.tv .TV premiums should be scrapped and replaced with leases

[memorablename]

Should .TV premiums be reviewed as lease premiums?

I think that .TV premiums should be scrapped and replaced with leases to help lift the market.

The .TV market is distorted right now. People looking at purchasing a .TV domain immediately have no idea if the renewal fee is $24.95 or $2,495 This distorts the market as many .TV domains are priced differently. This is an anomalous situation that does not exist in any other TLD and IMO is holding the .TV market back

If .TV premiums were instead offered for lease at the premium price and all .TV domains were at normal reg fee for renewals, this would help boost the market as it would take away the anomalous renewal price differences and IMO, many more premiums would be sold under the leases as the market overall would receive a boost and it would be better for everyone.

What do people think on this?

 

[kubativity]

This is an interesting idea, but it really is an exercise in semantics. In essence, when you buy a domain name you are really leasing it anyhow. So by changing premiums into lease agreements you are not really changing anything at all, just the words. The only real difference is that if you are "leasing" a name as you are proposing then you can not resell in the after market.

I am one of those NP members that agrees with premium pricing. I think that it does more good than bad for the TV market. After all, any premium purchase is proving value in the .tv extension.

 

[localexperts]

You want a way to ruin .TV, making it LEASE will ruin the extension.

Real business owners want nothing to do with LEASING domains that are their primary brand names. They spend millions of dollars building brands and typically reg domains till doomsday.

Check our long LocalExperts.com is regged. It is still not long enough for me.

 

[equity78]

Exactly KUBA domains are not property big debate going on about that the ICA rep got his ass handed too him in this forum about that. All domains are technically a lease you are leasing the right to a piece of intellectual property for a specified time. Usually 1 year. RJ does not own Namepros.com the domain he owns the forum and has a right to the domain Namepros.com but it is not his property.

 

[memorablename]

Should .TV premiums be reviewed as lease premiums?

Real business owners want nothing to do with LEASING domains that are their primary brand names. They spend millions of dollars building brands and typically reg domains till doomsday.

Check our long LocalExperts.com is regged. It is still not long enough for me.

All domains are leased. All I am suggesting is that how the leases are structured on .TV could be changed to give more confidence to end users and boost the market. Irresepective of how the domain lease was structured, the domain could still be sold on the aftermarkets as domains are sold right now. I gave this thread the wrong title as the title I meant was " Should .TV premiums be reviewed as lease premiums?"

I have spoken to many people who are wary of .TV as they think (mistakenly or otherwise), that the fee could be increased when they come to renew, something not under their control and not to their benfit. They feel that if they cannot afford the new fee proposed, they lose all the hard work they have done in building up their brand and someone else who can afford the new fee will benefit from their efforts.

.TV Premiums are currently chargeable annually, so changing that structure will not be an easy commercial decision to make. However, IMO, better to apply a discounted cash flow model and get a decent size lump sum up front (and have lower renewal fees apply thereafter that are more in line with other TLD's), than to have a premium reg domain that sits there for years and does not get taken up because of the uncertainty on the price to be charged for the renewal and also because people are reluctant to commit to paying high premium fees for years. Again, IMHO.

 

[localexperts]

At the end of the day, why people shy away from .TV is that they operate different than .COM or .NET

With a traditional leasing arrangement, the leasee has possession of that domain for a period of time with no guarantee that a structure exists where I can keep the domain if I continue to pay and follow the rules.

If Demand Media or Verisign LEASES .TV domain, then there is no guarantee they won't decide not to renew the lease of a large company that builds up a domain with traffic and revenue.

At least with ICANN, I have some protection from an entity whose #1 objective is not profit.

Are domains leased, I could see that argument. But then that person would have to stop claiming they own their house, when they are really leasing it from the bank until the mortgage is paid off. Don't make 4-5 payments, and it doesn't matter if I own 50% of that property....I'm out.

 

[memorablename]

.TV could be operated like other TLD's and the premium pricing structure amended

I see what you're saying, localexperts, and I agree with you. I don't think I made myself very clear in the first place. We both agree that people shy away from .TV domains because they operate differently from other TLD's e.g. .COM or .NET. What I am saying is that .TV could be operated like other TLD's .

However, the premium pricing structure could be altered so that under the current domain lease structure (which exists for all domains irrespective of TLD), a premium is charged for individual domains in much the same way that premiums are levied on premium .TV domains right now under the current pricing structure, but with the difference that the fee is treated on a discounted cash flow basis and charged up front instead of having a big annual renewal premium tied to .TV domains, which in my view, constrains the .TV market, along with the perceived uncertainty of what the renewal price will be, e.g. will a domain be reclassified as a premium, etc

I can see that commercially, this would be a very brave decision to make. However, it could be tried for a period and things could revert to the existing status quo if it did not work out. Perception is everything, and the current premium pricing structure is bringing a lot of negative perception to .TV. IMHO, if the premium pricing structure was amended as above or in a way that was better perceived, it would bring a big boost to the .TV market from which everyone in the .TV industry would benefit, including us domainers...

 

[DnEbook]

we already pay a lease

 

[TheBulldog]

I think I have ranted enough about the premium structure and how it's stupid.

I wish it would change, but realistically, it isn't going to until the contract renewal is up for demand.

No point getting worked up, just make snide off comments occasionaly.

 

[memorablename]

Can anyone in a position to help put forward ideas from this thread/related threads

I was not aware this topic had been previously discussed. I guess that all that could be said about it has already been said.

We're all agreed there's a lot of potential in .TV and all want to see that potential realized as much as possible. Could anyone in a position to help see some of this potential realized by putting forward some of the ideas in this thread or other related threads please do so...