amendment-3-03jan20/2020q1/000256.html

Brad
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Last edited:
0
•••
He did tell me before that commenting is useless:

https://www.namepros.com/posts/7624600/

No, I did not say that.

I gave a very specific suggestion on how to win in the court of public opinion. We all have finite time available to advance specific causes and to propagate thought leadership.

I do think commenting in an echo-chamber is of limited utility, but it can be extremely helpful for refining a framework, e.g. a concise set of talking points.

Have you seen a concise top 4-5 reasons for why the price increase should not happen? Does exist in the form of a virally-spreadable meme graphic?

Here is my quick and dirty attempt. Edits welcome. No pride of ownership. The battle in an ICANN conference room is not the relevant battle in my view.

no-com-price-increase.jpg
 
Last edited:
3
•••
0
•••
Com price increase - now. Earlier, it was .org sale. Many comments to ICANN - who, starting from at least ~2008, no more acts in public interest. They (not-for-profit corporation!) reported some of their $$$ lost in 2008 financial crisis - stocks crash, was some sort of investment as far as I remember (needs to be rechecked after 10+ years). Writing comments to them is of course something we all should do at this time. But it would not solve the problem. Because it can not. ICANN cannot be "fixed". It should be completely reorganized, with 100% change of staff and control. This is what the industry should be lobbying for. Imo.
 
3
•••
No, I did not say that.

I gave a very specific suggestion on how to win in the court of public opinion. We all have finite time available to advance specific causes and to propagate thought leadership.

I do think commenting in an echo-chamber is of limited utility, but it can be extremely helpful for refining a framework, e.g. a concise set of talking points.

Have you seen a concise top 4-5 reasons for why the price increase should not happen? Does exist in the form of a virally-spreadable meme graphic?

Here is my quick and dirty attempt. Edits welcome. No pride of ownership. The battle in an ICANN conference room is not the relevant battle in my view.

Show attachment 144604
True, at least not exactly. I just interpreted it that way since it felt like it.

I like that poster though, especially the subliminal message telling verisign to "risign"
 
Last edited:
2
•••
Back