I see he has a few overpriced .tv in his auction and runs a forum that includes .tv
We will see what happens. He has set the bar very high with his pricing. He also has a couple of names which are well suited to the extension. The extent of his portfolio in this extension is an unknown factor at this time, lathough his public indications are that it is limited in scope.
There is a lot of speculation about the motives.
There may also be the obvious.
With ownership of a domain name, it is like Highlander, "There can only be one".
By setting the price on the high side, the end user side, he may simply be trying to extract the maximum value for his holdings. If they sell, then he does very well with them, and there is satisfaction in that victory. If they do not sell, he still retains ownership. He is in a position to wait until the market catches up to where he stands. He can evaluate the results and move accordingly.
If his position is limited at this time, this is a low risk high reward proposition.
If his position is hidden and extensive, then it is a much bolder and riskier move. The payoff, if he can establish a high value range is considerable, and will demonstrate that it is time to put more of his cards on the table. However, if all of the offerings are rejected, then it would be a clear setback. If any sell, it is a partial success, and indicates a degree of recognition of the extensions value. He can also leverage his position as a high profile intermediary to his advantage.
A more conservative approach may have been weighed.
Depending on his degree of exposure, it would have different implications. The risk is of setting the overall market value too low.
If he has a limited portfolio, then opening at a "domainer price" risks being put in the position of a significant undersale and loss of long term value in what holdings he has.
If the portfolio is more extensive, then setting the baseline price at what may turn out to be a bargain rate, could potentially undermine his long term stakes. If there are significant renewals involved, this could actually be disastrous, as it could cost him both a few significant holdings and simultaneously affect the margins of his remaining portfolio. Significantly underselling could also effect his reputation, should a major increase in value be realized in a year or two as the media integration accelerates.
In evaluating these risks and relative positions, there is an incentive to aim for maximum value, which may in both cases outweigh the risks of a lower starting value.
As a high profile domainer, operating in relatively untested waters, the entire situation is interesting from a tactical and strategic perspective.
This may also just be a simple calibration test. By carefully controlling the number of offered domains, across a selected spectrum of types, the outcome is easier to gauge. That which actually sells, and who purchases it, will be revealing in its own way.
Another potential consideration is that this auction is a test of an alternative pricing structure to the renewal system. The actual value in the results may be in fact a test of or challenge to Verisigns premium structure.
There are a lot of possible motivations and considerations that may be taking place. I think it is worth pointing out that there are many possible reasons for this decision by Rick. The consensus of domainers appears to be that the price is beyond market threshold. This may or may not turn out to be true. The nature of the event is such that there may be highly interested and somewhat pre-sold end users present, as well as the typical speculators.
It will be interesting to watch.
The result will speak for itself.
