| 5:02 pm on Nov 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|comfortable site for mainstream domain name shoppers |
How would a "mainstream domain name shopper" know that a particular "hate, sex, obscenity or self-destructive behavior" domain name was registered with Afternic?
This smells funny.
| 5:15 pm on Nov 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Seams like marketing talk, perhaps there is another reason.
| 6:36 pm on Nov 11, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|no longer accept domain names that promote hate, . . or self-destructive behavior |
That decision took some thought? ;-/
Afternic's problem is that they took too long to catch onto the parking revenue game. Sedo, Revenue.net and everybody else has managed to eat Afternic's lunch by focusing on the revenue side of the parking model with sales being backfill. IF Afternic would have jumped on the revenue sharing model early on AND shared the PPC wealth generously they might have evolved to be the 800 pound parking gorilla today, instead of a being an also ran in the game.
[edited by: Webwork at 8:53 pm (utc) on Nov. 11, 2006]
| 4:55 pm on Nov 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
well there was a suggestion by someone on another forum saying they are clearing up their act to be bought out by someone
| 6:53 pm on Nov 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
They just removed a couple of my domains. I removed all of my domains. Don't like their self righteous attitude.
| 5:07 pm on Nov 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I applaud them for having the guts to make that decision knowing that it will tick some people AND will mean less revenue for them.
| 5:17 pm on Nov 18, 2006 (gmt 0)|
What comes to mind to me is the concept of "business ethics". Decisions such as this ought to be made before doing business. A company decides "We won't profit from doing business with (whatever) domains" when fashioning their business model, before startup.
Sorry to disagree rather strongly that this decision isn't a gutsy one at all. Similar versions of this ex-post facto virtue will likely continue to crop up in the business. For a long time domain parking firms accepted famous trademark typos, putting not only money into their own pockets but into the pockets of the those who trade off other company's famous marks, such as Disney. Then, eventually - likely when some lawyer squared up the issue and their spine firmly enough - parking companies started to back away from the practice. Was that virtue? Guts? Good business sense?
Interpret it whatever way you will. I have no praise for it unless they also disgorge all past profits from the practice of trafficking in such domains. Disgorge the past profits and then I might begin to see the emergence of some form of corporate soul, something praisewothy, for the company.
Think that will happen? That would take something like - but more than - guts. No guts here. Just repositioning.
[edited by: Webwork at 7:32 pm (utc) on Nov. 18, 2006]
| 5:39 am on Nov 20, 2006 (gmt 0)|
A company is, and should be, free to change it's business model any time it wants to. Otherwise, many companies would be destined to failure, not being able to correct mistakes made along the way and to respond to changes in the industry/business climate. It isn't fair to say that a company has to make all the decisions about how to run their business up front and then never change. That just isn't realistic. I'm guessing most of us here are business owners. How many of us have had to make changes to our business model to keep moving forward? Probably most, if not all of us.