3 ms·

It costs like 3$/year (or less probably) to register a domain name. But once you build your brand/website/etc you are tied to your domain name, which is tied to

It costs like 3$/year (or less probably) to register a domain name. But once you build your brand/website/etc you are tied to your domain name, which is tied to that registry. This gives the registry huge leverage over you. That 3$ that it actually costs them to run it can increase to whatever price they think you will be willing to pay and you can't not pay it...you would lose your spot and identity on the internet. Its not like with registrars, like godaddy, ghandi, bluehost, etc... that you can switch between in like 24 hrs. IIRC .orgs were price controlled, so the price couldn't rise, but with this takeover, the price controls have gone away.

JonathonW 7y ago
PIR currently charges registrars about $9/year per domain, with registrars allowed to mark that up however much they want without restrictions-- AFAIK neither the "wholesale" price nor the actual price from registrars is currently price controlled by ICANN. Regardless, I don't see how moving .org's operations from a non-profit (PIR) to a private equity firm benefits anyone, except the owners of said private equity firm. You're basically taking something that could operate at-cost and giving it a mandate to turn a profit-- the only way that happens is if prices go up. Likely a lot.
- techsupporter 7y ago
  > AFAIK neither the "wholesale" price nor the actual price from registrars is currently price controlled by ICANN. Important point: just before this rigged bid went through, ICANN conveniently decided to remove the price cap for .org registry prices.
- ohashi 7y ago
  PIR is already a rent-seeking organization designed to fund Internet Society. They don't actually handle the registry at all. It's outsourced, they put it out to bid. If you look at financials, they are paying <$2/domain. Yes, ICANN granted a monopoly to ISOC in the form of PIR, who have been allowed to increase prices consistently for years but at a capped rate. And they wanted more. As costs have gone down. Then everyone at ICANN talks about not being a price regulator and free markets. Ignoring the fact it's a monopoly, and not one ISOC/PIR played any role in creating, it was a gift from ICANN. A perpetual, no bid, contract with ever increasing prices on a decreasing cost monopoly good.

JonathonW 7y ago

PIR currently charges registrars about $9/year per domain, with registrars allowed to mark that up however much they want without restrictions-- AFAIK neither the "wholesale" price nor the actual price from registrars is currently price controlled by ICANN. Regardless, I don't see how moving .org's operations from a non-profit (PIR) to a private equity firm benefits anyone, except the owners of said private equity firm. You're basically taking something that could operate at-cost and giving it a mandate to turn a profit-- the only way that happens is if prices go up. Likely a lot.

techsupporter 7y ago
> AFAIK neither the "wholesale" price nor the actual price from registrars is currently price controlled by ICANN. Important point: just before this rigged bid went through, ICANN conveniently decided to remove the price cap for .org registry prices.
ohashi 7y ago
PIR is already a rent-seeking organization designed to fund Internet Society. They don't actually handle the registry at all. It's outsourced, they put it out to bid. If you look at financials, they are paying <$2/domain. Yes, ICANN granted a monopoly to ISOC in the form of PIR, who have been allowed to increase prices consistently for years but at a capped rate. And they wanted more. As costs have gone down. Then everyone at ICANN talks about not being a price regulator and free markets. Ignoring the fact it's a monopoly, and not one ISOC/PIR played any role in creating, it was a gift from ICANN. A perpetual, no bid, contract with ever increasing prices on a decreasing cost monopoly good.