Do really good domains ever get released?

[nX07]

I'm wondering if any of you know a case where a really great domain expired, deleted, and released back into the wild, whether it be because the registrant forgot about it, didn't care (unlikely), or god forbid passed away, or what have you.

Any stories?

I heard that this could never happen though, because registrars always snatch up good and expired domains for themselves to auction off. Is this true? like if someone forgot to renew freshwater.com for example the registrar would just take it and auction it off. True/Untrue?

 

[Lpspider]

For the most part, it's true. The registrar would snap it up and/or auction it off.

 

[omnia]

Fewer & fewer slip through the cracks as time goes on......

 

[Kate]

Fewer & fewer slip through the cracks as time goes on......

Yes, but it depends what you call a "really great domain". Pure generics will be grabbed for sure, also the names with solid traffic.
Not all registrars auction their domains, and some good domains get overlooked and drop because they have no bids.

Then enter the catchers and the tasters.
Now the tasters usually look at traffic only, and still release some nice names with good potential.
Not premium domains but still decent ones, that I could sell for mid-$$$ at Sedo easily.
The available domain lists that I post from time to time are made up of deleted/tasted domains released into the wild :blink:
Sometimes I am even surprised nobody picks them.

Right now the gems are to be found on the aftermarket only. But they are still good deals to be had sometimes.

So yes good domains get released all the time, but the premiums are not to be had for reg fee.

 

[projdn]

In regards to name drops, does the industry tend to resent the big registrars? It seems that back in the day, getting up at crazy hours of the a.m. to catch the drops, and having a real chance (as small as it may have been) to catch a great name would have been a lot of fun. Obviously, all businesses change over time as things evolve and competitors find ways to gain an advantage over the competition, but is seems as if the registrars are the ones cleaning up in this industry, at the expense of the very people they rely on to support them - the people buying the domains.

Not trying to sound negative, this is just a very humble observation by a newbie. It just seems like some of the registrars are taking huge and dangerous risks to corner more and more of the market (i.e. alleged front running).

 

[nX07]

In regards to name drops, does the industry tend to resent the big registrars? It seems that back in the day, getting up at crazy hours of the a.m. to catch the drops, and having a real chance (as small as it may have been) to catch a great name would have been a lot of fun. Obviously, all businesses change over time as things evolve and competitors find ways to gain an advantage over the competition, but is seems as if the registrars are the ones cleaning up in this industry, at the expense of the very people they rely on to support them - the people buying the domains.

Not trying to sound negative, this is just a very humble observation by a newbie. It just seems like some of the registrars are taking huge and dangerous risks to corner more and more of the market (i.e. alleged front running).

I had that feeling too. I thought to myself that it's pretty bold of them to do that.

 

[gazzip]

... but is seems as if the registrars are the ones cleaning up in this industry, at the expense of the very people they rely on to support them - the people buying the domains.

So true, the registrars all seem to be acting like they own the names which technically speaking is against the terms of becoming an ICANN accredited registrar.

ii. prohibitions on warehousing of or speculation in domain names by registrars;


They are supposed to be providing a service and as far as I can tell the names are not legally theirs to sell, keep or auction off.

Now with all these wallstreet backed PPC based media companies buying up the biggest/oldest registrars and the auctioning platforms it is going to be near impossible to land a huge domain in the drops, even if you have loads of money to buy it I think it will get far worse before it gets any better.


...but, thats the way it is, what can you do !


.

 

[projdn]

Interesting gazzip. As ive been watching the various auctions, that is the observation that i just cant get away from.

do the names actually ever even drop? between all of the people pre-regging names, the registrars already know which names they want to hold onto for resale. whos to say they ever really are even "dropped" from their control.

anyway, nice to get an opinion from someone who appears to have been around the forum for a while.

 

[rkbdomain]

Yes, I got one this week, a premium foreign travel destination, one word, over 3million google results, and lots of associated ads. It had dropped a couple months ago. They are out there, so many drop each day that it is inevitable that some great ones get missed.

 

[projdn]

congrats. good to hear.

 

[NameBuyer.com]

I'm wondering if any of you know a case where a really great domain expired, deleted, and released back into the wild, whether it be because the registrant forgot about it, didn't care (unlikely), or god forbid passed away, or what have you.

Any stories?

I see great domains expiring all the time, but there are so many domainers or end users watching them that you can't get it for the reg fee. CheapCalls.com just sold for $8,000+ on TDNAM as an expired domain last month from someone who didn't maintain their contact information. The same person also lost BusinessUnlimited.com (now for sale at buydomains.com for $11,800).

Also, I was bidding on all of the expired domains below at snapnames, but there were so many other bidders that the prices just skyrocketed.
ecommercewebsites.com $5,200.00 $60.00 Outbid! 18-Feb-2007
vjw.com $5,500.00 $60.00 Outbid! 29-Jan-2007
laon.com $500,249.00 $60.00 Outbid! 02-Jan-2007
zola.com $11,666.00 $60.00 Outbid! 26-Dec-2006
eua.com $42,249.00 $60.00 Outbid! 25-Dec-2006
fgi.com $15,259.00 $60.00 Outbid! 09-Dec-2006

I heard that this could never happen though, because registrars always snatch up good and expired domains for themselves to auction off. Is this true? like if someone forgot to renew freshwater.com for example the registrar would just take it and auction it off. True/Untrue?

If the names above are ones I've randomly seen over the last year, I'm sure there were thousands of other names that expired that I didn't see. The way things are now, most of the Registrars have agreements with Snapnames or other auction sites to exclusively list their expired domains.

Providing investors an edge
The world's top twenty registrars control a significant majority of the domain names that are sought by professional buyers. SnapNames continues to add members of this elite group to its Priority Partner program which now includes Network Solutions, Dotster, Register.com, DotRegistrar, DomainPeople, Moniker, DirectNIC and others. These partners offer their expired domains through SnapNames' auctions before they are available anywhere else in the public market. Sales prices are set efficiently through active customer bidding, and the constant stream of fresh inventory gives domain buyers the best chance at discovering unrecognized value.

Now the large domain registrars have agreements with sites like snapnames to put the name up for auction there before it goes through the expiration process. I think this levels the playing field more than anything else. You can go into snapnames and bid against the big investors in domain name buying such as buydomains or the guy in the cayman islands with over 100,000 domains. Whether you bid as much as they do is another issue, but at least you have the chance to do so. Prior to these agreements you had people like Kevin Ham running sophisticated operations buying up thousands of top names every month (see below).
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/06/01/100050989/

Then along came companies like snapnames and pool.com to compete with registering expired domain names. By this time it was long past the point where an individual could hand register a domain when it expired, because the valuable domains were being checked every second by automated processes. I would much rather have an equal chance to bid on expired names via exclusive agreements with snapnames and the registrars than having no chance against networks of servers and "pretend registrars" setup only to snap up names for one individual or investment groups with tons of cash.

 

[rick123]

apparently microsoft lost hotmail.co.uk once, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/11/06/microsoft_forgets_to_renew_hotmail/

 

[Dave_Z]

So true, the registrars all seem to be acting like they own the names which technically speaking is against the terms of becoming an ICANN accredited registrar.

ii. prohibitions on warehousing of or speculation in domain names by registrars;


They are supposed to be providing a service and as far as I can tell the names are not legally theirs to sell, keep or auction off.

Gazzip, you didn't include the portion before ii:

http://icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm

4.2 Topics for New and Revised Specifications and Policies. New and revised specifications and policies may be established on the following topics:

4.2.1 issues for which uniform or coordinated resolution is reasonably necessary to facilitate interoperability, technical reliability, and/or operational stability of Registrar Services, Registry Services, the DNS, or the Internet;

4.2.2 registrar policies reasonably necessary to implement ICANN policies or specifications relating to a DNS registry or to Registry Services;

4.2.3 resolution of disputes concerning the registration of Registered Names (as opposed to the use of such domain names), including where the policies take into account use of the domain names;

4.2.4 principles for allocation of Registered Names (e.g., first-come/first-served, timely renewal, holding period after expiration);

4.2.5 prohibitions on warehousing of or speculation in domain names by registries or registrars;

If you have time, go through ICANN's registrar accreditation agreement and/or
any of their policies to see if there's anything on warehousing or supposed to
be providing a service. If there is one where registrars are supposed to indeed
provide a service, see if there's any saying it's supposed to be for end users.

At bare minimum, one tries to secure a registrar accreditation so they can be
able to register, renew, and/or transfer a domain name. But are all registrars
required to cater to folks like you and me?

Kath essentially nailed it by saying it depends what you call a "good name". I
agree it's unlikely the average joe will probably be able to grab, say, a 1-word
generic or a high-traffic domain name that wasn't renewed, but I've seen few
examples where people are still able to get a "good name" based on their own
preferences or so.

Life is full of examples in just about every other field where one is not able to
get what they want because others are able to get an edge over them.

 

[aLeeOnline]

names with traffic cant be thrown back in the wild.. they are kept and auctioned..

 

[R9V.com]

................................................................edit/post retracted

 

[gazzip]

Gazzip, you didn't include the portion before ii:

http://icann.org/registrars/ra-agreement-17may01.htm


If you have time, go through ICANN's registrar accreditation agreement and/or
any of their policies to see if there's anything on warehousing or supposed to
be providing a service. If there is one where registrars are supposed to indeed
provide a service, see if there's any saying it's supposed to be for end users.

.

Although I don't pretend to be a lawyer - cos I'm not I have read most of it a few times and each time the following seems to be true and correct.

If a registrar is accredited by ICANN then they have agreed to the terms and conditions set by ICANN.

This being one of them - (from the link you posted above.)

3. REGISTRAR OBLIGATIONS.

3.7.9 Registrar shall abide by any ICANN adopted specifications or policies prohibiting or restricting warehousing of or speculation in domain names by registrars.


This article is a recent discussion about registrars Tasting domains for profit (speculating)

- 6 march 2008

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/msg05701.html

The above restriction on use of the Add Grace Period shall be
considered an "ICANN adopted specification or polic[y] prohibiting
or restricting warehousing of or speculation in domain names by
registrars" in accordance with Section 3.7.9 of the Registrar
Accreditation Agreement. As such, a Registrar that engages in
domain tasting, defined as using the AGP to register domain names in
order to test their profitability, shall be deemed in material
breach of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement.

The amendment succeed.

In favour: Philip Sheppard, Bilal Beiram, Kristina Rosette, Cyril Chua,
Tony Holmes, Tony Harris, Greg Ruth, Robin Gross, Carlos Souza, Olga
Cavalli, Avri Doria (one vote each)

Tom Keller, Adrian Kinderis, Tim Ruiz, Chuck Gomes, Edmon Chung, Jordi
Iparraguirre (two votes each)

Opposed: Mike Rodenbaugh (1 vote)

So, an ICANN accredited registrar is not allowed to make money by speculating (which they do if the hold or auction the names and split the profits) - They are not allowed to own a large number of domains (warehousing) and they are not allowed to taste domains for traffic.

At bare minimum, one tries to secure a registrar accreditation so they can be
able to register, renew, and/or transfer a domain name. But are all registrars required to cater to folks like you and me?

.

ICANN ones do have obligations to provide a service to both you and me - not just themselves.

I guess the non accredited registrars have other rules they are supposed to stick by ??

Life is full of examples in just about every other field where one is not able to
get what they want because others are able to get an edge over them.

So true, but it's usually those that bend or break the laws that win !


.

 

[Dave_Z]

Although I don't pretend to be a lawyer - cos I'm not I have read most of it a few times and each time the following seems to be true and correct.

If a registrar is accredited by ICANN then they have agreed to the terms and conditions set by ICANN.

This being one of them - (from the link you posted above.)

3. REGISTRAR OBLIGATIONS.

3.7.9 Registrar shall abide by any ICANN adopted specifications or policies prohibiting or restricting warehousing of or speculation in domain names by registrars.


This article is a recent discussion about registrars Tasting domains for profit (speculating)

- 6 march 2008

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/msg05701.html

The above restriction on use of the Add Grace Period shall be
considered an "ICANN adopted specification or polic[y] prohibiting
or restricting warehousing of or speculation in domain names by
registrars" in accordance with Section 3.7.9 of the Registrar
Accreditation Agreement. As such, a Registrar that engages in
domain tasting, defined as using the AGP to register domain names in
order to test their profitability, shall be deemed in material
breach of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement.

The amendment succeed.

In favour: Philip Sheppard, Bilal Beiram, Kristina Rosette, Cyril Chua,
Tony Holmes, Tony Harris, Greg Ruth, Robin Gross, Carlos Souza, Olga
Cavalli, Avri Doria (one vote each)

Tom Keller, Adrian Kinderis, Tim Ruiz, Chuck Gomes, Edmon Chung, Jordi
Iparraguirre (two votes each)

Opposed: Mike Rodenbaugh (1 vote)

So, an ICANN accredited registrar is not allowed to make money by speculating (which they do if the hold or auction the names and split the profits) - They are not allowed to own a large number of domains (warehousing) and they are not allowed to taste domains for traffic.

IANAL either, but again something relevant is being overlooked:

http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/msg05701.html

1. Kristina Rosette's friendly amendment on the language in 1a of the
included draft motion was accepted by Mike Rodenbaugh.

a. During any given month, an Applicable gTLD Operator may not
offer any refund TO A REGISTRAR for any domain names deleted during the
AGP that exceed (i) 10% of THAT REGISTRAR'S net new registrations in
that month (defined as total new registrations less domains deleted
during AGP), or (ii) fifty (50) domain names, whichever is greater.

2. Chuck Gomes proposed an amendment which removed the original #2 from
the draft motion that carried i.e.

The above restriction on use of the Add Grace Period shall be
considered an "ICANN adopted specification or polic[y] prohibiting
or restricting warehousing of or speculation in domain names by
registrars" in accordance with Section 3.7.9 of the Registrar
Accreditation Agreement. As such, a Registrar that engages in
domain tasting, defined as using the AGP to register domain names in
order to test their profitability, shall be deemed in material
breach of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement.

The amendment succeed.

Don't know how soon that'll reflect (if ever). But outside what's stated above,
does it still define warehousing or any other circumstance wherein a registrar
might be in material breach of their agreement for such?

There was a previous thread about it where a member gave scenarios that a
registrar may have legitimate uses for "warehousing" a domain name or so:

http://www.namepros/showthread.php?p=2594100#post2594100

I would bet that is part of the problem. A registrar could define warehousing as keeping for resale. If they say they are keeping as a company asset for future use, it could be argued that it isn't warehousing if it's being used or just held for development. "warehousing" is a pretty broad and undefined term.

I could say I have hundreds of domains and none are listed for sale. If they are being used as parking sites, I could argue they aren't being warehoused, but used in the business if part of my business was parking. Only if offered for the right price would I concede and sell one. I think the original intent was that registrars couldn't buy to speculate and sell on the secondary market, but as with other policies, they think they've found a loophole in a poorly defined description.

And registrars can very well make that same argument above.

Now, I certainly understand the desire to prevent registrars from warehousing
domain names. But good luck trying to get even a consensus on what exactly
constitutes "warehousing".

ICANN ones do have obligations to provide a service to both you and me - not just themselves.

If, say, we were to take Merriam Webster's definition of such:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obligation

1: the action of obligating oneself to a course of action (as by a promise or vow)
2 a: something (as a formal contract, a promise, or the demands of conscience or custom) that obligates one to a course of action b: a debt security (as a mortgage or corporate bond) c: a commitment (as by a government) to pay a particular sum of money; also : an amount owed under such an obligation <unable to meet its obligations, the company went into bankruptcy>
3 a: a condition or feeling of being obligated b: a debt of gratitude
4: something one is bound to do : duty, responsibility

Or, say, Wiktionary:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/obligation

obligation (plural obligations)

The act of binding oneself by a social, legal, or moral tie to someone.
A social, legal, or moral requirement, duty, contract, or promise that compels someone to follow or avoid a particular course of action.
A course of action imposed by society, law, or conscience by which someone is bound or restricted.
(law) A legal agreement stipulating a specified payment or action; the document containing such agreement.

They seem pretty much the same. Chances are, other dictionaries have same
or similar definition/s.

It's fine to opine that a registrar may be "obligated" to allow end users to let
them register, renew, and/or transfer their domain name to them. But I don't
know how you can compel registrars like, oh, Google to let you register your
domain name to them directly rather than through their reseller program with
Go Daddy.

I could try to get my own registrar (which I currently won't). But do I have to
offer that service to other people if I got that to manage my own portfolio?

Finally, there's a difference among words like obligation, rights, and privileges.
I've yet to know of any Constitution, U.S. or not, that says other people have
the obligation to serve you or you have the right to have your way with them
under any and all circumstances whatsoever other than what they address
specifically.

 

[Kate]

A registrar doesn't even have to offer registration services to the public.
Some people run their own registrar to manage their portfolio.

But when you are selling to the public and auctioning expired domains at the same time then we can imagine that conflicts of interest can arise (cough cough).

We are lucky registrars still leave us the crumbs after they had lunch.

 

[Dave_Z]

But when you are selling to the public and auctioning expired domains at the same time then we can imagine that conflicts of interest can arise (cough cough).

Depends on the circumstances, though. Of course, demonstrating such might
be easier said than done.