For Sale Think about this....

[Cartoonz]

Everywhere i turn, I see some poor sod whining about how the registrars are "selling out their registry connections to insiders" and the "normal joe" cannot get dropping domains because of this.

Let's see who can guess who the biggest "INSIDER" is that catches the most names this way and excludes the general public from using the registrar's connections to get names.

HINT:
It is NOT Buydomains or UltSearch.

 

[Drewbert]

Me?

 

[Cartoonz]

Next contestant, Please.

 

Verisign

 

[flex]

nAAme?

 

[Nic]

is it a pornstar ??

 

[domnet]

The suspense is killing me....

 

[mole]

No suspense, it is Verisign. These people who happen to own .com are desperate man.

 

Snapnames would be my guess

 

[dotsofdomains]

VeriSign is my guess: the master of "dropping" domains into their corporate resevoir on dates known only to them.

 

[Omni]

Snapnames

 

[Cartoonz]

A couple of winners, actually.

Snapnames controls at least 7 different registrar's connections, making them the largest speculator by far.

If you were to go to any of those registrars, they would not be able to diresctly register dropping names for you because they are controlled by SnapNames.

Meanwhile, SnapNames is waging a disinformation campaign accusing everybody else of everything that they are the largest culprits of themselves.

Remember the "registry load 'problems'"??
Right again, Snapnames accounts for probably 50% of all unsuccessful requests to the registry, due to the fact that they run 24 x 7.

Interesting what a slick marketing department and seemingly no integrity can do for a company, isn't it?

 

Toonz, I'm not following your logic on this one:

If I (and I'm more or less the general public) can buy a Snapback on a name that is then acquired for me utilizing a Snapnames partner registrar's threads, how was I excluded again?

If I compare my access to NameScout's threads (seeemingly Snap's best name grabbing partner) to my access to registrar's who really do make their connections unavailable to the public, I like my relationship with NameScout. Or Dotster or Enom, if I am using NW or Expirefish. Not that I'd waste money of Expirefish, of course. . .

 

[Cartoonz]

The point is, SnapNames is acting as a "middleman" or a "reseller" or a "speculator" (or even as a dreaded "cybersquatter" in some cases!).

Your "access" is to Snapnames, NOT the registrar directly.

SnapNames has been attacking registrars who choose NOT to be thier "Partners" with accusations of making thier registry connections available to "only an exclusive group" while SnapNames' "partners" are doing the exact same thing, only SnapNames is that "exclusive group".

Yes, you have access to SnapNames, but they control the resources that may have been used by the respective registrars to grab names for you under any number of different business models, so they are in fact doing the exact same thing they are whining about others doing.

Like I said, Think about it.

 

[avs162]

can i have a vowel

the guy who deletes brother in law????

or the guy that cleans the reg offices???

 

[dotsofdomains]

would someone please explain the snapback procedure in a nutshell, because those sorry folks are totally unable to do so on their website themselves!!

 

On your recommendation I've thought about it again, and I still disagree.

I think that you are now confusing separate issues: access to deleting names, and access to registrar threads. Snapnames/NW/similar might have access to threads locked up, but they make that access available to the public, via several different models. Compare that to registrars who either grab deletes for themselves (prohibited, but done all the time), or enter exclusive, secret deals to grab deletes.

Through services like Snap, NW, Expirefish, I and other general public types have the technical ability and the necessary access to at least some registrar threads to acquire deleting names. Even if I had the opportunity to purchase access to those threads, how would I get names? Its not like 99% of us have the funds and/or technical know-how to make our own registrar deals, like some.

By your logic, any operational business model involving an exclusive partnership is bad because it precludes all other business models the parties involved could have enacted. This makes little sense. As for the registrars that work for Snap, I somehow doubt they would agree that their resources are being used by Snap to their own detriment. I would bet that the dinky registrars Snap tends to work with for the most part lack the ability/resources/time to do anything themselves with their pool 3 threads.

 

[Cartoonz]

I never said that any business model that uses a registrar's threads was "bad" at all. Please do not put words in my mouth.

The point is that SnapNames is the biggest practitioner of the exact practice that they are rallying against.

In other words, ethical hypocrites.

I love the many different business models that can be formed from the current climate. I will not love it so much if there were only one model to choose from, however, which is what SnapNames wants.

 

[mole]

Originally posted by Cartoonz
I never said that any business model that uses a registrar's threads was "bad" at all. Please do not put words in my mouth.

The point is that SnapNames is the biggest practitioner of the exact practice that they are rallying against.

In other words, ethical hypocrites.

I love the many different business models that can be formed from the current climate. I will not love it so much if there were only one model to choose from, however, which is what SnapNames wants.

Absolute rubbish, sorry Cartoonz. The big difference is this ---

SnapNames opens request to first come first serve to the whole world. That automatically lengthens their que for every registrar under them for every drop, whether they like it or not.

Try direct RRP access, with just 1 name duh. Simple probability mathematics.

hmmm, some people just don't get the meaning of insider trading sigh.

Bring on the WLS! Let the insider traders bleed money to secure trash!

 

[Cartoonz]

if WLS does go through, it is "Game Over" after the first 24 hours for all but the deepest pockets.

Anybody who thinks that WLS will provide "fair and equal access" is a fool.