new gtlds Free ICA Webinar — New TLD Consultants Promoting New TLD Services

[jberryhill]

The ICA is taking the next step in monetizing its membership roster by chumming the water on behalf of folks who'd like to sell you their services in applying for a new gTLD application for the next round:

https://www.internetcommerce.org/ic...briefing-on-icanns-second-round-of-new-gtlds/

Are you curious about applying and operating a new generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD)? Or simply want to find out what the second round will look like? Join this panel of seasoned veterans to gain actionable intelligence and guidance on the next application round including an examination of material changes, expected timing and operations within the broader ecosystem will help participants determining whether to pursue a new gTLD for their new entrepreneurial venture, global brand or growing business.

Whether you’re just wanting to find out more information about new extensions or want to hear more about applying and operating your own, come discover what the second round of new gTLDs has in store.

Register today to reserve your spot and receive a zoom webinar link for this free event.

--------------

Free prizes to the attendee who yields the most wool!

 

[The Durfer]

ty Mr. John.

 

[Business Brands]

I will not attend it even if they pay me.

 

[jberryhill]

I will not attend it even if they pay me.

But look at what they'll be showing attendees:

 

[oldtimer]

What opportunities are new applicants going to have to get a good and viable New gTLD in the second round if all the already established and wealthy Registries are going to be allowed to be muscling their way in to hoarding all the best ones.

Should there be a limit on how many New gTLDs can be applied for by any one entity or its affiliates and subsidiaries.

IMO

 

[jberryhill]

What opportunities are new applicants going to have to get a good and viable New gTLD in the second round if all the already established and wealthy Registries are going to be allowed to be muscling their way in to hoarding all the best ones.

Well, that's a good question.

On quite a few TLDs, the only people who made bank were people who applied for the TLDs, but then withdrew their applications as a result of the private auctions.

Leaving aside things like "community" applications, when there are conflicting applications for the same TLD, the default process is for ICANN to hold an auction, in which ICANN keeps the money.

But applicants are allowed to work out conflicts on their own. One method was an auction in which the proceeds of the auction were divided among the participants. In other words, if you, Bob and Chad have applications for .foo, then the three of you have an auction. If Bob wins, he pays you and Chad a portion of the amount he bid.

So, there were people who "won" the private TLD auctions by paying out $$$ in order to have the right to lose money by running the TLDs, while the people who "lost" the TLD auctions made out like bandits.

If you look at some of the numbers thrown around by MMX and other TLD applicants, you will quickly figure out that there were quite a few TLDs where the only profitable strategy was to apply and then lose a private auction.

So, figuring that's the game, the next round will have a lot of applicants who have no intention of running a TLD, but they want to be in the negotiation game with those who do want to run the TLD. What will be entertaining is the inevitable situation in which every applicant for a TLD is only in the game to lose a private auction, instead of actually running the TLD.

 

[oldtimer]

Well, that's a good question.

On quite a few TLDs, the only people who made bank were people who applied for the TLDs, but then withdrew their applications as a result of the private auctions.

Leaving aside things like "community" applications, when there are conflicting applications for the same TLD, the default process is for ICANN to hold an auction, in which ICANN keeps the money.

But applicants are allowed to work out conflicts on their own. One method was an auction in which the proceeds of the auction were divided among the participants. In other words, if you, Bob and Chad have applications for .foo, then the three of you have an auction. If Bob wins, he pays you and Chad a portion of the amount he bid.

So, there were people who "won" the private TLD auctions by paying out $$$ in order to have the right to lose money by running the TLDs, while the people who "lost" the TLD auctions made out like bandits.

If you look at some of the numbers thrown around by MMX and other TLD applicants, you will quickly figure out that there were quite a few TLDs where the only profitable strategy was to apply and then lose a private auction.

So, figuring that's the game, the next round will have a lot of applicants who have no intention of running a TLD, but they want to be in the negotiation game with those who do want to run the TLD. What will be entertaining is the inevitable situation in which every applicant for a TLD is only in the game to lose a private auction, instead of actually running the TLD.

As you have correctly pointed out there might be a lot of opportunities here for those who want to game the system just to make money,

But the question is that in such an environment what kind of opportunities are really going to exist in the second round for the First Time Applicants who genuinely want to own and operate a New gTLD.

It seems to me that ICANN needs to come up with a new system that puts genuine applicants above those who have no intention of running a New gTLD and who are in it just to game the system.

IMO

 

[Chris Hydrick]

The ICA is taking the next step in monetizing its membership roster by chumming the water on behalf of folks who'd like to sell you their services in applying for a new gTLD application for the next round

• https://twitter.com/DotTBA
• https://twitter.com/DotAdvicePhil
• https://twitter.com/JJNSolutions

there were people who "won" the private TLD auctions by paying out $$$ in order to have the right to lose money by running the TLDs, while the people who "lost" the TLD auctions made out like bandits.

the next round will have a lot of applicants who have no intention of running a TLD, but they want to be in the negotiation game with those who do want to run the TLD. What will be entertaining is the inevitable situation in which every applicant for a TLD is only in the game to lose a private auction, instead of actually running the TLD.

tagging @Zak Muscovitch and @Jothan Frakes for comment.

 

[Jothan Frakes]

• https://twitter.com/DotTBA
• https://twitter.com/DotAdvicePhil
• https://twitter.com/JJNSolutions

tagging @Zak Muscovitch and @Jothan Frakes for comment.

THANKS!?!?

I have read some really good comments in this thread, and some good questions.

John Berryhill is not wrong about how some of the contention auctions played out for some of the applicants that submitted >1 TLDs.

TLD expansion and new rounds seem to really polarize conversations.

I suggest folks not necessarily look at this panel as the ICA trying to promote new gTLDs or not, nor to look at this as a means to promote consulting services for the participants.

The ICA have been doing monthly speakers or panels on a variety of topics, with the stated objective of elevating awareness and educating.

I heard in, the planning discussions, that all of the panellists are very supportive of the ICA and primarily are participating to prop up and support the org and the mission.

Haters are gonna hate, especially where new TLDs are concerned, and folks certainly have feels in abundance on the topic.

I watched the intro of 2012 round new TLDs push .com premium names up in value instead of the fear-based doomsday scenarios.

We are still very early in seeing some of the cool or innovative things that new TLDs might enable (https://doc.new launches a new Google doc, for example). There are some really amazing .brand launches on the horizon that are enabled by the brand having their own TLDs.

There are a lot of changes in the decade since the last round, and the hope is that this panel can help inform folks who have an interest.

The objective of this panel is not to hype or inspire applications or the next round... it is more about updating and elevating the audience.

And supporting the ICA.

Focus on that part of it, setting aside stance on non-com or TLD expansion, ICANN, etc.

 

[oldtimer]

ICANN must have certainly learned some valuable lessons from the first round,

ICANN should put all that knowledge and experience to good use to make sure that the mistakes that happened in the first round are not repeated again in the second round.

It is my understanding that the second round is going to concentrate more on International extensions and as such ICANN needs to put some safeguards in to place to make sure that genuine applicants especially those who are applying for the first time are protected against those who want to game the system to make money off of the contentions and also against the already established companies that want to hoard all the best New gTLDs.

IMO

 

[Future Sensors]

ICANN must have certainly learned some valuable lessons from the first round

Correct. This is what they learned.

Revenues from New gTLD application fees

12-month ended June
2013 USD 158 MM
2014 USD 37 MM
2015 USD 53 MM
2016 USD 25 MM
2017 USD 21 MM

Auction Proceeds

12-month ended June
2013 USD -
2014 USD 1 MM
2015 USD 61 MM
2016 USD 44 MM
2017 USD 135 MM

 

[oldtimer]

Correct. This is what they learned.

Revenues from New gTLD application fees

12-month ended June
2013 USD 158 MM
2014 USD 37 MM
2015 USD 53 MM
2016 USD 25 MM
2017 USD 21 MM

Auction Proceeds

12-month ended June
2013 USD -
2014 USD 1 MM
2015 USD 61 MM
2016 USD 44 MM
2017 USD 135 MM

For ICANN to make money off of the New gTLD program wouldn't look as bad if they at the very least followed their own mission statement that in short says that they want to create equal opportunity for everyone around the World.

In my opinion there should be a different determinant factor other than just money when it comes to who are finally going to end up with a New gTLD in the second round.

One would think that these must be some of the issues that ICA should be concerned about and look into.

IMO

 

[oldtimer]

I Wonder why this thread went cold all of a sudden,

I believe that there are some philosophical and ideological elements that control ICANN operations and strategies that need to be addressed here (well apparently it's not going to be talked about anywhere else).

Do you all believe that these New gTLDs should end up in the strongest and most experienced hands which mainly are the already established and well off companies which have already managed to amass large portfolios of New gTLDs From the first round,

or

Should the new and first time applicants who genuinely want to own and operate a New gTLD be given priority over all others specially over those who want to game the system to make money off of the contentions without having any real intentions of owning and operating a New gTLD.

What stand is ICA going to take on this matter,

The question that needs to be answered is:

Is ICA going to provide consulting services to those who want to game the system and help them make money off of the contentions and help steer the New gTLDs from the second round into the hands of the already established companies and entities (for a piece of the action in the form of consultation fees).

or

Is ICA as a Force For Good and the Defender of the Internet Community going to hold ICANN to account to make sure that it is not going to repeat the same mistakes of the first round and that it will give first priority to the new and first time applicants who genuinely want to own and operate a new gTLD.

IMO