discuss Now the price increase for .com is starting to hit...going to be dropping lots of names

[Mister Funsky]

It seems the price increases are kicking in across many registrars as the hours tick on. Just noticed they went from 8.49 at Epik to 9.99 in the last little while.

Perhaps others could post any price increases they have/are experiencing. The thieves that run .com will soon notice a decrease in registrations. In my case, I will let 25 to 30 percent of my names drop.

 

[topdom]

There is inflation everywhere. This is not a surprise. Natural solution: increase your asking price (or drop price?). But it may not work. Drops expected. Some people may consider this as an opportunity, until they realize they are out of cash, or they see "too many worth registering" and no new sales happening. Economies had to go down (a little bit), because gvts (I mean, deep versions) needed to be changed, and "RU-UKR war" is part of this game (in multiple ways).

 

[Recons.Com]

I just don’t see the significance of the increase , $1 to $2 per name , everything else has gone up , food - clothing and ect … the increase is minimal IMO , nothing of a fuss IMO

It is irrelevant. Unless the inflation is at the stage that buyers feel $3000 in 2022 is the same as $2500 in 2020, you will not get away with price increase to compensate. In fact, it would be dumb seeing 20-30% decline in sales volume from 2021, to raise them noticeably and risk plunging your sales further.

Premium domains are not considered an absolute necessity by most. It is not like the gas you have to put in your car, or bread you have to put on your table.

So, again, it is not $1 or $2 dollars, it is 14.5% cost increase over 13 months. And that 14.5% cost increase can be difference taking your profitability from the required 25% IRR to 18%. Or, for others, from being profitable to making loss.

To make things worse, it will not stop there. Verisign is greedy and they will go for year 3 and year 4, after which the cost increase will constitute 30%. If I don't grow my portfolio further, for me personally, that is $5000/month shifted from me to Verisign just because they are the monopoly over the resource.

The real question is, why they are entitled to make around 1.4 billion a year from .com alone.

If there were an open process, a company or consortium of companies would agree to do exactly the same with the same or better security for 0.5 billion a year. The remaining 0.9 billion/year could be spent developing Internet and IT in the developing world, for example.

 

[AEProgram]

yeah, I suspect a lot of people will drop many names.

 

[DomainConcepts]

Easy solution to this is multiple-year registration. If your domain names are so valuable simply register for five or ten years and you don't need to moan about prices increases any more. Problem solved?

Yes, if you not only own the domain but also intend to keep it for five or ten years. For the end user with a website, and for some domainers' monetization models (including yours, if I'm not mistaken), that might indeed be worth seriously considering.

If a domainer is simply intending to sell the domain though, and the sooner the better, paying five or ten years' registration fees in advance is unlikely to pay off. If they sell the domain a year later, they've probably lost the entire advanced registration fees that they've paid.

Having said that, I don't honestly think that these price rises are such a big deal (and I think you and I agree on this). Considered as the "overhead" of maintaining a domain, the standard registration fee is still tiny for any domain that's really worth having. However, even a fairly small rise can conflict with the common domainer business model of stockpiling a vast portfolio of domains in the hope that at some point someone will come along and pay a handsome sum for one of them that will more than cover the cost of warehousing all the others for years.

 

[Laguna]

I don't see what all the fuss is about. From what I've seen the increases are quite small. If your names are valued at 3 figures or above, is this small increase really a problem ? Those with huge portfolios may find it a bit challenging if they are not selling many though

 

[bmugford]

I think available .com domain names should cost $ 100 to register. Too many people registering rubbish domains and polluting the listings with them. Spend the money on free domainer training for everybody in the world. That's my opinion. Sticking to it. Leaving this thread now. You can all carry on agreeing with yourselves.

That's fine, but the idea of actually implementing that creates far too many other issues.

The theoretical argument that higher prices would lead to less registrations is obviously true, but I don't really agree that would be a good thing. In many parts of the world $100+ is not some insignificant amount of money.

Also, many websites are for personal use like email, hobby sites, etc. and likely make no money.

It would also be an unfair way to transfer money from non-profits to a for profit, as a result of the higher pricing.

Brad

 

[Mister Funsky]

So, I heard back from Dynadot. Their pre-funding prices are not that great until you reach the 5 grand level. At that point, .coms would be 9.57 per...much better than 9.99 but a pain to fund that much at one time.

I've not gotten a response regarding pricing from Epik.

Below is a screen shot of the landing page at Namesilo, but after drilling down in their site, I could not find how the achieve the 8.39 discount. If it is no longer offered, perhaps it is time for them to remove the rotating banner.

Years past, registrars would be foaming at the mouth to get a transfer of one or two thousand domains. Oh well.

 

[branding]

you've got $9.99 for renewal rates, consider yourself lucky or maybe you just have crap tons more domains than I do!

It's arbitrary. They probably factor in your account age or money you bring them. I have just about 10 domains at Epik on average.

I only use them when I purchase something already at Epik these days , then move out asap or when convenient.

With current pricing they're just a pitstop before consolidating at a more reliable and trusted alternative.

 

[bmugford]

Trolling? It's called having an opinion. I'm not bowing down to anybody when it comes to my principles. If 99 people turn right, I'm perfectly happy turning left.

This type of scheme is simply not possible with an extension like .COM that is supposed to be operated in the public interest.

If ICANN & Verisign tried to implement this type of crooked scheme, I would expect immediate attention from the federal and state governments.

ICANN should have learned their power is not unlimited when the California Attorney General stepped in to investigate the .ORG takeover by a private equity company -

On Heels of AG Becerra Letter, ICANN Rejects Transfer of .Org Registry to Private Equity Firm​

https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-relea...cts-transfer-org-registry-private-equity-firm

“In America, we grant non-profit organizations favorable legal and tax treatment compared to individual Americans or for-profit enterprises because, by law, they must serve the public’s interest and must be open to public examination," said Attorney General Xavier Becerra. "More and more, that premise has come under assault as those with personal profit motives see an easy opening to exploit the special tax and legal treatment reserved for nonprofits. Yesterday, ICANN, the governing body for web domains, decided not to approve the transfer of the non-profit operator of the “.org” domain (which is used principally by the non-profit world) to a for-profit, private equity firm. ICANN’s decision restores some confidence that the non-profit community may continue to be driven by a desire to serve the public, not to make a quick buck at charitable donors’ and taxpayers’ expense.”

 

[Recons.Com]

This is the Last New Analysis for the .COM domain names deleted in August 2022.
2022: 3.37%
2021: 55.65%
2020: 16.94%
2019: 6.71%
2018: 4.41%
2017: 2.99%
2016: 2.15%
2015: 1.53%
2014: 1.14%
2013: 0.85%
2012: 0.97%
2011: 0.62%
2010: 0.52%
2009: 0.45%
2008: 0.36%
2007: 0.32%
2006: 0.24%
2005: 0.20%
2004: 0.17%
2003: 0.12%
2002: 0.09%
<2002: 0.22%

The problem with expecting a massive drop of .COM domain names due to the price increase is that any domain names not renewed after 01 September 2022 will only start dropping in roughly 45 to 60 days time. The majority of .COM registrations are not domainer registrations. As such, they are not typically part of portfolios and most will renew.

The current non-renewal rate for first year .COM registrations is about 46%. If there is an increase in deletions due to the price increases in the pre-2020 registrations, it will be difficult to differentiate them from natural attrition due to businesses closing. (Covid and economic conditions in 2020-2022).

Regards...jmcc

You're right. The ones we are seeing now in auctions and drops are 35 to 60 days past renewal date. We should see the true result in 30 days in auctions and 55 days in drops.

Although some investors have taken stricter view at their portfolios since they found out about the increase.

 

[blogspotter]

So, I heard back from Dynadot. Their pre-funding prices are not that great until you reach the 5 grand level. At that point, .coms would be 9.57 per...much better than 9.99 but a pain to fund that much at one time.

I've not gotten a response regarding pricing from Epik.

Below is a screen shot of the landing page at Namesilo, but after drilling down in their site, I could not find how the achieve the 8.39 discount. If it is no longer offered, perhaps it is time for them to remove the rotating banner.

Show attachment 222553

Years past, registrars would be foaming at the mouth to get a transfer of one or two thousand domains. Oh well.

Yeah that is the old pricing. New bulk pricing is below:

 

[Mark Names]

$15 renew for .COM is supposed to be a "special price" ? Forget that.

I've pretty much stopped using anybody for .COM except Dynadot. $9.57 renewals for me.

LOL! Yeah, what the heck is happening there?! Definitely transferring out of @epik . They're out of touch - Wish @Rob Monster could do something... Something's amiss! Coincidently he steps down and renewal prices jump to $35?! WTH?! LOL

 

[internext]

Look, they lost Paypal

Am I the only one who realizes they have Paypal back? For months...

 

[Recons.Com]

Sure drop 10% of worst to cover inflation if buying to sell at $20 or just absorb it.

The problem with this advice is that most people, if not all, won't precisely identify what is their worst 10%.

If you had a magic tool for that, on that alone, you'd become very rich.

 

[bmugford]

Just a short while ago I interacted with a principal at a domain registrar. He said that in his personal (rather than professional) opinion the possibility of a tiered 'rate' could be introduced if the no bid contract situation remains in place.

I don't think it can happen with .COM.

Large companies often own thousands of domains, and many premium ones. They are not going to be on board with that type of scheme.

It would be rejected at every level.

Verisign is lucky to have their no-bid contact. They don't want to play with fire.

Brad

 

[bmugford]

I have an idea.
What if registrars make a deal with us domainers, example let us renew Com domains at 5$ for more years, when we sell those domains we are obliged to pay them some percentage from that sale no matter where it sold.
I would make such a deal with my current registrar.

They would probably end up losing money as most domains never sell.

Brad

 

[tonyk2000]

I have an idea.
What if registrars make a deal with us domainers, example let us renew Com domains at 5$ for more years, when we sell those domains we are obliged to pay them some percentage from that sale no matter where it sold.

Domainers do (underground) deals with registrars already. For example. Ever wondered why some expired domains from not-so-well-known registrars (or resellers) end up in hands of a particular domainer (or domainers) without following "official" domain expiration/deletion/recovery cycle, published by the registrars (or resellers) in question? No, it is not about expired auctions (domains in question do not appear on expired auctions to begin with). Underground deals. Pure corruption. Similar to netsol-owned New Ventures Services, Corp (just google it), but outsourced. The difference is that some domainers enjoy being a part of corruption schemes.

The scheme you suggested looks perfectly legit though. But, since registrars do pay (prepay in fact) for renewals to registries, I do not think that any registrar will agree... But, if you a good customer, some may offer a credit line.

 

[branding]

I'm curious... How can they actually demonstrate a justified price increase...

It's only been like what? Half a lifetime since a domain registration was free?

They're smart, keeping it below $10. once they surpass that psychological barrier I see some issues for .com.

I foresee another boost for ccTLDS. maybe not within a couple of years but it's bound to happen at this pace.

 

[Recons.Com]

Seems kinda drastic. I mean, the increase is about $1 per domain. For me it's like 58 cents because volume buying.

Is the $1 per name increase really cause to drop 25-30% of your names ?

First, it's already around 1.2$ per name in the last 13 months or 14.5%.

That is considerable. If that was all your profit margin or brought you below your required IRR given the high risk involved.

Remember that even before the raises, around 2/3 of the forum members said they are either losing money or barely breaking even.

 

[internext]

From $8.95 to $35 to renew on Epik is shameful.

My epik renewal price is $9.99

 

[internext]

Have you checked recently ?

Just checked. Still $9.99

 

[tonyk2000]

@redemo can you please share the basis of your calculations? You prefer $100, but why not $200? And, are you sure that, should your pricing idea be accepted globally, relevant parties who set the price would always /each year/ follow the same logic?

 

[Recons.Com]

You're right. same goes for the UK and a lot of European countries. Dot com will always be second/third best in this regard.

I like the way how they don't pronounce the dot in Germany so they just say domain de.

And yet, for my own projects, if I enable catchall email, I do get lots of emails where people type in .com instead of co.uk, .de, .nl, .fr. Often, the employees themselves will do it when emailing something to themselves or signing up for something. Apparently, even as a second option, .com is very important, if it can mitigate against leaking even 5% of your type-in traffic or important emails.

 

[Recons.Com]

Agree. It happens. But it's worse the other way around, where email leaks from the .com to the ccTLD

It's always best, when possible, to acquire the .com and forward it to your ccTLD. When developing I try to get the pair although that is getting harder every day.

Like you mentioned upthread, you may want to take your project globally at a certain stage.

Right. Basically, the simplest generic advice if you don't know anything else about the business and its plans is:

- if you are in the US or similar .com centric country, acquire the exact match .com of your brand and start building your brand equity on it. As a bonus, get .us or the cctld and forward to .com

- If you are in a cctld centric country, acquire the exact match cctld and build the equity on it. If you can, acquire the .com and forward it to your cctld

- If your location is not your major market, then acquire and do the above on .com

- if your project is social or non-profit, then do the above on .org. Owning .com and cctld and forwarding being a bonus.

Basically, getting your .com, cctld and .org covers all the basis pretty much for any business.

 

[branding]

I've never used SAV, but later today I will spend time looking into them...any input would be appreciated from someone using them recently.

I do use them but just for maybe a hundred domains.

It's a hit/miss experience. They're cheap but don't expect a spectacular experience.

I had some problematic issues with them in the past but overall, the cost/risk ratio could be worse.