EGM.uk - Please sign this petition against Nominet's 50% price rise

[RobM]

I asked a drop catcher I know (member here) today on the phone, while we were talking about all sorts of things, if he was going to sign EGM.uk and he said he wasn't bothered because the price rise doesn't affect him.

What a strange statement. If he is paying 50% more for his registrations then the price rise *does* affect him.... 50% of the previous registration price! If he doesn't register domains he is not a dropcatcher. I would either have to assume from this asinine statement that a) you made it up or b) the person you spoke to has no business sense. Sounds to me though a little like argumentum ad populum.

 

[Edwin]

What a strange statement. If he is paying 50% more for his registrations then the price rise *does* affect him.... 50% of the previous registration price! If he doesn't register domains he is not a dropcatcher. I would either have to assume from this asinine statement that a) you made it up or b) the person you spoke to has no business sense. Sounds to me though a little like argumentum ad populum.

I think what the person David spoke to might have meant was something like this "Because I charge £50 per domain I catch, a 50% price rise doesn't make a meaningful difference to my huge profit margin."

You're spot on when you point out that 50% is still 50%. Money is money, there's no two ways about it. So at the end of the day even a drop catcher will make "less than before" - but perhaps as in my example above they feel they can absorb the price rise without batting an eyelid because the profit margin is still over 90% on every catch.

I'd have thought they're the least meaningfully representative group for exactly that reason - which other group of domain users is GUARANTEED to make a return of £30, £40, £50 for every domain they succeed in registering?

(That's not to take anything away from drop catchers - it's a tough market that requires a lot of effort to stay on top of - but if we're talking purely in terms of costs, revenue and margins it's more predictable than any other line of business involving domains on a per-domain basis)

 

[RobM]

Claiming that 'this doesn't make a noticeable difference to me' does *not* mean that there is no difference. Therefore it can't really be used as an example to everyone to insinuate there's no difference can it? He may well consider it 'insignificant' as, to some extent, I do *personally*. This doesn't mean that prices aren't going up by a ridiculously large percentage for no good reason. I no longer have thousands of domains but members here still do. To them I'm assuming a 50% rise in renewal fees is not 'insignificant'. To make a throwaway remark about something someone may have said on the phone is hardly addressing the issue or even relevant.
Really we just need to know something very simple. What possible costs increase could there be at nominet when they already have millions available to justify a whopping 50% rise in registration fees? So far I haven't heard a sensible answer beyond 'our costs have gone up' which totally doesn't address the money available, what these 'costs' are, and the huge pay rises for board members. I don't actually expect we'll ever get an answer because this suits Nominet and we all know from past experience they do what's best for them and the top few registrars. The registrants come a very poor second.

 

[Skinner]

I would be more appeased if the price rise were equal, 1 yr gets what £0.25, then 2 yr gets 50p, I can't see why the removal of the 2 yr benefit which has existed since day one.

Another gripe I have is the co-marketing not being available to me as a self managed tag, yet I'm being told my cost are rising so I can grow some other Joe's business ?

Presumably with 5% an EGM can be called, and the message is being sent. It may make "the man" think more next time.

 

[RobM]

"If Nominet hypothetically informed everyone that a certain percentage of the price rise might contribute towards currently unaccounted for/not firm/potential to be changed future ideas/investments/developments, whether domain or non domain name centric, would that serve in anyway to make the planned price rise more appetising?

Not really. I don't see why nominet would or should be investing in anything non-domain centric. Have they forgotten who they are? They don't have shareholders, they don't have profit share, they don't have dividends. Why on earth would they need to 'invest' in anything outside of the domain infrastructure? Also I could understand a price rise if a company's service is not financially viable at the current rates - however we know (we can see the accounts) that they have millions of pounds spare. The only cost we can see increasing to justify any change in prices is the wages of the board members and it would seem there is still plenty of gravy left in the boat even taking that into consideration.

 

[RobM]

The company does not considers its sole purpose is to operate .uk only and otherwise cease to exist.

Well it should in my opinion. I don't know why they would feel they have any other purpose. If they spend any money related to this NON PROFIT industry set up for them on anything other than what they should be doing I would go so far as to say I want them sued for mismanagement of funds by a registrant who doesn't think his money should be used for other purposes, some of which he may not want to support. They did not create this income. They exist solely to utilise it. Illusions of grandeur from some very overpaid suits on boards methinks.

It can do that as I believe you will be aware

This is about the fifth time you've said this. We get it David. Nominet are going to raise the prices - I"m not one of the few on this forum that thinks there's a chance of stopping them. However for you to keep coming out with this means to me that you support the price increase. Yet *still* nobody is provided with a breakdown of costs that warrant this raise. What you seem to be essentially saying is 'everyone stop moaning and accept nominet will do what they want when they want'. They are a monopoly plain and simple.

Also David I really think you need to learn the difference between a private company with shareholders creating a product/demand and a non-profit company with limited guarantee handed a namespace to run. It is illegal for them to exist as a monopoly but that essentially is what they do - your comments just bolster this attitude.

 

[martin-s]

If Nominet hypothetically informed everyone that a certain percentage of the price rise might contribute towards currently unaccounted for/not firm/potential to be changed future ideas/investments/developments, whether domain or non domain name centric, would that serve in anyway to make the planned price rise more appetising?

No. Nominet already has a healthy surplus.

 

[RobM]

They don't need any more surplus to maintain the uk domain space and, as they shouldn't be involved in ANY other business that's not related to the uk namespace, they don't need to increase this further.

 

[Whois-Search]

Anyway back to the job in hand...

We now have 140 members signed:
http://www.egm.uk/petition-signatures/members-signatures/

Nominet say they will only calculate a new set of voting rights when an EGM request is received.

Therefore as the last set of voting rights was calculated at the AGM...

We need to make sure we are over 5% by getting as many members as we can

Can we get it to 150 members?

 

[Edwin]

Perhaps you can make a case for why you consider co-marketing should be made available to self managed registrars. Who would such registrars (not registrants) market to?

Their customers.

You can't try and argue that self-managed registrars and registrants are separate, then with the next breath conflate them so that there are "no customers" for the self-managed tagholders to market to!

A self-managed registrar (if you insist on that distinction) has as customers the registrant(s) of the names on their tag.

As such, why shouldn't they be entitled to a co-marketing bung to help keep that customer's renewal rates up?

If you're saying "well, that's the left pocket paying the right pocket" then that's exactly what lots of people have been trying to explain: when it comes to self-managed tag holders, the registrant/registrar distinction is a meaningless one because in most cases they're the same entity - AND NOMINET KNOWS THAT.

 

[Edwin]

They don't need any more surplus to maintain the uk domain space and, as they shouldn't be involved in ANY other business that's not related to the uk namespace, they don't need to increase this further.

+1,000,000,000

If Nominet won't learn that lesson, the UK namespace needs to be handed over to a new entity that will, for the good of the namespace and its registrants.

 

[Edwin]

Anyway back to the job in hand...

We now have 140 members signed:
http://www.egm.uk/petition-signatures/members-signatures/

Nominet say they will only calculate a new set of voting rights when an EGM request is received.

Therefore as the last set of voting rights was calculated at the AGM...

We need to make sure we are over 5% by getting as many members as we can

Can we get it to 150 members?

That's great going. I've posted a thread on Namepros explaining the upcoming 50% price rise, with links to both of the petitions. Hopefully that might garner a few more signatures.

Can an EGM be used (partly) as a no-confidence vote in NEDs?

 

[Whois-Search]

That's great going. I've posted a thread on Namepros explaining the upcoming 50% price rise, with links to both of the petitions. Hopefully that might garner a few more signatures.

Can an EGM be used (partly) as a no-confidence vote in NEDs?

Thanks for the post on namepros

I think two members at the EGM itself can call a poll (see articles)

However the petition itself can really only go with what it says now (vote on 50%)

 

[Edwin]

Thanks for the post on namepros

I think two members at the EGM itself can call a poll (see articles)

However the petition itself can really only go with what it says now (vote on 50%)

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Skinner]

Perhaps if they concentrated on the UK Namespace they wouldn't be storing/saving potential advertising / promotion money so they can "diversify" and go on dragons den toting "nom nom sauce 2.0" the perfect condiment with chips.

Perhaps you can make a case for why you consider co-marketing should be made available to self managed registrars. Who would such registrars (not registrants) market to?

I don't know, David, you're nominets posterboy, can you think of any registrants, someone like myself as a self managed tag would have ?

http://registrars.nominet.org.uk/namespace/uk/registrar-agreement/reclassification-selfmanaged

You may register a small number of domains for third parties. If you register any domain names to third parties this shall be no more than the lower of:
50 or
5% of the total domains registered under your Self-Managed tag.

I as a self managed tag which completed the "channel partner" requirements, I am allowed up to 5% or 50 (whichever the fewer), so I could potentially have 50 different clients.

I attend multiple trade shows and events every year where I market and promote .UK names, seeking new clients.

Which means I am advertising gain new clients as well as maintaining existing clients.

Now as Bob Geldoff is misquoted as saying "Give me the f'ing money"

Edited: to add more.

 

[RobM]

David I'm not a UK business lawyer as you well know (I only just know what is legal where I am now). Trying to tie me up in semantics really achieves nothing except diverting attention from the price increase. I am not here to answer questions especially when it is not my field of expertise. I do know that domains will cost me 50% more when the price is increased. To claim that 'hey we want more money because...um..we may need it (even though we already have millions in surplus) if we do something else like invest in space rockets or sauce for pizza or free shoes for everybody' is not a professional way for nominet, or a mouthpiece, to justify the price rise.

 

[Stephen]

Please answer the Questions not divert

"However, it’s important to us that .UK domains represent value for money as well as quality, and the price we have set reflects that.” (from the press release).

Value for money should be a two way street. Nominet consider the wholesale price rise value for money to all parties including the company.

The following is an invented scenario by me just for debating and not based on anything I am aware of:

If Nominet hypothetically informed everyone that a certain percentage of the price rise might contribute towards currently unaccounted for/not firm/potential to be changed future ideas/investments/developments, whether domain or non domain name centric, would that serve in anyway to make the planned price rise more appetising?

Although I appreciate robust and strong debate on issues.

I would rather see Answers not Questions from those that have them,
to all the many serious points raised on this and the Nominet forum.

However to answer your question, I would refer you to the reason Nominet exists, with its free cost of a National Asset to manage;

3.1 to act as the Network Information Centre for the United Kingdom (which also includes any other territories covered by the ISO3166 designation ‘GB’ as amended from time to time) and manage and control the use of the Internet domain “.UK” and any other domain name(s) or electronic numbering systems associated with the United Kingdom;

If Nominet really sees a place and need to change what it does,
it should be fully debated and all ramifications be discussed
and then census found to go forward.

Nominet should on Monday, state "the decision to impose the price increase is suspended pending a full review and discussion with its members and range of other stakeholders".

With this Nominet should also release the commissioned report on the future of Nominet, as the two issues are so interlinked.

Stephen