RE: [ga] domain tastinmg comments

[Shane Kinsch <shane.kinsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Karl, et. al,

 

In regards to the real-world example, I missed a zero…  Sorry.      The total 
cost for the trial for sampling 4,500,000 domains in 1 Quarter is:

 

4,500,000 registered for 5 days

80% are dropped leaving 90,000 registered at $6.70

3,600,000 dropped (- 1% given for grace leaving 3,564,000 fined  [I left off a 
zero])

 

Total registration fee: $6.70 x 90,000 domains registered (which are calculated 
to just barely break even or come ahead a bit to cover this fee) is $603,000

 

Total overage fee for dropped domains: 3,564,000 dropped at $0.20/each = 
$712,800 per quarter.

 

Multiply all that by 4 = $2,851,200 in overage FINES per year.

 

Basically, you RISK $2,851,200 in FINES (overage) and $2,412,000 in 
REGISTRATION fees (Verisign).  This is not a difference between the two but out 
of pocket $5,263,200 per year.  Also keep in mind that $2,412,000 in 
registration fees are just barely being covered by your estimates of the number 
of clicks calculated to cover that cost on a yearly basis.  Therefore, you 
break even on the $2,412,000/year.  Wouldn’t it be better to put $5,263,200 
into something that returned at least 7%/year?   Generic Domain tasting never 
really seems feasible on a grand scale unless the names made more than 8% over 
costs, etc. on a yearly basis which leads to the point that they probably will 
drop even more names.

 

In general, you pay a fine of $2,851,200 just to sample 18,000,000 domain names 
in a year and keep only the ones that barely pay for themselves.  That’s not 
good business sense anyway you look at it.  I would estimate a much higher drop 
rate such as 90+%.

 

If ICANN would enact a penalty as such, that anything over a nominal percentage 
is charged $0.20/drop would take care of this and everyone else.  The legit 
registrars are happy and the tasters/kiters will go away.  It’s not feasible 
for them to keep operating.

 

Karl – as far as what you went through, that’s a whole difference scenario and 
Is really a scam in that aspect, but easy to fulfill.  The scammer will just 
search the .org/.net database, index it, and compare any existing registered 
.net/.org domains and register the corresponding .com (as in your case).  Send 
out an automatic email stating that they want to sell you the domain and charge 
you a hideous fee ($295) for the services.  I personally don’t see that as 
‘tasting’ but on the lines of extorting.  Tasting is where the perp samples the 
traffic and keeps it if they see it valuable.  Its one thing whether or not 
they contact you.  If they register and ‘taste’ it vs. register and ‘extort’ it 
are two different birds.

 

Shane

 

 

From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 12:50 AM
To: Shane Kinsch; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ga] domain tastinmg comments

 

Shane and all,

 

  Well sorry to read that you disagree, but not all that unexpected.

Respectively, your two scenario explanation as to why you disagree

are quite irrelevant and do not reflect the current reality of Tasting.

  This said, lets start with your first scenario.  For a taster and it's

registrar of choice, $360.00US is chump change for 1,580 chances

at at least $360.00US or a return for their tasting efforts, and the

registrar looses nothing and gains the registration fees for all of those

1580 domains.  Good deal for the registrar and a far more than

reasonable investment to risk for the registrant/taster.  

 

  Now for your second scenario.  For an investment by the taster of

$71,280.00US in lost return fees the additional cost risk to the taster

is $50.50US for all 3,600,000 dropped domains.  A very small additional

risk vs investment for a chance at 356,000 domains.  Hardly much of a

disincentive.

 

  But this is not the total story, Dominik and Karl Peters both outlined

additional good reasons why Tasting is a bad practice.  I will add that

given the recent increase in Internet traffic congestion, tasting, although

a tiny bit of that congestion is one practice if eliminated all together

would work towards less congestion and thereby better Internet

stability.  Additionally, as many tasted domain names end up being

black listed or RBL'ed anyway simply due to their being tasted, the

waste of Domain Names in this fashion is a terrible cost to consumers

and a headache for systems admins. and network operators, not to mention

creating confusion for users.  Why allow for this intentionally or because

of such a practice such as Tasting? But I can certainly see the financial

benifit for registrars and in turn ICANN itself.  Seems a bit too close

to a pymarid scheme to me



-----Original Message----- 
From: Shane Kinsch 
Sent: Mar 24, 2008 6:57 PM 
To: jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Subject: RE: [ga] domain tastinmg comments 




Wow, I would have to disagree.  Assume the x% is actually 1%.  Let’s do the 
math in this example:

 

Quarterly a Registrar registers: 2,000 new domains.  1% of 2,000 is 20.  So you 
have 20 that are “free” of the $0.20 fee.  Anything more than that you pay 
$0.20 per domain.  To better emphasize what I’m referring to, that previous 
example is of a typical legitimate registrar on the low end of transactions.

 

If you’re in the business of domain tasting / kiting, then your average % of 
drops per registration is going to be very high, possibly around 80% or more, 
but we’ll be conservative.   So back to the original minor example, 80% of 
2,000 is 1,600 dropped, subtract the free 1% or 20 domains, that leaves 1,580 
to be charged the $0.20 fee or $316 USD.

 

Let’s knock this up a little and make this a –real world- example for a typical 
domain tasting Registrar over a period of 1 Qtr in 5 day increments at 250,000 
per period at about 18 periods.  That’s approx 4,500,000 domains registered.  
Drop 80% (conservative, probably more like 87%) and that leaves 90,000 
registered and 3,600,000 dropped.  Give that taster their free 1% drop and that 
brings it to 356,400 domains that will be charged at $0.20 or $71,280 for the 
quarter.  That will deter tasters and kiters especially when they’re just 
trying to break even on the registration cost based on a estimates of clicks 
during a 12 month period.

 

Shane

 

 

** *** ***** ******* *********** *************

Shane T Kinsch

President & CEO

Global Internet

  An ICANN Accredited Registrar

E: ceo@xxxxxx

N: http://www.gi.net

O: 913.871.0454 x803

F: 913.871.0454

M: 816.898.3448

 

 

 

From: jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 6:13 PM
To: Shane Kinsch; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ga] domain tastinmg comments

 

Shane and all,

 

  The $0.20 fee for ever errantly registered Domain name after x% over,

does nothing or any real significance to thwart tasters, and nothing

at all for tasters that use certain means of tasting that beats the 5 day

AGP assinge limit.  But if your willing to live with it as a registrar operator,

that's fine with me it's your nickel and your registrars rep.




-----Original Message----- 
From: Shane Kinsch 
Sent: Mar 24, 2008 9:04 AM 
To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Subject: RE: [ga] domain tastinmg comments 





As a legitimate registrar, we had perps fraudulently register domains that 
we’ve caught within the first few days of registration whether it be caught by 
the credit card company or other indications that the registration is 
suspicious (such as in phishing, etc.).  The grace period is good for this and 
I would much rather pay $0.20  vs. loose the whole registration fee.

 

The solution is simple… if your drop rate is above X%, then you will be charged 
$0.20 for every drop.  That takes care of legitimate registrars like mine and 
the kiters and tasters out there will make it financially infeasible for them 
to continue to operate.

 

Shane

 

** *** ***** ******* *********** *************

Shane T Kinsch, CISSP

  
<file:///C:\Users\Shane%20Kinsch\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Signatures\ginet-spelledout-logo-sm.gif>
 

  an ICANN Accredited Registrar

:: shane.kinsch@xxxxxx

:: wireline@913.871.0454 x803

:: wireless@816.898.3448

:: fax <mailto:faxline@913.871.0454> line@913.871.0454

 

 

From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
chris@xxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 6:53 PM
To: domain-tasting-motion@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: GA
Subject: [ga] domain tastinmg comments

 

Charging 20 cents for dropped names is not going to get rid of the big players 
in the domain tasting and domain kiting game. This just puts out the message 
that it's ok to do domain tasting and kiting as long as ICANN also profits from 
the practice. Elimination of the grace period is the answer to domain tasting 
and kiting.

 

It is very simple to understand for most of us and I find it hard to believe 
claims by ICANN staff and board members that they don't get it. When a user 
subscribes to an ezine or joins a forum, they fill out a form. Then they get an 
email asking them to confirm that they indeed want to join or subscribe. It's 
called double opt-in.

 

Domain names can be registered the same exact way. You fill out the forms to 
register your domain name. You get an email that asks, "Are you sure you want 
to register this domain name?". It adds, please check your spelling and 
everything because by clicking this link you agree that you are registering the 
domain name at a cost of $xx and that there are no refunds.

 

That allows for any mistakes someone made when filling out the registration 
form. It's simple enough for anyone to understand. It gives the registrant a 
chance to change their mind satisfying buyer's remorse. Show me any policy that 
allows five days for buyer's remorse on an item that usually, with the 
exception of a couple of registrars, costs around $10. 

 

In addition to that, for every one domain name that is legitimately dropped 
during the grace period, there are 100,000 dropped by domain kiters and domain 
tasters. The grace period only serves those in the business of domain tasting 
and domain kiting. Pretense that there are other reasons to allow a five day 
grace period is just nonsense.

 

Chris McElroy

_________________________________________

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic 
 <http://www.articlecontentprovider.com/> Need Content or Articles Written for 
you? 
Professional Management for Business Blogs 
<http://www.blogcontentprovider.com/>  
SEO, <http://www.seoserviceprovider.com/>  Content, and Link Building Stategies 
that work 

 

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Phone: 214-244-4827

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Phone: 214-244-4827