The cost of a .com domain name is expected to rise by at least 31 per cent over the next six years, due to new price-increasing powers granted to registry operator Verisign by industry overseer ICANN. ICANN last night published a proposed draft of a new .com Registry Agreement, which it had negotiated privately with Verisign …
The free market; we've heard of it!
Monopolies are what everyone really wants though... or at least, everyone who actually matters. Why is it that farming this sort of thing out to the evil Communists in China would give everyone a better deal, and leaving it in the hands of the democratic freedom-loving USA leaves us with what is effectively a state-sponsored monopoly granting magic money making powers to another state-sponsored monopoly?
Re: Ahh, capitalism.
Because the Chinese it wouldn't be able to enforce the same level of control over online gambling, pornography and other naughty stuff on the internet that the US can.
Its just business Jim, but not as we know it.
The first rule of business is that you don't talk about the nature of business.
<-- Paris, probably smart, pretending to be dumb so they people give her money.
Is ICANN a for-profit business?
I am wondering where all the money goes. We need some oversight with teeth, and fast.
Not like I'll ever buy a dotcom.
So is it only .com then, or are there plans to do likewise with other 'generic' TLDs?
All my domains are .net, so I'm hoping there won't be ''mission creep" here.
Things are not quite what you think
It's worth noting that .org, .net, etc are not generic but US property even if they are just as liberally marketed. The second round (.biz, .info, etc) are more competitive and generally cheaper but also just a bit shit. I can't remember the term but it's an example of perceived value skewing the market. .com isn't different than any other TLD but is somehow more desirable.
Re: Things are not quite what you think
Indeed. Hence why I'll not buy one, thanks.
If I end up with a wildly popular web site, it'll be because it's a popular website, not because it has ".com" on the end of it. The squatters can have .com, they'll only get the fools who don't know how to type ".co.uk" into an address bar, and I'm not interested in them.
I know someone with a .co.uk address that I made the site for. He can't get the .com version because the last people he tried to get to make a site for him basically bought the domain name then did little else, letting it expire and be grabbed up by a squatter. Funny how he's struggling to make enough stuff to meet demand, and all without the .com "cachet".
100m domain, $10 a pop
100m domain, $10 a pop
That's a billion dollars a year for basically doing NOTHING apart from running a few servers.
Re: 100m domain, $10 a pop
Aaah, but the responsibility!
Somebody loses sleep every night, worrying, and needs a decent compensation package to make sure he'll never have to worry again.
Yeah yeah, DNS is DEAD we know
Yeah yeah, DNS is DEAD we know. This is nail, coffin, bang.
So along with ICANN increasing the cost of business for everyone with the generic top level domain land grab, it is also allowing Verisign to continue to screw ever more money out of .com address owners. Who is going to put the brakes on these perpetual monopolies?