The Undergraduate.com domain name is in an expired domain name auction at DropCatch.com. This domain name sold publicly two times for around $22,000. Right now, the bidding is at $7,700 with a little more than a day remaining in the auction.
Today’s daily poll asks readers where they think bidding will end this time around for Undergraduate.com:
Uniregistry published a press release this morning calling for a “Domain Name ‘Bill of Rights.'” Here’s an excerpt from the press release:
“Uniregistry, the world-renowned domain name registration company called today for the creation of a domain name “Bill of Rights” to guarantee every domain name owner a formal “due process” when being faced with accusations and demands for censorship.”
I am curious if readers think this ‘Bill of Rights’ is needed. Customers are able to change their domain registrar fairly easily if necessary, although it can be a bit of a hassle. In addition, if several registrars give a domain name the boot, a domain owner can end up spending time and money transferring a domain name until it finds a registrar. From a registrar’s perspective, it might be appealing to have a third party make a ruling about a domain name transfer rather than having to make a potentially inflammatory ruling on its own.
The press release doesn’t really dive into what a ‘Bill of Rights’ for domain names would entail or what body would oversee it.
Do you think it is necessary? Vote in the poll below. If you do think it is necessary, what would you include in it?
On Friday, a blog post I would describe as inflammatory was published on the Verisign corporate blog. One line was particularly bothersome to me, especially given that Verisign has advertised here on DomainInvesting.com and Verisign has sponsored domain investor conferences like NamesCon and today’s NameSummit conference in New York. Here’s what was written:
“Flipping domain names or warehousing them to create scarcity adds nothing to the industry and merely allows those engaged in this questionable practice to enrich themselves at the expense of consumers and businesses.”
Andrew Allemann wrote about Verisign’s blog post, as did Rick Schwartz. There is a thread on NamePros, and a whole lot of comments on Twitter. Domain investors are reacting strongly to it.
I don’t really know what to think. I’ve always thought Verisign was supportive of domain investors. The employees I have met, both via email and in person, have always been helpful and friendly. After reading the blog post, it feels like Verisign is positioning itself to become an adversary to domain investors. I don’t really understand why.
It seems that people are angered and disappointed by the tone and content of the blog post, and I want to know if investors are concerned by it:
Andrew Allemann broke the news that Verisign will be permitted to raise the price of .com domain name registrations in the future. As Andrew wrote, “The deal will allow Verisign to negotiate with ICANN to raise the price of .com by 7% in each of the last four years of each six-year .com contract.”
For people with large domain name portfolios, this could become a substantial hit as prices for renewals and registrations continue to rise. Some people, especially those with smaller portfolios, don’t really care and the price increases will have a negligible impact on their business. Others may even own stock in Verisign, and the company’s stock is already up 23% (over $30/share) on the news.
One potential issue domain registrants face is the potential that domain registrars increase .com pricing by more than the 7% increase by Verisign. I could see a registrar potentially increasing the cost by 10% or even 20% and blaming the registry or even the government because many people might not even calculate the difference in terms of a percentage – and those who do may not even know about this.
I would like to know where readers stand. Do you care that Verisign is permitted to continue increasing price of .com domain names?
Domain buyers often prefer to make an offer or inquiry in “stealth mode.” Sometimes this is because they are buying it on behalf of a large organization, other times it is because they prefer to keep their information private, and other times there may be no real rhyme or reason.
Some domain investors will not respond to a blind inquiry. They insist that a prospective buyer provide their real name and real contact information or they simply won’t respond or engage. They want to know who is inquiring to buy a domain name and would rather risk a potential sale than negotiate without knowing the counterparty.
I am interested in knowing whether readers need to know who is inquiring about a domain name before negotiating with them. I invite your thoughts in the comment section as well:
Domain name sales are pretty much the most important thing for domain investors these days.
While I still do outbound marketing from time to time, I believe I sell more domain names via inbound purchase inquiries than any other way these days. This has changed over the years. In prior years, I might have said that I sell more domain names via auction or via outbound marketing. My business model has evolved.
These days, my sales are probably more diverse than before with outbound sales, inbound sales, and a handful of sales on Afternic. I also sold a few via broker (inbound), too.
If you had to choose one channel, how do you sell more domain names these days in terms of volume vs. value?
