New Rule Stinks IMHO

[Broker]

NEW RULE (effective Sept 25 2007)
Registrar and Expiry dates are required for each name being sold.


Completely useless imho. If I have a domain or domains up for offers and someone is interested, they can either ask me this information or look it up themselves.

Not that my opinion is going to change the rule, but I will not be posting my domains for sale here anymore due to the fact that this rule forces me to have to login into multiple accounts to get the information beforehand.

End opinion

 

[.X.]

I am in favor of this new rule, It is simple to post the Reg and Expiry, And makes transactions go much smoother, Imo

 

[Mark]

I find it odd anyone in this industry would have to look this info up - If you Keep it in a list/dbase of some sort ... you wont need to waste any time to begin with. It sounds like to me you place a lot of faith in "Email Renewal Reminders" if you don't have this info on hand somewhere.


We required this basic info for the live auctions for a good while now - I see no reason for it to be different in the main forum I like it :tu:

 

[Broker]

IMHO, it's important on names that are expiring within the next 2 months, or are at registrars that are difficult to deal with. The new rule was to avoid situations we've had complaints about where buyer purchases a name just to find out it's stuck in some awful registrar and expiring next week.

Suggestions are welcome.

Thanks,

RJ

Exactly, that is the buyers responsibility not namepros, to look up this information or ask the seller for it. Or....... a combination of both to confirm the information is true. Sedo, afternic etc do list this information when you click on their names for sale. Why should namepros require it? If people are stupid enough to buy a domain at 1and1 or "this registrar is horrible.com", they shouldnt be buying domains to begin with.

When I browse these forums for domains for sale, yes its "nice" to see the registrar and exp date etc. But if it's not posted its no big deal to me. If I am in fact interested in a name and this info is not posted, I will look up the whois info. I have countless times passed on a name I liked because it was reg'd at a regitrar I do not want to deal with or "open a new account"

If you find a domain you "must have" exp date and regitrar shouldnt matter at all. Transferring is easy and comes with the business.

I am not "lazy" by any means. As I said, I think the new rule we could do without. Manic, your car for sale comment doesnt work. We all know the actual domain name must be listed, thats a given and all that should be "required" to list them for sale imo.

Perhaps my never selling here again comment was a bit rantish and untrue, I just think the new rule stinks thats all. Everyone else seems to like the rule so keep it. I'm just a stupid domainer anyway

 

[deu12000]

I think it's a good rule. I've lost track of domains and lost tons of domains at weird/small registrars because I forgot I owned them, but sometimes I'll view an old sales thread with the name of the registrar and it will tell me where the domain is located and I'll go to the domain and transfer it to somewhere more familiar. Sometimes a whois just isn't enough to figure out who you have the domain registered with. Expiration is also helpful because depending on the extension whois searches fail on those too. Might as well put as many of the cards on the table as possible from the start. I use sites I buy things from as future reference because sometimes I forget to keep track (especially on great low priced deals).

 

[mktgmark]

I personally can take or leave the new rule. I think there are pluses and minuses to the situation.

I don't think it saves the buyer much time at all as I would never take someone's word for registrar and expiration date on a listed domain (unless I'd done numerous deals with them before of course) here or anywhere else... I always look up the info myself and think it's naive not to. My personal opinion is that no one should gripe that they bought a name they didn't know they'd have to renew within 5 days because of an expiration date, I guess I'm stunned that anyone would enter into any financial deal without finding out all the details of what they are purchasing before paying for the item.

That being said, I almost always list the expiration date and registrar when I sell names here or at any other forum, I always thought of it as providing "extra" information to make more sales - for those that already do this, I guess it would make more sense to be against this rule as then you would be one of the few providing this "extra" service, instead of blending in with everyone because we all "have to" do it.

I also don't see it as a huge pain to the seller, all my names are in an excel sheet and I learned how to copy and paste at a very young age.

So, in the grand scheme of things the new rule won't affect my buying or selling here at Namepros. Just my two and a half cents worth,
Mark

Oh, here is a thought - does this mean we are no longer allowed to list individual domains for sale in our signatures as I don't think the signature length rule would allow for too many registrar and expiration dates in it. Just a thought and if so you may want to make a wide announcement via email or something as thousands of NP'er have lists of their available names in their signatures.

 

[RJ]

Thanks for the feedback. Suggestions still welcome, and all is being taken under consideration. Nothing is carved in granite yet.

And no, you don't have to include reg and exp in your signatures. :]

RJ

 

[mktgmark]

Nothing is carved in granite yet.

Granite carving? Is this another skill to go along with your embroidery talent?

:hi:

 

[Prosperous]

I don't know how others do it but I've never bought a name without looking up the 'whois' info. This gives you more information than just the registrar and the time left on the domain. I always want to know everything I can about the owner/seller before I begin negotiations and especially before I send them any money.

I think the new rule is unnecessary and it does cause an undue burden on the seller. If a potential buyer is interested in a name he or she shouldn't mind at all looking up the whois info....they probably gonna do it anyway.

Ditto! Even though, iMHO, any decent seller would indeed keep a file/database (XLS spreadsheet, etc.) of the domains (s)he owns, and would therefor easily be able to reproduce registrar/exp. info in a sale.

Anyway:
Even if a seller'd post the registrar/exp. date, I'd still do a WHOiS search for the name(s) in question anyway, just in case the seller would make a mistake in his/her listing, or something.

Rob

 

[Electric-Shadow]

doesn't make a lot of difference to me imho as I always include them anyway saves a lot of hastle, no reason not to include the info really.

I think it's a good rule.

 

[Sabre]

Ditto! Even though, iMHO, any decent seller would indeed keep a file/database (XLS spreadsheet, etc.) of the domains (s)he owns, and would therefor easily be able to reproduce registrar/exp. info in a sale.

Anyway:
Even if a seller'd post the registrar/exp. date, I'd still do a WHOiS search for the name(s) in question anyway, just in case the seller would make a mistake in his/her listing, or something.

Rob

That's the main problem with the new rule, if you are a serious buyer for a domain then you are going to be looking up the Whois information anyway; if the seller has made a typo or is deliberately being deceptive then it is your loss as they can simply cut and run and/or edit their post with the correct date/registrar.

I don't agree with the rule, it's simply wasting seller's times IMO.

 

[dezinerite]

I do think it's a practical rule. I'm glad it's been implemented.

 

[Kenny]

OK, lets look at this from Staff and Mod POV.

Time is important to all of us, members and Staff alike.
Whatever makes it easier on us will improve our ability to do our jobs.

I cant count how many times I have run huge sales lists thru a proggy and found several expired names or dozens of names that expire in days. Why should I have to do this?

We try to keep everyone SAFE. We cant say, "all honest sales dont have to post reg and dates". Think about it.

Cy

 

[mktgmark]

While I think the idea and spirit behind the new rule is good, I still don't think it is overall a good idea.

By requiring this info posted in a sale thread you are insinuating that the info posted will be truthful or accurate. A buyer (inexperienced or otherwise) could look at the posted expiration information, know about the rule requiring it to be posted, believe it, and buy the domain - only to find out later that the information was not correct (either by honest mistake or by deception).

I think it is a dangerous precedent to say to buyers: "Don't worry about checking whois for expiration, registrar, etc., because we require that info to be posted."

I would hate to see it fall to the mods or other staff members to double check everyone's expiration and registrar info that they've posted to insure accuracy. Yech.

I think a better solution would be to just put a small banner or something across the top of the marketplace forums (or maybe have it default to appear at the top of any sales thread) saying something to the effect of "While it is recommended that sellers post the correct registrar and expiration date with any domain posted for sale, Namepros suggests you verify this information yourself before completing any and all deals."

Or something like that...

Namepros could even put a link in or after that message to the whois info checker of its choice to help the buyer. Maybe even increase revenues by getting it sponsored and having the link be the "official whois tool of Namepros" (Cha-Ching!)

I'm all for making Namepros as safe a community as it can be, but I think it is safer to encourage buyers to research the item they are buying than it is to have them trust that all the information they need will be provided for them.

Just some thoughts... caveat emptor, you know.
Mark

 

[SharonTucci]

I'm 100% in favor of this policy - as a moderator, buyer and seller. Let me explain why from a buyer's point of view:

Yes, you CAN transfer domains to a different registrar, but I have had serious headaches with several. Seeing the info in a post saves me time from having to look it up and I can move onto the next domain. I recently moved one domain from one registrar to another. I started the process in early July and it was completed YESTERDAY because of problems with the losing registrars system. This was an $80 purchase that I spent several HOURS on trying to sort out the mess and the domain is worth at most 250 or so. When I can bill a client @ $500/hour for consulting service, I'll certainly think twice about getting a domain at that registrar again - unless it is a case where I can buy a $100k domain for $100 LOL.

The expiration date factor will come into play more on low $ purchases. If I am considering a domain for up to $100 or so, I will take into account when the domain has to be renewed.

I will always double check this of course, but it saves me time from domains I would immediately pass on having this information and more time means I can spend more on domains I get.

 

[mktgmark]

I will always double check this of course, but it saves me time from domains I would immediately pass on having this information and more time means I can spend more on domains I get.

Great post!

That is exactly my point.

I am not completely against the rule, just looking at the ramifications and the possible problems that could come of it. Most people will double check anyway, I love having that information in a post, and when I post names for sale I always include all that information. I too like the convenience of looking at a name, seeing the registrar, and knowing it is a name I won't be purchasing as I want to avoid the headache of dealing with a poor registrar.

But, if you only institute that rule and don't put a disclaimer of some sort warning people to double check as the information may not be correct or reliable, then you are giving a false sense of security to and endangering the exact buyers you are hoping to protect.

Truthfully, as I stated in an earlier post, the new rule doesn't affect me either way as I always include the information in a for sale post and I always double check the information of a name I am interested in (and don't understand why anyone wouldn't). I'm just looking at how it may affect others, especially the less experienced buyers. I just feel that the safe thing to do is to either not have the rule, or to have the rule but make sure its posted that the information may not be reliable.

Great discussion.