For Sale WLS time line

[actnow]

The WLS effect the domains that expire after what date?

For example, if xxx.com expires on 11-1-03 would that domain be under WLS?

Or, is it some date in the future like 1-1-04?

 

[mole]

Dunno man. But as a rule of thumb, anything that is scheduled to expire from NOW (give and take a month) will be into the WLS cycle. :-#

 

[actnow]

I have to believe that someone on DNF has an idea when it will begin, if it begins.

I believe Domain Retriever implied that it would be in January?

 

[Luc]

Originally posted by actnow
I have to believe that someone on DNF has an idea when it will begin, if it begins.

I believe Domain Retriever implied that it would be in January?

When I said January, I meant that those people who have not
prepared for WLS by the start date, will have realized that the
game is over for them and they'll be looking for new things to
do by Jan.

Luc L.

 

[mole]

Originally posted by DomainRetriever


When I said January, I meant that those people who have not
prepared for WLS by the start date, will have realized that the
game is over for them and they'll be looking for new things to
do by Jan.

I agree. WLS represents a fast and instant death to the best names and if you haven't already grabbed them the moment WLS launches, you can settle back and try to pick out the crappy ones.

There is of course the always present option, just try to buy it from the domain owner, provided the contact email hasn't been disconnected yet.

 

[Beachie]

Does anyone know exactly what a WLS will cost? I remember a figure of $25 being mentioned, but what will registrars charge?

Just curiously, someone also mentioned a "human authentication" method to prevent mass registration. Will this be registry-based, or up to the registrar to implement? If the latter, the big players will bypass it easily using 'friendly' registrars. If the former, they will probably hire Pakistanis at $2 per hour.. Either way..

 

[Steen]

I thought WLS was going to start the week of oct 21-17 :huh:

 

[Steen]

But if snapnames and VS do not succesfully get all the Snapnames names into WLS form (I bet VS and SN's parterships wil make it an unfair compitition) the landrush could be fruitful for us, but in the long term not good.

 

[radioz]

Isn't the start date October 27?? I gather that if the domain hasn't entered the redemption period by Sept. 2 that it will be a WLS drop. That date was from a Domain Guru e-mail that came yesterday. Unless a lawsuit causes a delay; I guess that's it.

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by radioz
Isn't the start date October 27?? I gather that if the domain hasn't entered the redemption period by Sept. 2 that it will be a WLS drop. That date was from a Domain Guru e-mail that came yesterday. Unless a lawsuit causes a delay; I guess that's it.

You must have missed the thread with the link to the ICANN letter to Verisign telling them they were misleading the public by telling people WLS would roll out next month. ICANN said there are many details for WLS that have not even been finalized yet. So when and if WLS will roll out remains unknown. Here is the link to the ICANN letter:

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/twomey-letter-to-gomes-04sep03.htm

 

[URLCollection]

Originally posted by Duke


Youy must have missed the thread with the link to the ICANN letter to Verisign telling them they were misleading the public by telling people WLS would roll out next month. ICANN said there are many details for WLS that have not even been finalized yet. So when and if WLS will roll out remains unknown. Here is the link to the ICANN letter:

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/twomey-letter-to-gomes-04sep03.htm

Looks like they have a few details to work out Duke... I like this one - As that is not currently the case with the WLS program that is live and taking reservations right now -

A blackout period during which no registrar will be allowed to place a WLS subscription on a domain name for a period commencing 10 days prior to the scheduled expiration date for such domain name, and continuing for the duration of the auto-renew grace period lasting up to 45 days following the scheduled expiration date.

 

[Duke]

That's one reason I haven't gone near Verisign's pre-reg program. There are so many unanwered questions, details to be worked out, legal clouds overhanging (and distrust of Verisign to begin with) that you would have no idea what it is you are really buying or getting yourself into.

The fact that ICANN is openly accusing them of misleading the public about WLS should make one pause to consider if this is really a company you want to give your money to (and grant a new monopoly to, especially after the way they handled their last run as a monopolist).

 

[Honan]

Originally posted by Beachie
Does anyone know exactly what a WLS will cost? I remember a figure of $25 being mentioned, but what will registrars charge?

..

$39?
https://www.nextregistrationrights.com/backorder.sn?aff=79

 

[URLCollection]

Originally posted by Duke
That's one reason I haven't gone near Verisign's pre-reg program. There are so many unanwered questions, details to be worked out, legal clouds overhanging (and distrust of Verisign to begin with) that you would have no idea what it is you are really buying or getting yourself into.

The fact that ICANN is openly accusing them of misleading the public about WLS should make one pause to consider if this is really a company they want to give your money to (and grant a new monopoly to, especially after the way they handled their last run as a monopolist).

Well Duke you summed it up again, just perfect!!! Amazing - "The fact that ICANN is openly accusing them of misleading the public about WLS should make one pause to consider if this is really a company they want to give your money to".

 

[mole]

Originally posted by URLCollection
- "The fact that ICANN is openly accusing them of misleading the public about WLS should make one pause to consider if this is really a company they want to give your money to".

uhh, I'm going for the name, the company is an inconsequential means to an end.

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by DNMole

uhh, I'm going for the name, the company is an inconsequential means to an end.

If a company has a record of price gouging, poor service and deceit I would say that is hardly inconsequential to any customer. Before giving such a company my money I think it might be helpful to know if they were actually going to be able to deliver what they promise. ICANN says they very well may NOT deliver what they are promising because the details of the product haven't even been decided yet.

Your argument is like telling stock market investors that it doesn't matter if they invest in Enron because after all "they are going for stock so the company is an inconsequential means to an end".

 

[mole]

Well, a lot of people made money on Enron stocks before the collapse. :-D

Verisign is after all the registry for .COM and .NET. If you don't trust them, might as well ditch all your .com/.net domains and convert to .INFO and .BIZ.

But wait, wasn't .INFO and .BIZ fraught with scams too? Most times, its the registrars you need to look out for to avoid being scammed, and its not just Netsol.:-#

 

[actnow]

If I was a member of Icann's board and I was "sitting on the fence". I would propose (only if they were going ahead with it) to test the system on .com or .net. With the proposal that they would roll out the second TLD at a later date.

Large corporations and organizations do not make major changes like this without testing. So, Icann should be pushing Verisign to test. But, Verisign wants it all. Because, it would be extremely difficult to turn back once WLS is initiated.

Do the older members remember when Coke changed the formula and taste of the original Coca Cola? And, they found out that the consumer did not want a change. It cost them alot of money and marketshare for years. Coke will NEVER do that again without extensive testing.

Steve, you remember this! Was it Satchie?

 

[URLCollection]

Originally posted by actnow
If I was a member of Icann's board and I was "sitting on the fence". I would propose (only if they were going ahead with it) to test the system on .com or .net. With the proposal that they would roll out the second TLD at a later date.

Large corporations and organizations do not make major changes like this without testing. So, Icann should be pushing Verisign to test. But, Verisign wants it all. Because, it would be extremely difficult to turn back once WLS is initiated.

Do the older members remember when Coke changed the formula and taste of the original Coca Cola? And, they found out that the consumer did not want a change. It cost them alot of money and marketshare for years. Coke will NEVER do that again without extensive testing.

Steve, you remember this! Was it Satchie?

Yes I think it was Satchie that was handling it at that time. Major mistake, many ad folks got the can on that one!! Think they changed agencies for all placements after that. Huge loss for both companies. Testing is necessary on any major roll-out and it does not appear that Verisign has performed any yet. Public opinion polls are also a method that I am sure they have not executed, either. Plus a great deal of PR work surely is needed to pull this one off.

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by actnow
If I was a member of Icann's board and I was "sitting on the fence". I would propose (only if they were going ahead with it) to test the system on .com or .net. With the proposal that they would roll out the second TLD at a later date.

I think that is a great idea Richard. I would like to see them start with .CC! :-D