For Sale Verisign to auction domin names: WLS to be approved

Hi all

Does anyone know if there's a tentative start date for WLS, and will each WLS position be on an annual subscription basis, like SnapBack?

Thanks!
sas386

 

It will certainly be after the June ICANN meeting, and yes, the WLS proposal is for an annual WLS fee that you'll pay for the domain you want to "Wait" for. If the domain does not drop, you lose your money and have to pay to wait again next year...

-t

 

[domaingator]

RacerX and Grabby have it exactly right. WLS will be the fairest way to go. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a selfish idiot.

 

The fairest way to go would have be a randomized issuing (rather than first come first served) with WLS fees being due only on successful allocation of the domain name.

As it stands, the WLS will give an unparalleled window of opportunity to those who can afford it - locking out good domain names from the masses for a minimum of 12 months.

Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't appreciate the preparations that have been made by the bigger players.

 

[mole]

Originally posted by safesys
The fairest way to go would have be a randomized issuing (rather than first come first served) with WLS fees being due only on successful allocation of the domain name.

That is a good suggestion. I think Netsol will be silly to turn that down, since they, as well as the registrars, can charge "processing fees" to increase the revenue for this scheme.

 

[beatz]

Fair?!
This is what is going to happen:
The big players will buy subscriptions for the best 10000 names in the first minute on day one of the WLS,including sex.com down to middleclass names.They will keep those forever or auction the subscriptions for a higher price.
And you think it's fair?!
It's so obvious that right after THE FIRST DAY everything is over.

 

Yep, to compete you'll need to be able to outlay 3-4 months worth of drop registrations in one go (and at 4 times the normal reg fee). Of course, this will be less of a burden to those people used to spending large sums with registrars already compared to the poorer players or those that normally look to register and turnaround quickly on ebay etc.

People who think this won't happen really don't understand it - most mid-higher level players will have to register hundreds (if not thousands) of WLS subs just to maintain their normal growth curves. Multiply that out by the number of players, then throw in the lower rung registrants and you have a sewn up drop market within minutes.

It'll be an absolute cash cow for the registrars involved and, of course, VGRS.

 

[MillerTyme]

Hmm, I dont believe most people here are aware that names that currently have snapbacks on them and any names that have snapbacks put on them between now and the start day of WLS, will not be transferred over to WLS (grandfathered in) NOR will anyone be able to put a subscription on names that have a snapback UNTIL the snapback subscription runs out.

<<<<< mason cole:
A clarification: Please note that SnapBack customers will not be brought
> along, as is mentioned here. Under VeriSign's proposal, names for which
> there exist SnapBacks will not be allowed into the WLS system. All must
> compete over those names as they do today. Thus is "grandfathering" an
> unfortunate misnomer. And, as you mention, SnapBacks remain SnapBacks
> post-WLS. What would constitute tortious interference would be to allow
WLS
> orders on those names for which there are currently paid-up contracts
> (SnapBack orders) on specific names.>>>>>>>>.

 

[Cartoonz]

the latest proposal by Verisign does no such thing.

Snapbacks will not be recognized in any fashion by WLS.

 

[hiOsilver]

Cartoonz, could you please post a link to the latest proposal or something else which does indicate what is to be done with Snapbacks under WLS?

If WLS is implemented with no grandfathering of Snapbacks, then Snapbacks would become nearly worthless. It would seem that Verisign could take care of the concerns about favoritism towards Snapnames by other methods than making Snapbacks instantly worthless. I could see Snapnames having to pay some large refunds to holders of Snapbacks.

 

[bigdave]

go here (http://www.snapnames.com/wls.html), click on part II, and the discussion starts on page 14. Apparently as far as I can figure, a domain name with a snap on it cannot be part of the WLS until the snap expires.

The discussion ludicrously concludes that otherwise, the snap holder could sue everybody in sight including ICANN. If ICANN cannot approve or disapprove WLS, how can they be sued?

Their argument is that snap holders have paid contracts. I have a paid expirefishline contract, but again that doesn't matter to VeriSnap. Yeah, I know expirefishline isn't much good, but I'm a newbie so whaddyaexpect?

Besides, don't forget that the WLS is using **valuable SnapNames technology**!! (Whew, almost choked on that one.)

BD

 

[bigdave]

Originally posted by safesys
As it stands, the WLS will give an unparalleled window of opportunity to those who can afford it - locking out good domain names from the masses for a minimum of 12 months.

Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't appreciate the preparations that have been made by the bigger players.

Can you imagine the pounding that the WLS registry will take in its first hour of operation? It will make those major Verisign drop days of last year seem like a stroll in the park by comparison.

Maybe that's why the WLS will cost so much - it has to be built to take an enormous one-time assault. You know that buydomains et al have to be getting ready to wail on the WLS at startup.

Of course a WLS lottery to allow us ordinary Joes (or Daves to compete for good names is out of the question...

BD

 

[Drewbert]

>Besides, don't forget that the WLS is using **valuable SnapNames technology*
>*!! (Whew, almost choked on that one.)

Yeah. Hilarious isn't it. THey think they have something special, because noone else who has the same sorts of system wants to talk to them.

I've never been able to find the alleged Snapnames patent at the USPTO - anyone else had any success?

 

http://tess.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=1vir2t.5.1

 

Originally posted by bigdave
Of course a WLS lottery to allow us ordinary Joes (or Daves to compete for good names is out of the question...

Access to the WLS will only be through ICANN accredited registrars - no different than access to the RRP today. It will probably be implemented as additional calls to the RRP.

You'll be going through a "reseller" program to put in your bid - and these guys are going to have the same competition that they have today for dropped names; it will just occur at a different time in the domain lifecycle.

You lose.

-t

 

[bigdave]

Originally posted by thewitt
You lose.

-t

New system, same outcome! :sad:

The startup of the WLS should be more fun to watch than a Cyberwings thread...

Cheers,
BD

 

[mole]

Originally posted by bigdave


New system, same outcome! :sad:

New system, new outcome. A lot of people have much to lose if WLS comes on board.

 

[morel]

I am not convinced by the arguments against the WLS on this forum. Why? I will try to give one argument in simple language:

Under the WLS, it is first come, first serve. First come, first serve is fair. Will the big players come first? On the best domains, yes, of course they will. Good for them!! Is the current system first come, first serve? No! Why not? Because you can be the first person to locate an expiring domain, put a Snap on it (or something else), and STILL lose. BuyDomains, who came in AFTER you, will (probably) get the domain because of their special agreements with the registrars. So the system will be transformed, by the WLS, from one that is not first come, first serve to one that is first come, first serve. First come, first serve is more equitable.

-----------------------------------------

To recapitulate, here are my assumptions:

#1 - A system that is first come, first serve is fair.

#2 - A system that is NOT first come, first serve is NOT fair.
(Note that #2 does not follow logically from #1)

#3 - The current system is not first come first serve. Why do I make this assumption? Because I can be the first person to spot that asdfasdf.com will expire, yet I still will not necessarily get it.

#4 - The WLS is first come, first serve. Why do I make this assumption? Because if you are the first to get on the WLS registry, you will get the name if it expires.

#5 - The quality of "fairness" is the most important characteristic in picking a system.

From these assumptions, it follows logically that the WLS should be picked.

-----------------------------------------

P.S
If you are going to argue against me, and I know some will want to, I would rather that you do so in an intelligent, adult-like manner. So don't simply say "dmorel, you are a moron", but say instead I don't agree on assumption #5 (for example).

 

[David G]

Originally posted by dmorel
I am not convinced by the arguments against the WLS on this forum. Why? I will try to give one argument in simple language:

Under the WLS, it is first come, first serve. First come, first serve is fair. Will the big players come first? On the best domains, yes, of course they will. Good for them!! Is the current system first come, first serve? No! Why not? Because you can be the first person to locate an expiring domain, put a Snap on it (or something else), and STILL lose. BuyDomains, who came in AFTER you, will (probably) get the domain because of their special agreements with the registrars. So the system will be transformed, by the WLS, from one that is not first come, first serve to one that is first come, first serve. First come, first serve is more equitable.

-----------------------------------------

To recapitulate, here are my assumptions:

#1 - A system that is first come, first serve is fair.

#2 - A system that is NOT first come, first serve is NOT fair.
(Note that #2 does not follow logically from #1)

#3 - The current system is not first come first serve. Why do I make this assumption? Because I can be the first person to spot that asdfasdf.com will expire, yet I still will not necessarily get it.

#4 - The WLS is first come, first serve. Why do I make this assumption? Because if you are the first to get on the WLS registry, you will get the name if it expires.

#5 - The quality of "fairness" is the most important characteristic in picking a system.

From these assumptions, it follows logically that the WLS should be picked.

-----------------------------------------

P.S
If you are going to argue against me, and I know some will want to, I would rather that you do so in an intelligent, adult-like manner. So don't simply say "dmorel, you are a moron", but say instead I don't agree on assumption #5 (for example).

Agree 100% - bring on the WLS.

People who are against it seem to be not thinking straight, especially since it's doubtful big players like BuyDomains will participate much due to the large prepaid capital involved, something they now can do basically free but no more with WLS which should level the playing field

Did anyone see the post here about their owner Michael Mann posting heavily against WLS on another forrum? It would seem he would only post against it if it will be negative to him getting the names? Right?

 

On what basis do you assume the big players won't participate?

They are the very people WITH the capital needed to play on a grand scale.

It still amazes me that people think the WLS will level anything.

The WLS will increase the costs of the bigger players, but that doesn't mean they will walk away and start flipping burgers.