Re: [ga] keeping expired domains by a registrar

["Prophet Partners Inc." <Domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Chris,

By human nature, everyone is out to promote their own best interest. We
neither deny that we operate a business to make money nor the right for
others to do the same. However, we emphasize that we believe in doing so
ethically and fairly, without participating in domain tasting or abusive
trademark registrations.
http://www.nic.us/policies/docs/aaa/Award_49_413_1_06.pdf

While it is certainly possible to prevent automatic scripts from registering
domains, what makes you think that an ordinary registrant is going to have a
chance against several thousand knowledgeable domainers trying to manually
register valuable domains that are being deleted on a daily basis? What's to
stop a domainer from hiring 100 part time workers for an hour each day to
manually register valuable deleted domains to increase their chances of
success? Using Wall Street as an example, do you think that eliminating
automated program trading is going to actually benefit individual investors?

In our reply to Joop yesterday, we pointed out that there are real-world
consequences of action/inaction. Registrants have months of notice to renew
before expiration, in addition to extra time after expiration during the
grace period. Barring extraordinary circumstances such as the Registerfly
meltdown which involves alleged fraud, registrants should have to face the
consequences. If someone lost their job, had medical problems or got
divorced and couldn't pay their mortgage, what do you think the bank is
going to do?

The redistribution of expired domains is fair and equitable, as they go to
the person/entity willing to pay the most for them, at a particular point in
time. In the capital markets, orders are given priority based on price and
secondly on time. This is the basis for capitalism and represents an
efficient marketplace. Given a point in time, if Person A wants to buy XYZ
stock at $10 and Person B wants to pay the fair market price of $100 for
XYZ, should XYZ shares be sold to Person A or Person B? The same situation
applies to expired domains. Why should Person A be given the opportunity to
buy at $10 (with lower monetary risk) over Person B who is willing to pay
more money at $100 (with higher monetary risk) at that point in time? As
mentioned earlier, there is nothing to prevent an ordinary registrant from
buying or bidding on an expired domain, provided they are willing to pay the
price. Note that this argument is in favor of the registrars, who would
pocket the money and not from us as the customer, who would be paying the
money.

Contrary to your belief, we neither have an interest in suppressing your
opinions nor that of anyone else. Although we greatly respect your
contribution to this list, we believe that your opinions on this matter are
based on a socialist ideal and not rooted in economic reality. We have
presented valid points that address your concerns and would be interested in
hearing your feedback as well as others on the GA list.

Sincerely,
Ted
Prophet Partners Inc.
http://www.ProphetPartners.com
http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Prophet Partners Inc." <Domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
<ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 9:05 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] keeping expired domains by a registrar


> I expect everyone involved in making money on this to have the same
opinion
> Ted.
>
> Again, scripts can be written to register expired names and yes it has
been
> around for years. As early as 1995. I was in the domain speculation
business
> in 1995 and know about these scripts intimately. However, for every script
> that can be written to do this, one can be written to counter it. it could
> be made impossible to register the expired names by script. Registrars
have
> not found it to be profitable to do so is the only reason it has not been
> done.
>
> Domainers are a large part of a registrars income so they tailor things to
> suit the largest customers they have. Normal business practice but still
not
> what is best for the web overall in my honest opinion. You are of cours4e
> welcome to disagree and if I was in the business still, I might have been
> right there alongside you, who knows. Right now, as a member of a list,
who
> is supposed to try to represent the most users, not those who own the most
> domain names, I believe the process has gone on long enough and that it's
> time that the situation was corrected.
>
> Not idealistic at all to try and represent the best interest of users
> instead of my own interests Ted. I respect that you want your view
> represented and wish all other views to be called optimistic in hopes they
> will be ignored. Everyone's view here is valid. That's the beauty of it.
>
> Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
> http://www.articlecontentprovider.com
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Prophet Partners Inc." <Domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 10:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [ga] keeping expired domains by a registrar
>
>
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > Your thoughts on this are idealistic, not realistic. The reality is that
> > expiring domains are still available on a first-come first-serve basis.
> > The
> > domain auctions through registrars such as Network Solutions are open to
> > the
> > public and there is nothing to prevent anyone from participating,
provided
> > they are willing to pay the price. Given that drop catching has been
> > automated via scripts for several years already, what makes you think
that
> > allowing domains to drop via the normal deletion cycle would offer any
> > advantage to the normal registrant? If the registrars didn't auction the
> > domains, then companies like SnapNames or Pool would, upon immediately
> > registering the domain after Pending Delete.
> >
> > Expired domains are essentially abandoned property. If you fail to pay
the
> > mortgage, your home gets foreclosed and is auctioned off to someone
else.
> > In
> > the real world, lotteries only exist for undeveloped public land, not
for
> > formerly private property. IMO, the current environment for expiring
> > domains
> > represents a healthy and competitive market.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Ted
> > Prophet Partners Inc.
> > http://www.ProphetPartners.com
> > http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "Nevett, Jonathon" <jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Gomes, Chuck"
> > <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>; "Bashar
> > Al-Abdulhadi" <bashar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 12:29 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ga] keeping expired domains by a registrar
> >
> >
> >> I see the justification used here for auctioning names off after
> > expiration,
> >> but it defeats the first-come first-serve nature of domain names and
how
> >> they should be distributed. If a domain name expires, it should go back
> > into
> >> the pool so that anyone can register the name at normal registration
> > prices
> >> period. There really is no justification, other than greed by
registrars
> > who
> >> control these names for holding auctions, using them in parking
schemes,
> > and
> >> making deals with domainers to use them for profit they in turn share
> >> with
> >> the registrar.
> >>
> >> Justification comes easy when it's something that makes you money.
> >> However
> >> it denies users the right to register a name after it has dropped into
> >> the
> >> pool.
> >>
> >> Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
> >> http://www.articlecontentprovider.com
> >
>
>
>
>