.UK - A botch?

[mdb]

I'm not a Nominet member, so granted you could say STFU, but still...

Why is there a need for a sunrise period of FIVE years??

I don't even know why Nominet talk about .org.uk registrants in their press release, they will have NO say so in the .uk extension of "their" domain. I've just spoken with Nominet to ask them to clarify the .org.uk position, and I was told the registrant would have to wait 5 years, after which they could try and make the registration (just like anyone else).

Based on what I've just been told it completely negates this paragraph in their press release:

In the small proportion of instances where there could be competition – e.g. where one person holds example.co.uk and another holds example.org.uk – the shorter domain will be offered to the .co.uk registrant.

It should say, if somone holds the .co.uk then you can't register the domain. Either wait 5 years or contact the owner of the .co.uk, ask them to buy it so you can buy it off them.

The Nominet chap said I couldn't do anything but wait, or make an offer to the .co.uk registrant... Well that doesn't put me in any kind of privileged position, anyone could make an offer to buy it?

I asked what if hypothetically the .co.uk and .org.uk registrants were happy with their domains and felt no need to register the .uk. He said, again, after FIVE years anyone could register the domain. It blows a hole right through their blurb about expanding competition yada yada.

Sounds more like a strategic way of cashing in and / or justifying their own jobs.

 

[Stephen]

.org.uk rights

Basically the 5 years is an automatic protection of the .uk to all .co.uk owners registered of the same string before 28 10 2013.

As for .org.uk they do have limited rights over .uk.

This Q & A from nominet sites shows how.

http://www.nominet.org.uk/how-participate/policy-development/IntroducingSecondLevelDomains/qanda

Q. Who exactly will be offered the shorter .uk domain?

A. Anyone can register a new .uk domain from launch.

However, we want to look after our existing customers, so holders of the following domains will be offered the shorter .uk equivalent of their current domain (provided they maintain their current registration until they take up the .uk):
1. All domains that were current on 28th October 2013 where there was no other corresponding third level domain registered.
2. Where there are two or more domains with the same string the .co.uk will be offered the .uk equivalent, and
where there is no .co.uk, the .org.uk will be offered the .uk equivalent.

3. All .co.uk domains registered after 28th October 2013 and before the new domains are launched (as long as there is no ‘clash’ with any domains meeting the criteria above).

 

[Systreg]

Why is there a need for a sunrise period of FIVE years??

Nominet has answered that question here:

http://www.nominet.org.uk/how-participate/policy-development/IntroducingSecondLevelDomains/qanda

Q. Why are you offering the free reservation period for five years?

A. For businesses choosing to move to .uk, we want to minimise additional costs as much as possible. We belive that a five-year period will mitigate the marketing/rebranding costs associated with moving to a new web address, as the changes could form part of a natural cycle of rebranding and updating marketing material.

It would also mean website owners are not pushed into making a decision, and have a substantial amount of time to observe trends in the market and decide whether or not .uk is right for them.

 

[monaghan]

The 5 years is basically a botch to keep people happy, best of a bad job really. I don't see that it actually gives you much as you'll still need the .co.uk for brand protection (unless there's a huge market swing during the next 5 years making .org.uk and .co.uk redundant) so it is purely for vanity as the majority of .co.uk holders will buy the .uk within the 5 year window.

Anyone handing the .uk to a .org.uk owner clearly doesn't have a clue about domains or they don't really need the domain.

 

[mdb]

Nominet has answered that question here...

I still say it's a load of b*ll*cks.

Does anyone genuiely believe a company needs five years to complete on a rebrand of their domain? A year, two years at a push I could stomach.

What makes the UK so spectacularly different? Has there been any other TLD launched in any country since the internet began that granted a five year sunrise period?

Lets say that non .co.uk / .org.uk registrants had the facility to register the .uk domain equivalent... Think of the amount of money Nominet will make with DRS cases. The average Joe won't know the rules re .co.uk ownership, Nominet will need to employ an army of people to cope.

As for .org.uk they do have limited rights over .uk.

Not as far as I could make out from my conversation with Nominet today. As you might have guessed, I specifically asked about .co.uk / .org.uk question. How long would I have to wait (as a .org.uk owner) until I had dibs on the .uk domain based on the assumption the .co.uk owner didn't register it... He said it was exactly the same process - wait five years, or contact the .co.uk owner and offer to buy it off them EVEN if they didn't have it at the point of contact.

It's not like the .co.uk registrant would get x amount of time to register the domain before the .org.uk has a second chance. The .org.uk owner is lumped in with everyone else.

So, to use a timely example, the Disasters Emergency Committee who own www.dec.org.uk would not be able to register www.dec.uk. If they wanted the domain they would have to either wait 5 years and take their chances with everyone else in the summer of 2019, or buy it off the company who have the microsite on the .co.uk.

The .uk namespace is geared around maximising money for Nominet, both through registrations and DRS cases. It also benefits domainers because it gives them five years breathing time to decide what's of value. The re-brand argument is nothing but a lame smokescreen.

In my view it does little to nothing for competition.

 

[Edwin]

The average business doesn't rebrand every year or so, but statistically many have to reprint/redo a bunch of branding stuff within 5 years, so they won't incur specific losses because of implementing .uk.

Re the .org.uk, the .org.uk owner either "won" on 28 October 2013 and will get the .uk at launch, or else they "lost" on that day and therefore have zero chance at the .co.uk.

Nominet has reflected the commercial realities of the UK namespace (93% of registrants use .co.uk, the vast majority of ad/marketing spend comes from companies on .co.uk domains) and has designed its release mechanism accordingly

 

[Edwin]

Stephen's comment about limited rights is correct. He means that - taking all .org.uk owners as a group, some will have rights to the .uk. Therefore that registrant category has "limited rights".

 

[anthony]

...Nominet has reflected the commercial realities of the UK namespace (93% of registrants use .co.uk, the vast majority of ad/marketing spend comes from companies on .co.uk domains) and has designed its release mechanism accordingly

That's flawed logic.

Whatever the percentage of companies owning .org.uk domains who would have gained the .uk on an aged basis is, they too have marketing and advertising costs. The split line would have been different percentage wise, that is all.

I did an analysis in 2007 of the percentage actually used for web sites between .co.uk and .org.uk domains, it took me days to complete it, and what i found was that the .org.uk holders had many more sites (percentage wise within their group). The number of .co.uk domains not used was frankly staggering, massive amounts hoarded by domainers and opportunists, very few of those with web sites on them, just 'for sale' links. (Unfortunately the HD died, so I might do the exercise again, but I'd imagine .org.uk would come out on top again). Therefore citing 93% is also flawed for justification purposes.

We all know it's because .org.uk registrants are in the minority, nothing more than that. There are many lines that can be drawn in the sand depending on ones perspective, they've drawn this one!

 

[bulkcorn]

... well 'domainers' didn't decide to launch .uk! :lol: They were quite happy with the existing extensions ...... until some people came up with a very brilliant idea! :lol:

 

[diablo]

I still say it's a load of b*ll*cks.

Does anyone genuiely believe a company needs five years to complete on a rebrand of their domain? A year, two years at a push I could stomach.

When you take into consideration some companies will need to change web addresses on vans, shop fronts, stationery and more, five years isn't unreasonable.

.org.uk is intended for non-commercial organisations and is most commonly used by charities, trades unions, political parties, community groups, educational councils, professional institutions and others. Not having the .uk is really no different to not having the .co.uk for such an organisation.

 

[mdb]

The average business doesn't rebrand every year or so, but statistically many have to reprint/redo a bunch of branding stuff within 5 years, so they won't incur specific losses because of implementing .uk.

I think it's a lame argument, Edwin. Not every company rebrands every five years. Some might rebrand every couple of years, some might rebrand once every 10 years or every 20 years. It's one of those "how long is a piece of string questions".

Re the .org.uk, the .org.uk owner either "won" on 28 October 2013 and will get the .uk at launch, or else they "lost" on that day and therefore have zero chance at the .co.uk.

Yes, it's of little value.

Nominet has reflected the commercial realities of the UK namespace (93% of registrants use .co.uk, the vast majority of ad/marketing spend comes from companies on .co.uk domains) and has designed its release mechanism accordingly

Obviously .co.uk is the preferred commercial namespace, but domainers have been well taken care of, probably because they hold so much leverage in the membership. In many cases they're sat on prime domain estate and de-facto are offered a chance to further consolidate at any point over 5 years, making their oriignal .co.uk worth x more. Hence I go back to my original argument, it does nothing to encourage competition and it does everything to:

1. Line Nominet's coffers
2. Protect business (.co.uk) owners
3. Protect domainers

The bottom line is in the way it's being presented like it's opening up opportunity because of the crowded marketplace. That's the smokescreen.

In the main, no new entrants will be able to capitalise on the release of the .uk namepace, at least commercially, unless they've got the same deep (if not deeper) pockets to pay domainers. So, for Nominet to argue they're doing it for competition is like listening to politicians ridicule bankers over immorality.

 

[mdb]

When you take into consideration some companies will need to change web addresses on vans, shop fronts, stationery and more, five years isn't unreasonable.

Lets be reasonable here, a 301 redirect takes minutes to set up. If you're a genuine business with a .co.uk website set the redirect up to the .uk domain, or vice versa. It's as simple as that.

I've nothing against legitimate business owners wanting to protect their brand / name in the .uk namepace, but equally they should have limited time to register the domain, not five years. Surely they would know within a year or within 2 years if a rebrand of the company would ever be on the cards in the future - if so protect the name NOW. Lock it down and do the rebrand whenever you like.

I've also nothing against domainers registering in the .uk namespace, good luck to them. It's the de-facto rule that allows domainers the automatic right to consolidate and further lock out competition to new entrants, whether the newbies are domainers themselves or peeps trying to set up a new web businesses.

If it takes a company owner or marketing director 5 years to decide if they're ever going to rebrand their company in the future, I would suggest that there are more pressing issues that would concern me about their company.

 

[websaway]

I think it's a lame argument, Edwin. Not every company rebrands every five years. Some might rebrand every couple of years, some might rebrand once every 10 years or every 20 years. It's one of those "how long is a piece of string questions".



Yes, it's of little value.



Obviously .co.uk is the preferred commercial namespace, but domainers have been well taken care of, probably because they hold so much leverage in the membership. In many cases they're sat on prime domain estate and de-facto are offered a chance to further consolidate at any point over 5 years, making their oriignal .co.uk worth x more. Hence I go back to my original argument, it does nothing to encourage competition and it does everything to:

1. Line Nominet's coffers
2. Protect business (.co.uk) owners
3. Protect domainers

The bottom line is in the way it's being presented like it's opening up opportunity because of the crowded marketplace. That's the smokescreen.

In the main, no new entrants will be able to capitalise on the release of the .uk namepace, at least commercially, unless they've got the same deep (if not deeper) pockets to pay domainers. So, for Nominet to argue they're doing it for competition is like listening to politicians ridicule bankers over immorality.

The fact of the matter is that .uk is co.uk it's simply a transition and there had to be found a way to get there.

 

[mdb]

The fact of the matter is that .uk is co.uk it's simply a transition and there had to be found a way to get there.

And that's fine, I agree.

Just please less of the b*ll*cks about opening up opportunities and competition.

 

[websaway]

And that's fine, I agree.

Just please less of the b*ll*cks about opening up opportunities and competition.

Don't you think it will increase the attractiveness of the uk namespace when .uk is in competition with all the new gtld's .

 

[diablo]

Lets be reasonable here, a 301 redirect takes minutes to set up. If you're a genuine business with a .co.uk website set the redirect up to the .uk domain, or vice versa. It's as simple as that.

And how does that update vans, catalogues, stationery, etc?

Nominet couldn't win. If they had said a year, someone else would have been moaning. Anyone who wants to change immediately can do so. You don't have to wait five years, but if you want to take up to five years you can. That should suit the vast majority of businesses, surely.

It is what it is. The .uk is coming. It really is pointless arguing the toss about it now. Better to invest that same energy is the future, not the past.

 

[mat]

I would have thought most companies would just register the .uk for around £7 and have it sit there doing nothing, then worry about the rebranding after it has been purchased.

Who is going to go through all the rebranding first and then purchase the .uk for £7 once it is all done?

Regardless of if the rebranding will take a month, or 5 years, surely if the rebrand is on your mind you will just buy the name before it all goes ahead…?

 

[websaway]

I would have thought most companies would just register the .uk for around £7 and have it sit there doing nothing, then worry about the rebranding after it has been purchased.

Who is going to go through all the rebranding first and then purchase the .uk for £7 once it is all done?

Regardless of if the rebranding will take a month, or 5 years, surely if the rebrand is on your mind you will just buy the name before it all goes ahead…?

It's not that easy, websites are a little like cars, you are at the mercy of the mechanic.

 

[Edwin]

The overwhelming majority of businesses are sole proprietorships and micro businesses with sub 10 employees. They are very unlikely to have in house tech expertise and for many, a 301 redirect might as well be brain surgery. They also won't have the funds to trash all their marketing collateral and start again.

With a 5 year window, they can do something about the .uk gradually and in stages, for example reprint brochures when their stock runs out, repaint the van when the existing logo has faded, etc.

More importantly, it gives them time to find out about the issue in the first place, via their ad hoc tech person, friends, suppliers, customers - or just by seeing .uk addresses "live" in the wild long enough that their existence starts to sink in.

 

[mat]

With a 5 year window, they can do something about the .uk gradually and in stages, for example reprint brochures when their stock runs out, repaint the van when the existing logo has faded, etc.

My point is, why would you even do these things if you have not purchased the domain name?