| 5:09 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I think the value (economic, social, etc) of the .com domains are increasing rapidly however and the infrastructure around those domains needs to be respectively hardened security wise.
7% indefinitely seems a bit much, and the automatic (did I read that right) after 2012 seems weird, but I think GoDaddy is wrong if they think that prices should go down or don't deserve some kind of increase.
The other problem here is that unless their is a profit motive, this will have to be handed off to a government.
Do you really want that? And do you really want it handed off to the lowest bidder?
Maybe if IBM put in a bid, I think it would be OK, but even then I'd rather a smaller player like Verisign to have it.
| 5:47 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Verisign has been nothing less than assanine from day one. I truly believe just about anybody could do a better job than Verisign. I would love to see GoDaddy put in for it.
| 5:56 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
There might be less domain squatting if the .com domain name was more expensive.
| 7:49 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
*goes to renew domain for another 10 years...*
| 7:52 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|There might be less domain squatting if the .com domain name was more expensive. |
Squatting means when someone buys a domain which tries to gain from another entity's trademark. This was the case with bmw.com. Someone bought the bmw.com domain and wanted to sell it to bmw for millions; instead of paying up like other companies had up to that point, bmw took the squatter to court and got their domain.
I hope that I have my history right. :)
In short, there is already a law for squatting; what it might cut down on is parking domains for years without using it for anything.
| 9:13 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I tend to agree with GoDaddy's view. Even before I read the article I was thinking about the decrease in overall costs due to improvement in efficiencies. There probably is an increase in ongoing costs as upgrades and expansion is implemented but I would think that the continuing increase in registrations along with renewals would cover it. I don't know about a decrease in registration fees but I'd have to see some pretty reliable cost and revenue numbers supporting an increase before I was convinced it was necessary.
And that is another legitimate concern...if all the supporting information is unavailable how can we know an increase is needed or not? Are you just going to take their word for it? That's not good business.
Just my opinion of course. ;)
| 10:26 pm on Feb 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Continued over here: