news Icann Verisign comment period on .com price increase

[Joe Styler]

I wanted to let everyone know who may not have received the email from GoDaddy yesterday about our stance on the price increase and how you can make your voice heard on the comments. The comment period is still open for another day. The proposed price increase would be 7% for 4 years.

Here is the public comment link: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/com-amendment-3-2020-01-03-en

Here is the email we sent out.

ICANN has proposed changes that could significantly impact you and your business.
Let your voice be heard.

As a large domain portfolio holder, ICANN has proposed changes that could significantly impact you and your business. ICANN has proposed an amendment to the .COM registry agreement between itself and Verisign. The proposal would allow Verisign to increase the price of .COM by up to 7% every year for the next 4 years. Since 2018, we have been actively working to raise awareness around this issue, including when GoDaddy testified before Congress in July 2018. Even now, we’re continuing to have discussions, but ultimately, we are one company. Now is the time for ICANN to hear your voice. Please take a few minutes to let ICANN know how allowing this increase will impact you in the years to come. The public comment period is open until February 14th. To be heard, use ICANN’s form to submit your personalized comments. We value your business and vow to keep advocating on your behalf.

 

[Lox]

Over 70% comments @ ICANN are Copycat ... and it looks like they're doing their best to copy the most used template. Those who cannot express their minds in an unique/creative way cannot change anything.

Good Luck!

Regards

 

[equity78]

Over 70% comments @ ICANN are Copycat ... and it looks like they're doing their best to copy the most used template. Those who cannot express their minds in an unique/creative way cannot change anything.

Good Luck!

Regards

Good point and those idiots might use that to say it was spam.

 

[Lox]

Good point and those idiots might use that to say it was spam.

I've even noticed some of comments using an anonymous email providers to post ... the easiest way to blow up credibility ...

 

[Joe Styler]

@Joe Styler I scratch my head, because i find it hard for you to be able to be so concerned about ICANN and Verisign making a 7% pricing up adjustment to .com when your company charges $17.99 for a .com registration and renewal. i don't want to hear about any Domain Discount discount club that cost $89 a year, because the average consumer pays $17.99 for your .com product. do you care to elaborate on this ?

We are part of a free market. You can go register your .com anywhere you want if you think they offer better value for your money. Personally I do not think you can get a better value than GoDaddy but you have a choice. If Verisign raises prices... well you cannot go anywhere else. That to me is a big difference. We have competition.

 

[Domain_savvy]

Joe, can you paste the direct link of the site/page here where one can make the comments?

 

[Keith]

I like the idea of an increase. In fact, it should cost a fortune to hold an asset, where there’s only one in the world.

It’s not advantageous for big registrars but higher prices keep people honest!

 

[Keith]

@Joe Styler Why doesn't Godaddy throw a lawsuit on this case? As the largest revenue source for both ICANN and Verisign there is surely a case to be made.

Sure, comments are good. That is they create a "feel good" moment, but anyone believing ICANN will listen to the comments is kidding themselves.

If godaddy protests it’s because they want to keep low prices for their bottom line. More registrations equal more revenue.

At this stage, .com should be $1,000 a year to hold. It would actually build the internet enduser base and create real content. The days of holding loads of domains hostage should come to an end imo.

 

[branding]

At this stage, .com should be $1,000 a year to hold. It would actually build the internet enduser base and create real content. The days of holding loads of domains hostage should come to an end imo.

You mistake the end-user base for solely consisting of domainers and companies.

It's a very common mistake though so understandable.

 

[Keith]

hi Keith
Your joke is here:
https://tldinvestors.com/2020/02/at-this-stage-com-should-be-1000-a-year-to-hold.html


Show attachment 144646

I’m not going to sign up to the website in order to reply.

Saying renewals should be $1,000 was just throwing a number out. The point is, they should dramatically increase. If you can only afford one domain than so be it.

Believe it or not, it would save 99% of members at NP money. How? They won’t be able to afford all the junk they register which pads the bottom line at registrars, not the registrant.

 

[branding]

I’m not going to sign up to the website in order to reply.

Saying renewals should be $1,000 was just throwing a number out. The point is, they should dramatically increase. If you can only afford one domain than so be it.

Believe it or not, it would save 99% of members at NP money. How? They won’t be able to afford all the junk they register which pads the bottom line at registrars, not the registrant.

Empowering the wealthy. Solid.

 

[1Darko]

I have sent my comments - however I know exactly what I will do in the following months of 2020:
Buying stocks of Verisign and GoDaddy.

 

[Bob Hawkes]

There is, as I see it, some logic to the argument that if prices were higher it would make the digital asset worth more. As I see it though there are two difficulties with a very high figure (quite apart from fact virtually everyone would go out of domaining).

1. If the sell-through rates were even 2%, then a registration/renewal cost of $1000 per year implies just to break even domain retail prices have to average $50,000 per domain name, more when some account is made for other costs and any profit. Almost the entire retail market would disappear, we would only have the huge companies and everyone else would hand register, and probably not in .com.
2. Even if it was agreed that the rate should be $1000, why is it that Verisign, who did not create .com, but are its caretaker, as awarded by the US Government and ICANN approval, without an open bid process, should be the ones to make a huge profit? It would be like I manage a rental building. Arguments are that rents should go way up. I get all that money for managing the building.

Bob

Edit: I wrote this before the preceding adjustment to $100. At a 2% sell-through rate and $100 per year average prices obviously would need to be $5000 to break even, but with investment risk allowance for reasonable profit, and other holding and sales costs, probably substantially more. Possibly feasible.

 

[GeorgeK]

I agree George. I provided my comments without being prompted by this thread, but on George's prompting 8K of comments is such a tiny number of comments against the number of com's registered. ICANN are going to just blow right past all those comments as insignificant. It's a done deal.

A typical ICANN comment period generates less than 50 comments, so the 8,998 comments to date should be compared with that figure, rather than the total number of domains that have been registered. I'm sure if they asked all domain name registrants, a huge proportion would be against the proposal. But, they never ask all registrants -- they seek to instead sneak these bad proposals through, hoping that nobody pays attention.

 

[Ategy]

Yeah I agree with your there Bob .. total mind-boggling garbage!

BTW .. here's my own official comments ...

ICANN Proposed Amendment #3 is Censorship on the World, a Threat to Democracy and Strengthens a Monopoly
http://namecult.com/icann-amendment3/

 

[oldtimer]

We are part of a free market. You can go register your .com anywhere you want if you think they offer better value for your money. Personally I do not think you can get a better value than GoDaddy but you have a choice. If Verisign raises prices... well you cannot go anywhere else. That to me is a big difference. We have competition.

As long as you reduce the yearly membership fees for the Domain Discount Club to something more reasonable like around $49.00 dollars and as long as you include free domain privacy and Auction membership for those who are DDC members then I believe that more domainers will be happy with GoDaddy.

The important thing is to put customer satisfaction, loyalty, and retention above extracting the maximum amount of dollars possible from the domaining community. This also applies to the excessive marketplace fees and commissions.

Telling people to go somewhere else if they don't like it does not fit very well with Godaddy's stated goal of empowering the masses through owning domains and websites.

IMO

 

[bmugford]

I had a conversation with a couple people who pondered are people that charge 1,000 to 20,000% above their cost the best messenger to say another company should not raise 7%?

It is a simple answer. One is a monopoly. The other is not.
If people don't understand the difference then they need to take a class in economics.

There is no financial or public interest justification for the price increase.

On top of that Verisign has a temper tantrum against domain investors, a group that they profit off more than anyone with their monopoly. Maybe they were not expecting the push back when they paid off ICANN to the tune of $20M to re-negotiate the contract.

It is not just domainers that are the issue, the comments show that basically no one wants price increases without a clear, valid justification. This is something Verisign has yet to give.

Brad

 

[bmugford]

Brad you seriously don't think end users who believe they are being gouged care about that do you? Technically every owner has a monopoly on a specific domain name. If I want DataCube.com (which I do, hahaha) you have the monopoly there.

Someone can go and buy Data Cube and add a word, or pick an entirely different domain.

There is a huge difference between controlling a specific domain, and controlling all of them.
Also, unlike new extensions Versign does not even own the extension. They have a sweetheart deal that allows them a de facto monopoly.

If you read the comments, the vast majority are comments from non-domainers who are against this.

Brad

 

[Joe Styler]

I will never comment on any type of legal action real, imagined, future, past, perceived, etc. That would be a very bad idea for me as a non-attorney. I certainly would not comment on leading a lawsuit. So I am not planning on responding any further to this thread.

 

[Business Brands]

@Joe Styler Why doesn't Godaddy throw a lawsuit on this case? As the largest revenue source for both ICANN and Verisign there is surely a case to be made.

Sure, comments are good. That is they create a "feel good" moment, but anyone believing ICANN will listen to the comments is kidding themselves.

Agree.

 

[Sutruk]

Just did

Thank you Shaan!!

 

[werty]

Thanks Joe...

 

[oldtimer]

I’m not going to sign up to the website in order to reply.

Saying renewals should be $1,000 was just throwing a number out. The point is, they should dramatically increase. If you can only afford one domain than so be it.

Believe it or not, it would save 99% of members at NP money. How? They won’t be able to afford all the junk they register which pads the bottom line at registrars, not the registrant.

There is some logic to what you are saying, but they could instead pass a law that limits the number of domains each person can register and that will achieve the same results as you want. (and or license those who want to be domainers)

IMO

 

[Picorio]

Thank you @Joe Styler for the information. I also got the email.

 

[branding]

Or making people think before they spend. Imagine that concept...

That's definitely a good point and something a lot of people should think about. A different issue though.

I can live with a decent rise as everything is getting more expensive. As long as it's justified. Raising prices to , let's say, just $100, would definitely not be.

If you want to kill a TLD real quick this would definitely be the way to go.

Give it some years with a $1000 price tag and let's see how fast .com will get dethroned.

 

[branding]

Nah.

As it stands, people want to hoard domains and ask ridiculous prices. If they can only afford to keep half of their domains, the rest go back into the pool at a standard rate. It could actually build .com, not destroy it.

Yes it will render a lot worthless. It will kill most of liquidity of the mid and lower valued liquid domains. Domainers leave, legitimate private people leave, hobbyist leave. Small companies leave. Only tier one domains will survive but as the namespace shrinks they will drop big time in value just the same.

Stuff like that kills a namespace. But hey, you planted a seed for thought and I respect that. Would be a nice experiment and it could actually speed up the demise of the web as we know it which isn't necessarily a bad thing.