.UK Announced

[retired_member27]

I'm trying to stay out of this thread as I've already made my views known and anything else is just going over old ground, this thread is 1395 posts long of which possibly only a handful are worth reading, btw is this the longest thread on AD?

Relating to the last few posts, the question you got to ask is would those people with large domain portfolios really be shouting so loud if they didn't own any domains, I think we all know the answer to that.

As for 100% of "real" businesses are against the proposal, well I've spoken to quite a few "real" businesses in the last few weeks (double glazing manufacturers, plumbers, kitchen fitters, garage owners, etc) and without exception all were in favour of it.

 

[websaway]

Not wanting to appear to be fighting Edwin's corner, but there are many without large portfolio who would benefit from having grandfather rights. What about all those who have bought "premium" names from one of the sellers here who have made their fortunes selling these names - do they not also have the right to have the "new UK premium" domain? What about those who registered a long time ago without trademark? Of course big business can afford to buy out trademark holders to ensure that they can get the domains they want.

Where there's a new TLD, then I'm happy to accept that first come first served or whatever the registry decides is the selection criteria, however, this is not a new TLD it is simply a reorganisation of the overall .uk namespace.

It only takes an badly informed journalist to produce a TV show or half a page in a newspaper telling the "facebook generation" that .uk replaces all other previous .co.uk, .org.uk & .me.uk domains and you then have a huge chunk of the UK immediately reducing the whole .uk namespace down to just .uk

Personally, I'm undecided, I like the idea of [myname].uk but I don't hold a trademark so potentially even though I had the .co.uk pre-Nominet and been using it continuously since registration so could potentially loose it to someone else.

I think this is among the best posts I have seen on this issue.

Who would not want a .uk under different circumstances, but the space has already been sold to .co.uk holders and branded by co.uk holders, unfortunate but true. And the cost to change even with grandfather rights is inhibitive.
The only people who can be in favour of the proposals are speculators.

 

[monaghan]

Where other countries have a single top level, what do non-profits do? Does everyone register as domain.country or do they have domain.xxx.country and domain.yyy.country?

I have a non-profit I work with who correctly use the .org.uk and has registered the .co.uk which redirects to the .org.uk to prevent cybersquatting, under current proposals they wouldn't qualify for the .uk

 

[monaghan]

As for 100% of "real" businesses are against the proposal, well I've spoken to quite a few "real" businesses in the last few weeks (double glazing manufacturers, plumbers, kitchen fitters, garage owners, etc) and without exception all were in favour of it.

How many of these businesses have a trademark that would protect their domain? How many of these businesses rely on their on-line presence to generate income?

 

[websaway]

I'm trying to stay out of this thread as I've already made my views known and anything else is just going over old ground, this thread is 1395 posts long of which possibly only a handful are worth reading, btw is this the longest thread on AD?

Relating to the last few posts, the question you got to ask is would those people with large domain portfolios really be shouting so loud if they didn't own any domains, I think we all know the answer to that.

As for 100% of "real" businesses are against the proposal, well I've spoken to quite a few "real" businesses in the last few weeks (double glazing manufacturers, plumbers, kitchen fitters, garage owners, etc) and without exception all were in favour of it.

It's a bit like an election campaign, it depends on the way it's presented as to the reaction you get.

But look, if there was a referendum on imigration in the UK tomorrow we would probably not get the most beneficial result. Sometimes there is no need to ask the question in the first place, and I think Nominets actions are deplorable.

 

[websaway]

Alex, I agree with what you're saying. The problem is that as you know, the secondary market had a golden period when the pre-Nom names were dropped. Edwin, along with other domainers has sold many very expensive names that were registered in that period. He sold these domains to businesses with big prices and big promises and it seems very selfish to me that he now proposes an alternative that would mean many of these customers would lose the right to the equivalent .uk while Edwin would get his maps.uk etc..

Have we all unwittingly been dragged into a feud between you and Edwin ?

 

[foz]

Alex, I agree with what you're saying. The problem is that as you know, the secondary market had a golden period when the pre-Nom names were dropped. Edwin, along with other domainers has sold many very expensive names that were registered in that period. He sold these domains to businesses with big prices and big promises and it seems very selfish to me that he now proposes an alternative that would mean many of these customers would lose the right to the equivalent .uk while Edwin would get his maps.uk etc..

Grandfathering of .co.uk registrants would mean those businesses would get the .uk equivalent. Not good?

 

[foz]

If possible would you please share any particular aurguments/viewpoints/observations made in the .NZ case that have not appeared on this thread.

I mentioned my feedback on .nz near the beginning of this thread.

The submissions still remain http://dnc.org.nz/second_level_proposal_c1?m=309

The proposal was more friendly too. Existing third level registrants had first dibs and the registration fee remained equal. No security to speak of.

 

[Edwin]

My proposal was based on what other countries did. I have yet to see a counter proposal that is fairer across the board.

From memory, only about 5-6 of the 30-odd people in the two roundtable sessions I went to were domain investors. The rest came from the IP industry, registrars, and "regular" businesses.

 

[Stephen]

Distinction on factual paper and actual proposal made?

Not the way Edwin is proposing it. He thinks that the oldest registered .co.uk, .org.uk or .me.uk should get the .uk which means that many people who've bought more recent .co.uk drops would lose out to the earlier .org.uk's etc..

For example, I sold winecellar .co.uk to an end user for just over £4000 recently, under Edwin's alternative proposal my buyer would lose the .uk to the registrant of the org.uk

This isn't a personal attack on Edwin, I simply responded to his post and have answered others who've questioned my response.

I cannot speak on behalf of Edwin but I would make a distinction between Edwin's paper which is factual and shows what other country registries have done about going to the 2nd level in providing different rights to current domain holders rather than auction and involving trademark holders as per the Nominet .uk proposal. I cannot argue with the facts in the paper but I disagree, this is the correct way forward and point out that some of those country tld decisions were done a long time ago when the internet was a different place, and they were not as developed as the uk namespace and had not had a several year campaign encouraging us all that the .co.uk was the place to be!.

As opposed to the proposal he made at the Nominet meeting which was to pair ownership for all time of the .co.uk and the .uk domain, which I do agree with, which would solve the issue you raise plus many others.

As for having a secondary postion if you don't get the result of the Nominet consulation for think is right, then it is only prudent to express it. My secondary position is sadly that the .uk proposal should then not go ahead unless there is full rights to the .co.uk registrants.

 

[websaway]

Have you anything constructive to add?

Have we all unwittingly been dragged into a feud between you and Edwin ?

well?

An answer rather than a duck would be nice, just for clarity.

 

[Alien]

I have certaintly dropped more .co.uk domains this month than any other month in the last 6 years (some of which I cannot remember why I thought they were good in the first place!)

Also noticed today 595, yes 595 pure 3 letter .co.uk domains are for sale on this site for £167 each excluding VAT if you buy 6 or more.

I wonder if .org.uk registrations are up and .co.uk renewals are down?

Do you think their is a connection with the above to the Nominet .uk proposal?

It's quite interesting really watching people dump domains here (the LLL.co.uk batch is a good example) and from what I can see they either generally are:

a) Ridiculously overpriced or -

b) Cheap as chips in the mad dash to unload them - often from some sellers who have held onto domains for years hoping for their 'big' sale and now are worried they could be vastly lower in value soon.

Personally, I haven't purchased (nor will I) any UK names until there's more clarity (I have bought .com's though recently).

Buyers willing to gamble could buy up many cheap .co.uk's here at the moment at bargain prices, as in the event the .uk proposal doesn't come off, (which of course it will, lol) could make a killing/profit later.

 

[websaway]

I assumed it was a rhetorical question. If that wasn't your intention then I'm afraid that only "we" can provide you with an answer. Perhaps you meant to ask me, "are you trying to drag us into a feud between you and Edwin"?

No it was meant to read have we all been dragged into a feud between you and Edwin ?

The reasons I ask are simply that, if I have then I could read your posts from a different perspective and sidestep that which doesn't apply wholly to the .uk issue.

 

[websaway]

[snipped]

From what I saw almost all of those three letter .co.uk domain names, if not all, featured a q, x or z. It's probable that the registrant still owns many others that don't.

Good three letter .co.uk domain names are not getting dumped by registrants I'm in contact with.

I agree quality domains won't just be sold off cheap. The investors who own them are more savvy than that.

 

[Stephen]

Will it - Won't it!

.......Personally, I haven't purchased (nor will I) any UK names until there's more clarity (I have bought .com's though recently).......

I'm still catching a few .co.uk and hedging my options, as don't know which way Nominet will go, today ;

BusinessCardCentre.co.uk - in case .uk comes out (lots of cards will need to be printed!)

CompanyTaxAdvice.co.uk - in case .uk not released, caught as a good general domain.

 

[Stephen]

Other cases?

Although I disagree with .uk, if it had the go ahead how about a sunrise blocking option open to the .co.uk and .org.uk registrants (and possibly trade mark holders where validated)? I'd exclude .me.uk because these are supposed to be for non trading individuals (correct me if I've overlooked something). The sunrise blocking would allow any existing .co.uk or org.uk registrant to block a matching .uk from being registered. The matching .uk could only be unblocked by agreement from all SLD registrants. Blocking would cost a reduced (one off) fee paired to the registration of the corresponding .co.uk or org.uk. This avoids an existing registrant feeling they need to be pushed into an expensive auction to obtain the .uk. It might require one SLD registrant to negotiate with another to buy the rights to the .uk if they really desired it however if they couldn't come to agreement then the .uk would remain blocked.

what about the .ltd.uk and .plc.uk registrants? (I don't own any)

and non used .org.uk domains as opposed to a trading .co.uk with a proper website, would you make a special case for them?

 

[namealot]

So far most I’ve asked about it in particular some at Procter Gamble others ay GSK they were indifferent or in favor and cited free market economy and non protectionism,

They couldn’t see it effecting either brands whose identities are established or how long if ever it would become publicly excepted and even if it did certain search engines dominance and ability to manipulate results have far more influence over business locally and globally (especially those dependant on net based sales) than any name, Cctld, Tld etc will ever have…? and said it might frighten the ignorant but not those that matter

For them search engines dominance was far more influential factor in shaping decisions with advertising, marketing etc over the next few years than any consideration of a cctld…? “Why bother with “names” far more effective and profitable to be in charge of the results and do they care if a or b sells my product…

Even Mr normal when you consider most sort of brand themselves as either there trading name or the service geo or occupation etc as more sites are developed around non generics etc than around them is another john the builder or london dentist going to effect them that much or any more than the org net com etc does or the new proposed other tlds would...for every business that makes a loss there would probably be five that will benefit with the exception of domainers with large uk portfolios and lets be honest business and joe public ain''t going to give a toss about them.

Millions of sites and business on the web in the uk where were all the top 100, 1000 companies in the uk at the nom discussion I’d say there absence speaks volumes to there thoughts on it…

 

[Stephen]

Apathy?

.....

Millions of sites and business on the web in the uk where were all the top 100, 1000 companies in the uk at the nom discussion I’d say there absence speaks volumes to there thoughts on it…

I was very suprised at the lack of businesses attending the Nominet roundtables, some of it was because no effort has been made to contact the top 1,000 uk owned websites in the uk not to mention the owners of the 10,000,000 uk domains.

As a domainer and a businesses owner, I have an insight some businesses owners don't have, which is a knowledge of domains, SEO, websites and how it all fits together. I really believe cyber squatting on a scale previoulsy not seen in the uk, will happen if the .uk proposal is adopted in its current form.

In 2004 one of the main reasons that .uk was looked to be introduced was to right the wrongs that a few thousand businesses did not own the .co.uk they should, if this goes ahead, it is not certain those few thousand will get their required .uk even with tradmarks.

But you can be sure through apathy, lack of awareness, lack of knowledge, lack of trust, cost many .co.uk owners will simply not register their .uk domain equivalents and I believe live to regret it.

 

[sdsinc]

As for 100% of "real" businesses are against the proposal, well I've spoken to quite a few "real" businesses in the last few weeks (double glazing manufacturers, plumbers, kitchen fitters, garage owners, etc) and without exception all were in favour of it.

I don't think they realize the implications, because they have not been explained to them.
.uk sounds like a good idea - as long as you are left to believe you might have preemptive rights as a .co.uk holder.

Also, these are not pure online businesses.
IMHO they rely more heavily on SEO than the more branded businesses. So they place less emphasis on domain names. In fact, the majority probably don't have an online presence at all.

 

[WaftyCrank]

The majority of good quality .co.uk domains are owned by dominers. Surely then the value of the .co.uk Market shouldn't be dictated by the release of .uk (which I don't agree with) but by the domaining community ensuring they don't start binning and lowering domain values when offers come in.

If the big players hold their nerve then surely if people want the domains then they have to pay the value that is set or buy something else. As for .uk, I agree that grandfather rights should go to the .co.uk owner. I also like the sunrise blocking idea as mentioned too.