5 ms·

Domains operate in a manner to real estate. We've been through the "wild west" land grab of domains at this point and now we're working toward the next stage, w

by mbleigh 14y ago

Domains operate in a manner to real estate. We've been through the "wild west" land grab of domains at this point and now we're working toward the next stage, whatever that ends up being. Remember that domain names are transferable so the reality is that, of all of the millions of registered domains, only those which are profiting their creators are truly taken without much chance of being reclaimed (probably 1% or fewer). This is a problem that will sort itself out, there's no cause for concern.

zcvosdfdgj 14y ago
I agree with you.. but, then shouldn't we be asking ICANN to raise the registration fees? Because right now, registration fees are so low that squatters can register thousands of names, and then demand a few thousand dollars if you won't one of those. Raising it to (say) $25 keeps names affordable for everyone, and would raise the cost to squatters substantially... which should make more names available.
- lerouxb 14y ago
  No, the domains are already taken.
  - zcvosdfdgj 14y ago
    yes, they are taken. And when they come up for renewal and the price is $25 instead of $8.. the owner will have to decide if it's worth it or not.
    - lerouxb 14y ago
      Oh I see what you mean. That's a good point.
  - rebelde 14y ago
    Raising the price is what I advocate, too. At the current price, squatting on a domain name can be profitable if it brings in $10/year. Raise the price of a domain name to $50/year, and millions of domains will free up. In fact, I, too, would probably stop renewing some of the domains that I am not using for any purpose. I'm not even a squatter.
    - zcvosdfdgj 14y ago
      I'm not a squatter either, but if the price were $50/year, I would drop about half of the 30 domains I own.
      - MatthewPhillips 14y ago
        If you're not using them, isn't that a good thing?
        zcvosdfdgj 14y ago
        absolutely. But at the current price of $8, I'm going to keep them forever. Never know if I might want to use them later, right?
- jarofgreen 14y ago
  Really dislike any suggestion like this. It won't help much, it'll just price the low end out of the market. Given that a good domain can sell for thousands, you'd have to raise the fees a lot to deter people chasing that one hit. Meanwhile, you damage lots of small people who have domains for personal things that never were intended to make money. The Internet was meant to be an open place with low barriers of participation.
  - viscanti 14y ago
    ~$25 probably wouldn't stop the issue, but something ~$100 might. "GOOD" domains will always sell for well over that, regardless of a price floor. Owning a good domain name is like owning any other valuable good. Pricing around $100 helps with the long-tail of domain names. Most domains aren't worth sitting on for hundreds of dollars (in the majority of cases, where there's not an obvious quick flip). I'd even be for a tiered pricing structure. Domains under ~7 characters could be $100+, domains over 15 characters could be significantly cheaper.
    - jarofgreen 14y ago
      > but something ~$100 might What about the cost to innocent parties? Really dislike this! > Domains under ~7 characters could be $100+, domains over 15 characters could be significantly cheaper. Now that could be good - Charge inversely by the character. Also has the side effect of discouraging URL shortening services :-)
  - zcvosdfdgj 14y ago
    of course really good/valuable domains will always be worth a lot more than the registration fee. $25 is still basically nothing. Name one other thing important to you that you spend less than $25 PER YEAR on. Geez, right now I spend more on coffee in 1/2 a week than on a domain name. I spend more on toothpaste than a domain name. Who could possibly claim that is too high? Squatters of course think it is too high. Owning thousands of domains they consider worthless. Well other people don't consider those names to be worth less than $25.. so if you do, maybe you shouldn't have them registered.
  - 14y ago
suresk 14y ago
> of all of the millions of registered domains, only those which are profiting their creators are truly taken without much chance of being reclaimed (probably 1% or fewer). I don't think this is true. Domains are so cheap to keep around, squatters only need to profit on a small percentage of them to keep a large number of them on hand. If a squatter lets go of one, another squatter will simply pick it up. I'll give you an example: When I was in high school in the late 90's, I registered my last name as a domain name (uresk.com). At some point (1999, I think) I couldn't afford the registration fee (~$35 per year back then, I think) and had to drop it, thinking I'd pick it back up later. Ever since then, the domain has bounced around various squatters and is to this day unavailable to me. There is no way they are making any money off this domain name: - I have an incredibly uncommon last name that is shared by maybe only a thousand or fewer people in the world. - The .net version of the domain name (which I own) gets only a few thousand visitors per year. - The sites run on the .com version have never had anything but parking pages up. The only reason the domain name keeps getting registered is because of the criteria that someone owned it before. I'd be shocked if the domain name became available in my lifetime. I see this same situation played out whenever I go to find a new domain for a business idea I have - all of the decent domains are just be squatted on, and the only way to get them is to pay insane fees to squatters. So, no - the problem isn't going to resolve itself.

by mbleigh 14y ago

zcvosdfdgj 14y ago

I agree with you.. but, then shouldn't we be asking ICANN to raise the registration fees? Because right now, registration fees are so low that squatters can register thousands of names, and then demand a few thousand dollars if you won't one of those. Raising it to (say) $25 keeps names affordable for everyone, and would raise the cost to squatters substantially... which should make more names available.

lerouxb 14y ago
No, the domains are already taken.
- zcvosdfdgj 14y ago
  yes, they are taken. And when they come up for renewal and the price is $25 instead of $8.. the owner will have to decide if it's worth it or not.
  - lerouxb 14y ago
    Oh I see what you mean. That's a good point.
- rebelde 14y ago
  Raising the price is what I advocate, too. At the current price, squatting on a domain name can be profitable if it brings in $10/year. Raise the price of a domain name to $50/year, and millions of domains will free up. In fact, I, too, would probably stop renewing some of the domains that I am not using for any purpose. I'm not even a squatter.
  - zcvosdfdgj 14y ago
    I'm not a squatter either, but if the price were $50/year, I would drop about half of the 30 domains I own.
    - MatthewPhillips 14y ago
      If you're not using them, isn't that a good thing?
      - zcvosdfdgj 14y ago
        absolutely. But at the current price of $8, I'm going to keep them forever. Never know if I might want to use them later, right?
jarofgreen 14y ago
Really dislike any suggestion like this. It won't help much, it'll just price the low end out of the market. Given that a good domain can sell for thousands, you'd have to raise the fees a lot to deter people chasing that one hit. Meanwhile, you damage lots of small people who have domains for personal things that never were intended to make money. The Internet was meant to be an open place with low barriers of participation.
- viscanti 14y ago
  ~$25 probably wouldn't stop the issue, but something ~$100 might. "GOOD" domains will always sell for well over that, regardless of a price floor. Owning a good domain name is like owning any other valuable good. Pricing around $100 helps with the long-tail of domain names. Most domains aren't worth sitting on for hundreds of dollars (in the majority of cases, where there's not an obvious quick flip). I'd even be for a tiered pricing structure. Domains under ~7 characters could be $100+, domains over 15 characters could be significantly cheaper.
  - jarofgreen 14y ago
    > but something ~$100 might What about the cost to innocent parties? Really dislike this! > Domains under ~7 characters could be $100+, domains over 15 characters could be significantly cheaper. Now that could be good - Charge inversely by the character. Also has the side effect of discouraging URL shortening services :-)
- zcvosdfdgj 14y ago
  of course really good/valuable domains will always be worth a lot more than the registration fee. $25 is still basically nothing. Name one other thing important to you that you spend less than $25 PER YEAR on. Geez, right now I spend more on coffee in 1/2 a week than on a domain name. I spend more on toothpaste than a domain name. Who could possibly claim that is too high? Squatters of course think it is too high. Owning thousands of domains they consider worthless. Well other people don't consider those names to be worth less than $25.. so if you do, maybe you shouldn't have them registered.
- 14y ago

suresk 14y ago

> of all of the millions of registered domains, only those which are profiting their creators are truly taken without much chance of being reclaimed (probably 1% or fewer). I don't think this is true. Domains are so cheap to keep around, squatters only need to profit on a small percentage of them to keep a large number of them on hand. If a squatter lets go of one, another squatter will simply pick it up. I'll give you an example: When I was in high school in the late 90's, I registered my last name as a domain name (uresk.com). At some point (1999, I think) I couldn't afford the registration fee (~$35 per year back then, I think) and had to drop it, thinking I'd pick it back up later. Ever since then, the domain has bounced around various squatters and is to this day unavailable to me. There is no way they are making any money off this domain name: - I have an incredibly uncommon last name that is shared by maybe only a thousand or fewer people in the world. - The .net version of the domain name (which I own) gets only a few thousand visitors per year. - The sites run on the .com version have never had anything but parking pages up. The only reason the domain name keeps getting registered is because of the criteria that someone owned it before. I'd be shocked if the domain name became available in my lifetime. I see this same situation played out whenever I go to find a new domain for a business idea I have - all of the decent domains are just be squatted on, and the only way to get them is to pay insane fees to squatters. So, no - the problem isn't going to resolve itself.