[gnso-rpm-wg] Quantifying the extent of Sunrise registrations, Costs and Challenges

Fri Aug 11 19:32:29 UTC 2017

Building on Georges and Cynthia's very insightful analysis, please see this
staff report on RPMs and the utilization of Sunrise in new gTLDs at:

https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/reviews/rpm/draft-rpm-review-02feb15-en.pdf

Some key take-aways of interest:

Between Dec 13 to Dec 2014, there were 33,008 Sunrise transactions.

>From my perspective, the fact these Sunrise registrations are spread over
hundreds of gTLDs, may reflect less profit per registry, but does not
change the net costs associated with the utilization of this RPM. In fact,
since we do not know the price per Sunrise registration, the total costs
are unknown (although can be estimated to some extent).

Note: this figure does not incorporate the costs associated with the
voluntary blocking services purchased during this same 12 month period.

As far as I am aware, this figure of over 30,000 domains represents one of
the largest number of Sunrise registrations in gTLDs over a 12 month
period, going back to 2001 (.info - 52,000).

For context, in 2006, .mobi had around 15,000 (50% less than the 2014
totals). In 2008, .asia processed somewhere between 27,000-31,000 domains
(their website references Sunrise 'applications' not registrations). In
2011, .XXX collected an estimated $13M for 80,000 blocks, but these are
more akin to the DPML or the related blocking services.

As an aside, from other sources (not the staff report), .porn and .adult
totaled around 8,000 Sunrise registrations (in 2015), along with .sucks
getting over 3,000 - making 2015 a banner year for Sunrise fees.

The staff report also highlights various challenges faced by TM owners
during Sunrise, including some that hinder the utilization rate, including:

1. The difficulty associated with identifying an eligible registrar for a
particular TLD, suggesting that registries provide a list of accredited
registrars on their websites.

2. Pricing being too expensive, including Premium Names. Suggestion for
registries to publish list of premium names on its website.

3. SLD Block lists (associated with the name collision issue). One
registrar informed the TM owner that 35 names were unavailable for
registration.

I hope you find this information helpful, and please let me know of any
questions/comments.

Have a nice weekend.

Best,
Claudio

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:47 PM Cyntia King <cking at modernip.com> wrote:

> Hi George,
>
>
>
> Thoughts:
>
>    - It makes sense the vast majority of nTLDs have low/no sunrise
>    registrations as they’re uptake has been low.
>       - 64% of nTLDs have less than 1,000 registered domains
>       - 85% have fewer than 10K registrations
>    - All nTLDs are not created equal. It’s no surprise nTLDs that are
>    expensive, have limited applicability, and/or are similar to other
>    extensions see fewer Sunrise registrations.
>    - Sunrise registrations are affected by many factors in consideration
>    by registrants at any given moment (the economy, cash-on-hand, marketing
>    plans, life of the brand, etc.).
>
>
>
> In other words, just because we don’t see Sunrise registrations booming
> across all nTLDs doesn’t mean it isn’t a valuable tool where it is
> applicable.  It’s rather like a product warranty: you may decide to cover
> everything, only what you can easily afford, or to skip it altogether.  The
> fact that many people opt out of the warranty doesn’t invalidate the
> concept.
>
>
>
> Sunrise is relatively simple and provides a reasonably effective initial
> bar to bad behavior.
>
> Rather than eliminating a feature that is often useful as a first measure
> of protection & not overly-burdensome, we should tweak Sunrise & move on.
>
>
>
>
>
> O:  +1 81-ModernIP
>
> C:  +1 818.209.6088
>
> [image: MIP Composite (Email)]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rpm-wg-bounces at icann.org]
> On Behalf Of George Kirikos
> Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 12:44 PM
> To: claudio di gangi <ipcdigangi at gmail.com>
> Cc: gnso-rpm-wg <gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [gnso-rpm-wg] 99%+ reduction in sunrise utilization rate per
> TLD supports EFF call for elimination of sunrise
>
>
>
> Claudio:
>
>
>
> Costs of a sunrise also scale as you increase the number of gTLDs. Are new
> gTLD registries paying on a per domain name (variable cost per domain name)
> only? Or are there fixed costs too? Are sunrise periods (which delay launch
> of GA) shorter, if there are more TLDs? Or are they fixed in length? Are
> there equal amounts of "good" domain names in those new gTLDs, or are the
> gamed sunrise domains representing a higher proportion of the "good" ones,
> as one scales?
>
>
>
> If 1,000,000 new gTLDs are launched, clearly any sunrise period is
> *pointless*, as TM holders are going to focus nearly entirely on *curative
> rights.* That was my point --- they're *already* doing that, shifting to
> curative rights, by decreasing their usage of sunrise periods. Thus, the
> costs of eliminating sunrise period are lower, because of that reduced
> usage (or, in other words, the benefits of retaining that sunrise period
> are low).
>
>
>
> That's why it's time to sunset/eliminate the sunrise period mandate -- it
> outlived its usefulness as a tool, as the numbers show. It's only there to
> "shear the sheep", so to speak (i.e. soak TM holders who are highly risk
> averse, and don't know any better; i.e. bad insurance, like the folks who
> buy those electronics "Extended Warranties").
>
>
>
> As for those 1,000,000 new gTLDs, realize that if sunrise was eliminated,
> there'd also be 1,000,000 landrushes --- any brandholder that had coveted a
> name could still get it, on an equal playing field with everyone else,
> instead of jumping ahead of the line.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> George Kirikos
>
> 416-588-0269
>
> http://www.leap.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 1:24 PM, claudio di gangi <ipcdigangi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > George,
>
> >
>
> > I'm going to use an extreme example to illustrate my point.
>
> >
>
> > If 1,000,000 new gTLDs are launched in the next round, how many
>
> > Sunrise registrations do think there should be order to reach the
> "success"
>
> > threshold?
>
> >
>
> > Best,
>
> > Claudio
>
> >
>
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:50 PM George Kirikos <icann at leap.com> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> Hi again,
>
> >>
>
> >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:44 PM, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> >with stats propped up with high counts of sub-$1  registrations, or
>
> >> >even domains that are stuffed into the accounts of  registrants of
>
> >> >other TLDs (e.g. .xxx with NSI, or .kiwi).
>
> >>
>
> >> Sorry, that was a typo. It should have been .XYZ with NSI, of course,
>
> >> not .XXX, e.g.
>
> >>
>
> >> http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2014/dailyposts/20140605.htm
>
> >>
>
> >> Sincerely,
>
> >>
>
> >> George Kirikos
>
> >> 416-588-0269
>
> >> http://www.leap.com/
>
> >> _______________________________________________
>
> >> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>
> >> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
>
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
> _______________________________________________
> gnso-rpm-wg mailing list
> gnso-rpm-wg at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170811/4687f1d7/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 5425 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-wg/attachments/20170811/4687f1d7/image001-0001.png>