Dot Net Crashes through 6M

[Rubber Duck]

Verisign have obviously been doing some internal admin. Dot net put on 200,000 yesterday! As Mark Twain once famously said. "Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

Best Regards
Dave Wrixon

 

[seeker]

it is a superb extension and much undervalued among domain professionals like ourselves, while the market in general sees it as what is it, the best after .com

 

[actnow]

Dave,

Thank you for the update on .net. I missed that.

I hope it is internal housekeeping by Verisign.

Or, do I suspect that the data mining registrars are expanding their horizon?

 

[EGS]

Meh. Sad news to me. I hate the .net extension. :-(

 

[seeker]

so, If you hated coffee(.net), and a lot of people wanted to drink it, and assuming you had a beverage shop(domain shop), would you not server it because it is sad to you and you hate coffee???

 

[actnow]

Meh. Sad news to me. I hate the .net extension. :-(

Seeker, please show respect to your elders.

In his old age, VG_King has become slightly opinionated.
(Birthday: September 20, 1906)

However, to his credit, he is very progressive for his senior years since
he is active user of instant messaging. :-D

VG_King - Don't get upset, I'm just teasing you.

 

[Theo]

It is true, my wallet is five figures fatter thanks to a .net sale.

 

[Rubber Duck]

Dave,

Thank you for the update on .net. I missed that.

I hope it is internal housekeeping by Verisign.

Or, do I suspect that the data mining registrars are expanding their horizon?

Being suspicious myself, I wonder whether there might not have been some understatement of registrations while the decision on new contract to run registry was being made.

Best Regards
Dave Wrixon

 

[mole]

Yeah, looks like a data mining registrar(s) playing the system again.

 

[Rubber Duck]

Yeah, looks like a data mining registrar(s) playing the system again.

So, how does that work! What do they get up to?

Dave Wrixon

 

[seeker]

they reg a bunch of names, handem over to me for testing of traffic etc..., and if after a few days I dont want them, they release them.

of course, I only get a small %, the rest go to the registrars.
seriously though, I think thats what they do

 

[Rubber Duck]

they reg a bunch of names, handem over to me for testing of traffic etc..., and if after a few days I dont want them, they release them.

of course, I only get a small %, the rest go to the registrars.
seriously though, I think thats what they do

Thanks,

Interesting, this could probably account for recent volatility in the dot com register. If, however, these people are now switching their attention to dot net, it could be that speculation in dot coms is approaching or has already exceeded its rational limits, at least for the time being.

Best Regards
Dave Wrixon

 

[mole]

it could be that speculation in dot coms is approaching or has already exceeded its rational limits, at least for the time being.

Absolutely agree. Most succint and reality-based statement I've read so far about the state of the dotcom namespace.

 

[furca]

Birthday:
September 20, 1906

Damn, hes like 99.

 

[Mr. Deleted]

Damn, hes like 99.

I tried to make myself 100 years older, but it did not work. I was able to make myself 30 years older however (I'll change it back later)

 

[diverge]

they reg a bunch of names, handem over to me for testing of traffic etc..., and if after a few days I dont want them, they release them.

of course, I only get a small %, the rest go to the registrars.
seriously though, I think thats what they do

Certainly this is unethical, if not completely illegal. Does ICANN know / approve of these actions?

 

[Rubber Duck]

they reg a bunch of names, handem over to me for testing of traffic etc..., and if after a few days I dont want them, they release them.

of course, I only get a small %, the rest go to the registrars.
seriously though, I think thats what they do

Looks like they were mining again yesterday. 189K registrations yesterday!

Best Regards
Dave Wrixon

 

[seeker]

it happens on and off.
sometimes though, it looks like it might be a glitch as they show regged status for less than 24 hours, so how can they test traffic?

 

[Theo]

Owners of .net Web addresses may face higher registry fees in the future--but not until 2007.
http://news.com.com/2102-1030_3-5780400.html?tag=st.util.print

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, the nonprofit organization responsible for Internet addresses, quietly agreed to lift wholesale price restrictions on .net registry fees last month when it renewed a contract with VeriSign to run the master database for .net domain names.

Buried in the fine print, the fact has escaped notice until recently. Over the past several days, news of the change has traveled around the Web.

"(It's) a move that may signal ICANN's intent to get out of the business of regulating domain name pricing," noted Internet services firm Netcraft.

ICANN used to cap .net domain fees at either $6 or $4.25, depending on the type of address. Under the new, six-year VeriSign contract, the cap is now $4.25 and that cap will remain in effect until Dec. 31, 2006, after which time all price restrictions expire.

A VeriSign spokesman told Computer Business Review that it's unlikely to raise prices, and would do it only to invest in its infrastructure. The master-registrar has agreed to give six months' notice in advance of any price changes, Netcraft noted.

Netcraft said prices are likely to remain stable because the domain-name market is very competitive. Domain names are practically given away as part of Web hosting packages, the group noted.

Others were less certain. "I'm not yet sure whether it's a change for the good or the bad," wrote Bret Fausett in his Lextext blog. "On the one hand, it gets ICANN out of the messy, non-"technical coordination" business of price control. On the other, will I be able to afford to renew my .net domain names after 2007?"

The $6 price cap will still apply to the more popular .com registry, which VeriSign also controls. That contract expires in November 2007.

 

[jdk]

Interesting read. Makes you think how high registrations will go for in the future.