registries Breaking: Verisign announces .com price hike to $8.39

[koolishman]

.Com domain name registry Verisign (NASDAQ: VRSN) announced today that it will increase the wholesale price it charges registrars for .com registrations and renewals from $7.85 to $8.39. The price hike will go into effect on September 1, 2021.

https://domainnamewire.com/2021/02/11/breaking-verisign-announces-com-price-hike-to-8-39/

 

[Peak.Domains]

How dare they charge me $9 instead of $8.50 for a name that I'm about to list for $2,888.

It's greedy, it's predatory, and it needs to stop!

How is a small business supposed to survive?

 

[Mike Goodman]

The point is, that =1*1,07*1,07*1,07*1,07 = 1,31.
That's a 31% increase in 4 years alone.

Either I am missing something in this argument or your argument is utterly skewed. It wouldn't be too far off the mark to say hypocritical. As domainers we expect markups in huge multiples. Tens. Hundreds. Thousands at times. And that much even after factoring in years of renewals and other costs.That cannot and will not go on for ever. Furthermore, how can you point the finger at our suppliers when they want a little bit - and it is only a tiny slice - more of the pie?

A 31% price hike over 4 years on the basic cost, less than ten bucks, not on our huge selling prices, when we're expecting far more than that each and every year, put into context, does not appear to be an awful lot to me.

I can agree that if we're arguing on behalf of end user initial registrants we may have a case. On NamePros? An organ for domainers? When is that going to happen?

 

[Name Trader]

The point is, that =1*1,07*1,07*1,07*1,07 = 1,31.
That's a 31% increase in 4 years alone.

This whole mathematical argument thing is a bit absurd in my book. Who gives a f* about ROI when you have an offer on the table to accept or not-accept. You don't calculate the ROI and say sorry I can't sell it at that priced because it doesn't match my ROI of 1000% or whatever. So why would anyone want to ever fix their prices to a fixed ROI. It's an idiotic idea. Every domain is unique and every customer is unique. I just don't get the argument that you would add the $0.54 x your current ROI for every domain, every year when the ROI's are already stratascopic.

 

[Future Sensors]

We look at this from a different angle. Some of you say "No problem! I am a domainer, I will still make a lot of money". Others say, "Verisign should not increase, and should even lower .com prices because they have economies of scale". This is far from a new discussion (also following SiteFinder).

There is no point in repeating the entire .COM Public Comments discussion @ icann.org here. I would like to refer you to those discussions. And I respect that you think otherwise

 

[branding]

We look at this from a different angle. Some of you say "No problem! I am a domainer, I will still make a lot of money". Others say, "Verisign should not increase, and should even lower .com prices because they have economies of scale". This is far from a new discussion (also following SiteFinder).

There is no point in repeating the entire .COM Public Comments discussion @ icann.org here. I would like to refer you to those discussions. And I respect that you think otherwise

Aren't you Dutch? You should be vast asleep

 

[Future Sensors]

Aren't you Dutch? You should be vast asleep

The Dutch never sleep. So they say.

But you're quite right @DirkS

Nite nite

 

[oldtimer]

A bit of rounding here and there, it seems to me. The rise is not, or should not be, a significant factor to a domainer. If a domainer is squeezing prices to their buyers downwards to such an extent they are missing the point of domaining. What is the point?

As with every new appearance of a financial security on the markets, speculators in a capitalist society will take positions. Pointless moaning that "things" should cost this much or that much if the populations insist upon electing capitalist parties to government who do not agree with that position.

Domaining is speculating. Argue it whichever way you will, if you are not speculating as a domainer you cannot possibly make an honest profit. You will either have an unfair winning situation or you will lose money if your are a domainer not taking a chance on the greater value domains. The only one who can (almost) guarantee a profit is the biggest domainer of all, GoDaddy.

I fully agree with those who argue a private company or listed corporation is the wrong type of organisation to be trusted with a public property. But that is and always has been the American way and the USA effectively runs the domain name system.

So back to the main point. The whole idea of domaining is to make a profit. It is not to be "fair" or otherwise. It is to buy cheap and to sell dear. If your wish is to do people a favour by selling low, do yourself a favour and don't try that in a speculative environment.

As for extrapolating a small purchase price hike to a huge selling price hike, or trying to add pennies to huge sums, my suggestion is to learn about marketing and, just as importantly, do the sums. It is simple arithmetic, not high mathematics.

I like the American way,

That is when a company makes a new product or comes up with a new idea to enhance the quality of life for the masses and in the process makes a profit without causing any harm to others. Such companies usually reduce their prices as their customer base and their sales grow. So a new product that might be out of the reach of many people at first (like a smartphone) eventually becomes affordable enough for the average person to be able to buy (I bought my phone on sale at Walmart for $25 ).

Now please explain to me exactly what it is that domain companies are offering us that has to cost so much in the first place never mind all the price increases.

In my opinion if we pay $20 for a domain name we should own it for life or until it's transferred to someone else who then will have to pay a one time fee of $20 for the transfer without having to pay any renewal fees after that. I don't believe that there should be any renewal charges (just the transfer fees), but if there has to be some renewal charges they shouldn't be more than a dollar or two which comes to around 10 to 20 percent of the original cost of registering a new .com domain name.

I like Capitalism, but I don't like those executives who don't like using their own products and services because they think they are not good enough for them, and I don't like those who get those big bonuses at the expense of causing so much harm to the Society and the Environment.

Other than that I am all for Capitalism.

IMO

 

[Name Trader]

We look at this from a different angle. Some of you say "No problem! I am a domainer, I will still make a lot of money". Others say, "Verisign should not increase, and should even lower .com prices because they have economies of scale". This is far from a new discussion (also following SiteFinder).

There is no point in repeating the entire .COM Public Comments discussion @ icann.org here. I would like to refer you to those discussions. And I respect that you think otherwise

Although I quoted your post when posting mine. I wasn't in any way to attempting to belittle your point of view. Yours was just the last post. But the main thrust of this thread hasn't been contrasting what Verisign is doing, and whether they should or should not do it. The main thrust of this thread has been what to do about selling prices given what Verisign has adopted as their pricing strategy going forward. Which is to execute their rights under their re-negotiated contract to increase prices. If you are to point fingers at who is to blame for this situation, it must be to point fingers at ICANN who allowed the no price increase clause to be removed. Which stinks! IMHO.

 

[Mike Goodman]

Thank you for the respect, which I reciprocate. Let's agree to differ!

I have put my case here within the context of business. Elsewhere I wear a social responsibility hat and will argue until hell goes cold that we need better control over businesses which are responsible for the upkeep of public property and that they should behave more responsibly. Indeed we should govern them with more scrutiny and public accountability. That, I believe, is the case with ICANN and Veritas but they are beyond my brief. I am not USA citizen or resident.

So I have to accept what is and get on with business and personal life.There is no conflict or contradiction within the statement above as I see it.

 

[Name Trader]

I wonder how much GoDaddy would have increased their $2 wholesale registration for .com's by now. When Parsons made his claim that he could do it for $2. Looking at their selling prices at $13.17 for .com I think they would be making a healthy profit

 

[Mike Goodman]

@oldtimer you are contradicting yourself. You like the American way but diss it in the same post.

I wish somebody could tell me what domain companies - are you meaning registries or registrars or both - are adding value-wise to he world. I'd add the term "on balance", because I can see pluses and minuses.

Also, please don't confuse capitalism with corporatism. Those boardrooms are corporate. They stultify invention and advancement, the antithesis of the (sadly misguided) ideal of capitalism which is supposed to promote innovation and the public good.

It never has. All research shows technological advance is publicly, not privately, funded. In the case of technology, most of it by the USA military establishment. The web. Everything Apple has ever "invented". The Google algorithm. Just a very few instances of what has been funded by the USA public and not, as the propaganda claims, those businesses. YOU, USA citizens, own the G algorythm. YOU, USA citizens, paid for it. $billions if not $trillions. But your "representatives" just handed it over without so much as a by your leave. Same with touch screen technology and everything else Apple has been granted a patent for. To mention just two.

Still, all of that is way off track for what NamePros and domaining is all about. It simply illustrates that rosy tinted spectacles can't hide the out and out speculative nature of what we are all doing. I'm not saying there is any harm in that. I'm simply saying don't delude yourselves into thinking you have some high moral ground to stand on. You don't.

 

[Henry Y]

What concern us is how registrars charge us, not how Verisign charges the registrars. I believe some registrars will increase .com prices by less than 7% in order to stay competitive.

 

[oldtimer]

@oldtimer you are contradicting yourself. You like the American way but diss it in the same post.

I wish somebody could tell me what domain companies - are you meaning registries or registrars or both - are adding value-wise to he world. I'd add the term "on balance", because I can see pluses and minuses.

Also, please don't confuse capitalism with corporatism. Those boardrooms are corporate. They stultify invention and advancement, the antithesis of the (sadly misguided) ideal of capitalism which is supposed to promote innovation and the public good.

It never has. All research shows technological advance is publicly, not privately, funded. In the case of technology, most of it by the USA military establishment. The web. Everything Apple has ever "invented". The Google algorithm. Just a very few instances of what has been funded by the USA public and not, as the propaganda claims, those businesses. YOU, USA citizens, own the G algorythm. YOU, USA citizens, paid for it. $billions if not $trillions. But your "representatives" just handed it over without so much as a by your leave. Same with touch screen technology and everything else Apple has been granted a patent for. To mention just two.

Still, all of that is way off track for what NamePros and domaining is all about. It simply illustrates that rosy tinted spectacles can't hide the out and out speculative nature of what we are all doing. I'm not saying there is any harm in that. I'm simply saying don't delude yourselves into thinking you have some high moral ground to stand on. You don't.

Obviously we are talking about the .com Registry here as it is the topic of this thread,

Although you have made a good argument, but you didn't answer my question as to what exactly it is that the .com Registry is providing that justifies all the fees that the public as a whole is being charged for year after year including the registration fees, renewal fees, redemption fees and the price increases that are put in to effect on top of those while the total number of the .com registrations is and has been increasing consistently for a long time now.

And don't forget that with the Registrars people at least have a choice and can shop around for the lowest prices and most Registrars usually offer discounts and coupons to help their customers out and a lot of them already have a small profit margin on domains to begin with , but the Registry has a monopoly and as such can treat the public as captive customers who have no other choice especially if they are already heavily invested in their .com websites and domains.


IMO

 

[Name Trader]

Obviously we are talking about the .com Registry here as it is the topic of this thread,

Although you have made a good argument, but you didn't answer my question as to what exactly it is that the .com Registry is providing that justifies all the fees that the public as a whole is being charged for year after year including the registration fees, renewal fees, redemption fees and the price increases that are put in to effect on top of those while the total number of the .com registrations is and has been increasing consistently for a long time now.

And don't forget that with the Registrars people at least have a choice and can shop around for the lowest prices and most Registrars usually offer discounts and coupons to help their customers out and a lot of them already have a small profit margin on domains to begin with , but the Registry has a monopoly and as such can treat the public as captive customers who have no other choice especially if they are already heavily invested in their .com websites and domains.

IMO

I think the fault lies squarely at the feet of ICANN for renewing their contract for the .com registry with Verisign allowing them to increase prices. The previous contract had a no increase clause. What did they get in return for dropping that clause. I simply don't believe there wasn't any corruption involved with the dropping of that clause. I cannot prove it. But these are such big numbers. Verisign will have exceedingly better profits than they do now, from now on. Mark my words.

 

[Name Trader]

What concern us is how registrars charge us, not how Verisign charges the registrars. I believe some registrars will increase .com prices by less than 7% in order to stay competitive.

I don't believe any Registrar will charge less than they are charged by Verisign. They will all charge the same or more to us end-users. For sure.

 

[oldtimer]

I think the fault lies squarely at the feet of ICANN for renewing their contract for the .com registry with Verisign allowing them to increase prices. The previous contract had a no increase clause. What did they get in return for dropping that clause. I simply don't believe there wasn't any corruption involved with the dropping of that clause. I cannot prove it. But these are such big numbers. Verisign will have exceedingly better profits than they do now, from now on. Mark my words.

I have no problem with people making a profit, I just don't think that they should increase the .com prices just for the sake of making a profit. They have to provide some value that justifies all the fees and price increases that they are putting in to effect, otherwise as I said before it will be like putting a mandatory Tax on the people whom they have as captive customers which amounts to a big portion of the general public who are invested in .com websites and domain names.

IMO

 

[Future Sensors]

I think the fault lies squarely at the feet of ICANN for renewing their contract for the .com registry with Verisign allowing them to increase prices. The previous contract had a no increase clause. What did they get in return for dropping that clause. I simply don't believe there wasn't any corruption involved with the dropping of that clause. I cannot prove it. But these are such big numbers. Verisign will have exceedingly better profits than they do now, from now on. Mark my words.

Yes. That's why I dropped the word 'Site Finder' earlier in this thread. SiteFinder, SSAC report, VRSN lawsuit, revised .com deal. See also https://www.cnet.com/news/price-hikes-for-com-could-be-curbed/

Maybe not 'bribery', but absolutely a way to solve that issue, and at the same time fund the pockets of ICANN with every .com domain registration and renewal. ICANN got more funds for building the organization that we know now.

 

[CraigD]

I have other idea that passed my mind and wanted to contact Verisign directly but i see it fit in this topic.
My idea was to suggest them to increase prices for only one dictionary word to prices similar to .io extension and don't bother the others, this will be a better move.

Why should a good single dictionary name be 'penalised' or charged more after the current system has been in place for 30-odd years?

Can you also imagine the implications of what defines a single dictionary word?

Which dictionary is the source?
And are we talking about british english, american english or another language etc.

An interesting idea but not fair or workable.

 

[Mike Goodman]

@oldtimer I did answer your question. Here in the UK and elsewhere in Europe, until the current shower of charlatans were elected here anyway, such activities would have been put into the hands of an existing pubic body or a new one set up for the purpose. For domains we have Nominet, initially NoninetUK, a public membership body set up for the purpose but now in a weird public-private mix.

I do not understand why the USA refuses to separate private and public interests and simply shoves it all into the hands of publicly quoted corporations whose only motive is the profit motive. That is what I was referring to as "the American way". I understand it even less as ICANN is supposed to be run on international, not USA, lines. But it is dominated by USA interests hence way beyond my scope of influence. I can only get on with it within the parameters I am given.

 

[Future Sensors]

@Mike Goodman Indeed...

Related: http://www.circleid.com/posts/the_geo_politics_of_icann_vs_itu/

 

[The Durfer]

boo.

 

[Name Trader]

boo.

Aaaah!!. You just woke me from my slumber

 

[1Darko]

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/verisign-vrsn-q4-earnings-beat-222510347.html

VeriSign (VRSN) Q4 Earnings Beat Estimates...

They really must increase prices - lol

 

[oldtimer]

As I said before I have no problem with them making a profit, but if they are just going to increase the .com prices so that they can give themselves (and those who are supposed to be watching them) a bigger bonus instead of using the money for bringing some value and benefit to the digital and Internet community then in my opinion they are misusing a public resource.

So basically what it comes down to is that if they are going to continue Taxing people through price increases then the money should be used for helping the disadvantaged people around the World, like making it possible for them to have high speed Internet or be able to start their own website or business online.

In conclusion, I like Capitalism that actually helps enhance the quality of life for all people through innovation (without bringing any harm to the Environment that is).

On a related note, I also believe that the only way that we can justify having millionaires and billionaires is if they use their financial abilities and influence to do some good for Humanity and our Home Planet instead of living in excesses and only thinking of themselves.

My motto is:

Live a simple life but do big things. ©

IMO

 

[Mifuru]

.Com domain name registry Verisign (NASDAQ: VRSN) announced today that it will increase the wholesale price it charges registrars for .com registrations and renewals from $7.85 to $8.39. The price hike will go into effect on September 1, 2021.

Renew domains now. After this news, I want to renew my domains now until 2024.

How dare they charge me $9 instead of $8.50 for a name that I'm about to list for $2,888.

It's greedy, it's predatory, and it needs to stop!

How is a small business supposed to survive?