What is Digg?Sponsored by Double Your Dating
Meeting Women Online "On The Cheap" view!
doubleyourdating.com - Here’s some killer free ways to stand out from the crowd if you're online looking for a lovely lady...
52 Comments
- drvelocity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+34Being that Verisign indeed has a government granted monopoly on oversight of the domain registration system, it seems a huge conflict of interest to allow them to arbitrarily set the price on a digital commodity, in fact it rings of the oil cartel or Haliburton getting no contract bids from the government.
The government needs to figure out a way to bring competition into this - decentralization is a good idea not just for pricing issues but for the overall stability of the net. At first thought, bringing the price down to understandable levels ($1 per year) seems disastrous - but domain speculating is already rampant to the point where nothing of high commercial value is left. To get a good domain today you basically have to make up a new word and create a great product to build it up. - Portwineboy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+25paltry?
- TheChihuahua, on 10/12/2007, -8/+25...partly?
- nunbot, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21with a really big stick
- blaze03, on 10/12/2007, -7/+23poultry?
- neom, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Spamzor,
While I understand your point, you forget a very intral part of the internet. That being Aunt Bess and Uncle Joe who wish to create a website of their grandchildren to send out to the family. Or Bobby Joe Balaski who wants to start a political blog.. These people won't, and shouldn't have to pay, exorberant amounts for a domain. - juneau, on 10/12/2007, -8/+15Don't use words you can't spell in the headline, kthx.
- blackax, on 10/12/2007, -10/+17Wtf are you on??? you can Not use verisign They have a deal with icann. It is a ***** monopoly!
- 60days, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Going to jail without passing go or collecting 200
- sishgupta, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8The important part here is that the US government has created this monopoly.
It is a shame. IMHO one of the roles of the government should be to fix market failures, not create them.
And then up comes the debate about whether we should internationalize ICANN and IANA
but then I find the Americans get incredibly defensive and go "we created it, we'll control it"
but do you really think that things like net neutrality would be in jeopardy if a single state did not control the internet?
I am not trying to bash Americans either. I said "internationalize ICANN" in a related Digg article once and that was the general response I got. Very disheartening indeed. - fac3less, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@jackhole,
You're mistaking Verisign for GoDaddy:
http://hostjury.com/blog/5/godaddy-suspends-domains-on-request - TruckStuff, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The math is wrong. He calculated a markup, not margin. Margin is Profit / Revenue, so their margin is actually 98%. It is impossible to have a margin > 100%.
Not that this makes the news any more palatable... - SimonDonkers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I run several projects to help young children create simple computer games and they all want to have a website to put them on to show everyone. They have no money and therefore can't get a domain name, especially not if the prices increase again.
I'm all for a rule to make the price of domains rise exponentially on the more domains you have. If somebody wants one domain then let them have it cheaply, if somebody wants every possible misspelling of every possible business then let them pay for that.
Yes I know a system like that wouldn't work as they would just register domains on somebody else his name. Possible let the price of a domain be decided in auction. If I want www.simondonkers.com then let me have it cheaply but lets add some digits to the price of sex.com. - xatrak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Buried for using "title says it all" in TFA.
- AhmedF, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Spammers are not deterred by domain prices, and neither are domainers.
I can't believe people actually defend a monopoly making millions of dollars! - bootle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2My understanding is that you don't need verisign if you want a .org domain, is this true? Are .org prices cheaper as a result?
- cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Y'know.. my bad. I haven't been watching the headlines on Verisign lately, and the new RAISING of rates in October. Connected with this, it is pretty bad. It does get me angry however that people make such arguments without clearly articulating at every opportunity what their ultimate point is.
Most of the people in this thread commenting, read the article, and don't follow the second link, and don't realize that with wholesale prices increasing ALL registrars will need to decide on whether to raise prices. Most would really have no choice. While there is a lot of "domain tasting" going on... people who register names temporarily, check them for traffic, and then delete them, this isn't necessarily a reason for Verisign to counter the abuse by punishing everyone. People need to be voicing that much more clearly if any effort to effect the situation is going to be successful. - AhmedF, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It would stop maybe 5% of domain parking. As long as they make over $30 a year (which they do), they have no reason not to keep the domain.
- BankersHill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Let's not forget the $0.25 tax that ICANN add's to all domain registrations (registrars pay).
- sishgupta, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4The first TLD that everyone checks is .com. If you own a .com you are going to get more hits than .net or .org and after that any other TLD will get significantly less hits.
Using a country code TLD (ccTLD) or one of the lesser TLDs (uTLD/sTLD) is inconvenient for users as it requires the user to remember the TLD. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I'm in favour of price increases for .com domains, within reason - if domains cost $30 instead of $7, say, the effect wouldn't be massive on most legitimate web business, but it would stop a hell of a lot of domain parking. Typosquaters and made-for-adsense homepages would have to make four times the revenue they're making now to make it worth doing (assuming negligible hosting costs).
- fac3less, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@Simon,
It's time you taught them about www.tk.tk then if you're after minimal costs. - zippy757, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There is much more to this story...
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/policy/2002/12/05/karl.html
and a check of Edgar shows a company in financial reporting free fall ..
http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html - nonanet, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3VeriSign (edit: currently) has the monopoly for .com, granted. But there are a whole lot of other top level domains out there: http://www.iana.org/root-whois/index.html
Additionally, most of the country code top level domains have less than a million active domain names - so finding a good name is probably much easier than under .com. - fac3less, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4I think you missed the point. Verisign handles the registration of all domains.
At any rate most web hosting providers give away free domain names with their service these days so most end-users won't be effected. - 15charmaxwtf, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6How is the monopoly enforced?
- jdandrea, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Sigh. I really wish there was a grammar/usage checker.
But then would it catch something like partly? Prolly not. ;) - streaky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1OK, but a few points.
First you can't get an actual .uk - they're reserved for the government, even though they have .gov.uk which is really suck.
It's a bit like the w3c only worse and more pointless.
It also costs more for a .co.uk domain than for a .com. Why is that? Verisign are giving a good deal on the .co.uk scale.
Nominet also have bizzare domain registration rules, like doing a rain dance whilst plucking a chicken to register a domain.
.uk domains suck. They really do, but then so do .com domains. You can't get one that's free these days without stringing long combinations of random letters together.
It really was better back in the day when a .com cost $80 or whatever it was - because at least then you could probably get the one you wanted - and people didn't horde them so much.
Now you can reg one for a few dollars and everybody has like 10 of them, I have like 6 that I don't even use. I think the domain system needs to go and just use IPV6 addresses. Think, no more DNS traffic - ever!
Domain system is just a big scam like christmas and easter, made up to make you buy stuff that nobody really needs anyways. - greymarketbrain, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Learn how to ***** SPELL!!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1lets start our own open source domain registration, and charge less?
- h0dg3s, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Buried due to blogspam. Real article is here. http://dev.blog.domaintools.com/2007/04/ex-icann-board-member-says-com-costs-014/
- AhmedF, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yep my mistake - fixed it.
- eonblue, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4"That seems pretty fair for 5GB storage and 500GB bandwidth." [and 2 seconds of cpu time]
- jackhole, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I am shocked.
That VeriSign hasn't pulled techsoapbox's and digg's domain names. - MrScience, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1... portly? :)
- vdxc, on 09/29/2008, -2/+2True, but for example, .uk is the second largest TLD in the world. Since it's creation it has been controlled by an organisation (Nominet - http://www.nominet.org.uk/) - not a multi-national corporation. Considering .uk is specific to the UK alone it seems the structure in place in the UK works pretty well.
I think ICANN should be internationalised just because at the moment it is swayed by what the US government wants and the current US government likes having multinational corporations in charge. - steelmaverick, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Uh....$30 still isn't that much if you're gonna do advertising.
- Gesiwuj, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I think the domains have to have a reasonably high price, otherwise people just buy a million domains that they never use, and the spammers and domain-holders can buy even more...
- gr3yn3t, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Well, if you guys look around, domains are as cheap as $2 / year some places
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/domains/ - for example. - seaner, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I actually don't mind paying more for domains. The more they cost, the less that will be registered, thus minimizing spam, parked domain sites with ads, domain squatting, and useless website.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Learn about fixed, variable and marginal costs plz.
- kernelhappy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Portly profits?
- Evildudetx, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Just another reason I LOVE my .TK domain.
Screw the TLDs - I could get one, but I'd prefer not to pay the ridiculous prices....... - sexydawg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0I wish they'd raise the price to $100/yr. If you need cheap domain names for non-commercial purposes (i.e. kids with programs, personal sites, etc.), start a new TLD that wouldn't be desirable for commercial purposes.
- brendandonhue, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1VeriSign sucks but the claim in the title kind of ignores that they also run massive server farms, which I imagine cost a bit more than 14 cents.
- otatop, on 10/12/2007, -19/+17How does VeriSign have a monopoly? And how can something cost partly $.14? Maybe a paltry $.14...
- ayeroxor, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2"It is a ***** monopoly!"
While you're correct, you're also a "*****" retard. - cleverboy, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3People shouldn't feign outrage and ***** that doesn't really affect them. It's pathetic.
Verisign charges $6 to registrars, and registrars pass on the cost per domain, upsell like a normal retailer, or choose to absorb it as a loss leader, while upselling other more profitable services. If domain name registration was, oh say "$1" wholesale, or even "50 cents", and retail prices moved down to $2, it would make people even more apt to register stupid names than to suddenly be able to afford a name to begin with. I don't see the benefit. Don't get me wrong, I think people need to be more vocal and active about consumer domain name rights. Verisign has little to do with consumers. I also run FreeWho.com.
I created http://www.registerwatch.org to help people begin looking critically at registrar services. That picture involves not ONLY Verisign (which only handles .com/.net) but other registries as well. Moreover, those consumer rights are much more often affected by the actions of registrars. Whining and complaining about Verisign is as old as the hills. They didn't get to implement the waiting list system or the SiteFinder service, more than that there are bigger issues to rant about... like the unfortunate, horrible state the latest changes have left domain name transfers in. It's an absolute mess and getting worse. - JD223, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2godaddy has $2 domains if you get hosting with it.. hosting is like
$3.50/month. That seems pretty fair for 5GB storage and 500GB bandwidth - spamzor, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2I think the most important thing to consider here is how much would you actually pay for a domain and if VeriSign can increase the price so that it is still below that point why shouldn't they; there are profit margins to maintain remember! Sure it would be great to pay 20 cents for a domain, but if I had to pay $20, $200, $2,000, etc for a domain I probably would... it's the real estate for your business! Think about how much an SMS costs, they are hugely marked up but you will still pay that 10/15/20 cents...
-
Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is