[CPWG] [registration-issues-wg] [GTLD-WG] Verisign Dissing Domainers?

[Carlton Samuels]

Always a thinking fella, Evan. Grist for the mill.

CAS

On Fri, 2 Nov 2018, 11:20 pm Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org wrote:

> On one hand, I am delighted to see such an acknowledgement of reality.
> The use of the term "scalpers", while incendiary to some, is revealing in
> its candor and maybe its intent.
> However I agree that such an opinion is not made lightly, and is unlikely
> for pure public-service reasons.
>
> So... why?
>
> Recently, a CBC investigation of Ticketmaster
> <https://www.npr.org/2018/09/20/649666928/ticketmaster-has-its-own-secret-scalping-program-canadian-journalists-report>
> revealed that the company encourages the hoarding and scalping of tickets
> to popular events, and itself profits from the activity by getting revenue
> from the scalped tickets well over and above the original selling prices.
>
> I see one of two possible related scenarios, both of which are plausible
> though could be wildly incorrect:
>
>    1. Verisign is setting the stage to get a piece of the scalpers'
>    action. It has watched as other TLDs roll out "premium" domains and wants
>    to itself profit from domain sales that are inflated well past original
>    value. It wants what Ticketmaster can do. While a scalper's revenue is a
>    one-time sale per domain, premium domains may be perceived as a
>    sustained-revenue path that allows Verisign to exploit a dominance in TLD
>    space that really hasn't been challenged by the swarms of now registries.
>
>    2. Verisign may suspect that regulatory reaction (of the governmental
>    kind) against Ticketmaster may bleed into TLD space. There are so many,
>    many similarities between ticket scalping and domaining which is why its
>    use of the term in the blog is so apt. This might be a move to forestall
>    state intervention by indicating that Verisign will be proactive in
>    reducing scalping on its own. The revenue hit may be offset by the good PR
>    and reduced threat of governmental interference.
>
> Cheers,
> Evan
>
>
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 at 21:46, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> The RAA has always had a provision allowing ICANN to have a Consensus
>> Policy prohibiting reistrars from warehousing or speculation. We have never
>> taken action on this and I cannot see the GNSO ever doing so.
>>
>> The Verisign blog is interesting. Rare that a large company publicly
>> disses its largest customers.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>> At 02/11/2018 03:43 PM, Greg Shatan wrote:
>>
>> This post is actually taking aim primarily at REGISTRARS who buy huge
>> numbers of .com domains at wholesale ($7.85 per domain) and then hold them,
>> in order to try and sell them later for a premium price. That’s not
>> really dissing domainers in the general sense, just these
>> registrar-domainers.
>>
>> The writing is a bit sloppy on this point, and the blog pivots to ICA
>> toward the end, but even there, the focus is on the registrar-domainers,
>> not on the general domaining public. Look again at the post, and you will
>> see references to “speculators†who buy at a “regulated price.â€
>> That’s the Verisign price they are talking about. Regular registrants
>> don’t have that opportunity — onlly registrars. The “Domainer Name
>> Wire†article largely misses this point — partly because the post is vague
>> and partly becausse of a tendency to “rush to judgment†in the domaining
>> press.
>>
>> As Jonathan notes, ICA argues it’s protecting the little guy, when they
>> are actually providing loads of protection for some very “big guyâ€
>> registrar-domainers.
>>
>> While this is not “insider trading,†it is really a form of diversion
>> based on insider access — the registrars abuse their privileged position to
>> bbuy cheap and to buy before any “regular†registrant (even a domainer)
>> can, and then they hold this portfolio and charge secondary-market prices
>> for domains that are not really in the secondary market. Registrars’
>> unique ability to buy domain names directly from the registries was never
>> meant to produce this result. This is a bug, not a feature. The end user
>> domainers should really be pissed off at the registrar-domainers, not at
>> Verisign. (Of course, they are permanently pissed off at Verisign,
>> especially with a price increase in their “commodity.†)
>>
>> Maybe registrars should be prohibited from buying for their own account
>> for investment purposes. GoDaddy apparently has 2.5 billion reasons to
>> oppose that idea.
>>
>> I don’t know if I would call them scalpers (though it’s a fair
>> comparison). I see domainers more like the folks in Boston who get up in
>> the morning, sit down in a lawn chair in a prime parking spot near the
>> Fenway Park baseball stadium, and then sit there until game time
>> approaches. Then they charge you $20 or more to get out of the way so you
>> can park there. This is not entirely accurate either since this is a lot
>> more work than a domainer would put in (at least for a single domain name.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 3:10 PM Jonathan Zuck <
>> JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org> wrote: We'll, it's not particularly easy to
>> take them back. Blog raises some good points about where the money goes.
>> The ICA rhetoric about small business is pretty silly.
>> Jonathan Zuck Executive Director Innovators Network Foundation
>> www.Innovatorsnetwork.org
>> ------------------------------
>> From: GTLD-WG < gtld-wg-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of
>> Carlton Samuels < carlton.samuels at gmail.com> Sent: Friday, November 2,
>> 2018 2:59:12 PM To: cpwg at icann.org;
>> lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [GTLD-WG] [CPWG]
>> Verisign Dissing Domainers?   Um,.......hmmmm, a flag up the pole to see
>> who salute you think?
>> Assuming the posting it is sanctioned as official view, what is the end
>> game here? Afterall, they are gifted ownership of every name, known and
>> hitherto unknown, in the .com space! The domainers merely 'rent' them!
>>
>> Hmmm....we have a saying in my corner of empire, 'one hand alone can't
>> clap'. Gotta follow the money.
>>
>>
>> https://domainnamewire.com/2018/11/02/holy-sht-verisign-just-called-out-domain-scalpers-and-its-biggest-customers/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy,
>> Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround =============================
>> _______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list
>> CPWG at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________
>> registration-issues-wg mailing list
>> registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CPWG mailing list
>> CPWG at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> registration-issues-wg mailing list
>> registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CPWG mailing list
>> CPWG at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>> _______________________________________________
>> GTLD-WG mailing list
>> GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
>>
>> Working Group direct URL:
>> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
>
>
>
> --
> Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
> @evanleibovitch or @el56
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
> _______________________________________________
> registration-issues-wg mailing list
> registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20181103/d332d4bb/attachment-0001.html>