I think its because people only focus on one aspect as being the single reason why they don't get names - with being outbid seeming to be the popular one at the mo - rather than looking at the bigger picture and realising there is a lot more distance between them and the pro's other than that.

infact i am against monopoly, but on the other hand i hate bidding sites. Wish there may be 5-10 firms that serves as drop catchers but only with first come first serve basis. No bidding. ý have now 4 snaps that will be deleting in july 2 of them is hot ... really hot. One will drop at the end of july but now nearly $400 on NW. That will probably goes for $2000-$3000 even it is a .net domain. And again probably i ll lose it

Hey, yeah, great idea!

There's a house in downtown Redmond that I think is really great. Unfortunately, with the current system, if the owners ever move out, they can sell it to the highest bidder. And if they die, and the property reverts back to the State, it's auctioned.

Wish there may be 5-10 firms that serves as house catchers but only with first come first serve basis.

(duh)

Originally posted by cambler
It is nothing more than a profit center for Verisign.

Agreed 100%.

since ICANN accredits everything they can accredit some registrars for registering expiring domains. Dont think this is very hard thing to do

Don't you think that the *reason* you were able to get the snap was because of the existence of other drop chasing services? The money will follow the method that works best for securing the names the buyers with resources want.

All registrars are accredited for registering dropped domains. I fail to see your point.

and all these registrar can serve like snap names. NOT like NW.

I see. So you want to dictate the BUSINESS MODEL.

Sorry, no. Your argument is lost.

Originally posted by safesys
Just because *you* don't know how to do it doesn't mean other people don't.

This is the very basis for getting a college degree, or graduate degree, to kick the stuffings out of your "competition" when applying for a job ... The differance between "the haves" and "the have nots" is usually the fact that "the haves" knew, or had access to, something "the have nots" did'nt. It's also why people say "lifes not fair".... The sooner you play "the game" (sic) the sooner you become one of "the haves", if you resist then you'll just get the stuffings kicked out'aya.

isnt WLS a dictate?

>isnt WLS a dictate?

Absolutely. That's why it won't happen (among other reasons).

You begin to understand?

we will see if it is going to happen or not

Hopfully this post contributes to this thread and offers a numerical basis for "all the words". From my posts in:

http://www.domainstate.com/showthrea...&pagenumber=11

Ok I just ran some "obvious" numbers and have begun to more clearly see what others have been saying but have not framed their comments in a way that made sense to me. Here goes --

Verisign gets,

$6 for a domain reg
$24 for a WLS slot, so
$30 total for a domain (lets assume 100% utilization of WLS)

Until recently Verislime, errrr, Verisign was charging $30 per domain year but reduced the price to $20 per year. So when WLS kicks in Verisign makes no pricing changes however adds an additional service,

$20 for basic domain registration
$30 for "insured" domain registration (ie includes WLS)

(lets forget about laws for the moment - thank you)

So now other registrars still look competive for basic domain registrations however Verisigns "Insured Registration" is the lowest in the industry -- Of course it is since this is the zero income point for all other registrars!

Thus Verisign in no way affects the domain registration competition but it does get to offer a very specific service, which domain speculation has proven the value of, at a price that nobody else can compete with!

Is this legal, sorry folks but this kind of stuff happens all the time. Just talk to the phone guy the next time he comes to your house to fix your phone, just ask'm about phone deregulation ..... That said we go back to what I said before and that *REGULATION* is the answer here. Thus I can now see how the financial review of WLS fits in to the coalition's bill. I still say none of the above ends WLS however I do see how the result is that Versign is legally bound to a minimum WLS price / Reg+WLS price that allows other registrars to compete with them. So I do see how things might get delayed for a while as "they" bicker back and forth about what the fair regulated cost structure for Versign will be.

I hope that made sense.

Originally posted by mole:
Network Solutions do not notify registrants of renewal and expiry unless you registered directly with them. And if you did, I think the word spam is a more correct description of being "notified".

This is actually part of the thought process I went though regarding my above post. I kept trying to wrestle with the idea that WLS redirects registrations away from other registrars -- something that has been suggested by others but just does not make *ANY* sense. Simply put Verisign *SUCKS* and there is now way in hell I would ever do anything that moves me towards their direction.

However the combined *PRICING* of Reg fee and WLS fee of $30 *DOES* push registrants in thier direction! So in my mind it's not the service but the price of the service that causes the shift -- And this is exactly where the concept of "monopoly" kicks in, again it's not the service but the price *ONLY THEY* can offer the service at ..... This is a problem.

Yes, we will. Care to place a bet?