Our Kiwi cousins across the ditch made the decision a few years back that they needed direct registrations e.g. sheepshaggers.nz. This was despite only having a population of around 4,500,000 at the time – and total domains of around 500,000.
To be fair though, it wasn’t your average registrant or domain investor that wanted this. It was the supply side – in combination with the regulator (which is also the registry) – that pushed this change through.
To keep everyone in work, the regulator came up with a convoluted process on how to deal with “prior rights” of existing registrants. They called this the Conflicted Name Process. What a shemozzle this was. Rather than describe it all again here, have a read of the article I wrote back in May 2016.
Given this was such a problem, the regulator then decided to change the process. I covered that here.
Fast Forward
It’s pay the registrar / regulator time! If you hold the rights to a reserved domain name, you have until 1pm tomorrow NZ time (30th March) to pay for it. If you don’t, it then becomes available for anyone else to register. This article from the regulator explains the process.
One of the most widely read articles on Domainer back in 2015 was “Follow The Money”. Unfortunately, I lost some “Supply” friends over this.
This subsequent article “Still Following The Money” related to dropcatchers (in particular Netfleet).
Are You A Rhodes Scholar?
The good thing is you don’t need to be one. Thanks to our friends across the ditch, it’s very easy to work out what’s going to happen if and when direct registrations in .au transpire.
What do you think?
Ned O’Meara – 28th March 2017
Disclaimer
The uptake of direct registrations in the .nz and .uk name spaces, in terms of both registration volume and usage, has been dismal. To say the very least.
This article is a timely warning for our local namespace. The results here will be no exception. Extra costs will be worn by Australian businesses, with no additional value derived from the expense.
Direct Registrations failed in the .UK and .NZ
auDA, Ausregistry / Neustar Inc. Melbourne IT ( and associated entities), auDA Board Members, Deloitte, Australian Dept of Communications all know this so why the false and misleading information from some parties that those direct extensions have been successful and Australia should follow also into failure.
Many people may not know:
1. Anyone in the world could register and .co.uk and .co.nz …unlike the auDA restricted .com,au and .net.au
2. Those UK and NZ registries never auctioned premium names the same way auDA chose to do for massive profit ( “not for profit” auDA has over $10 million in the bank from profits).
3. only 6 % of .co.uk owners took up the .uk name. 94% failure rate
4. only 4% of .co.nz owners took up the .nz name. 96% failure rate.
No matter how supply stack the auDA memberships in both supply and demand class members and stock all voting and survey results and voting the facts are clear.
– When was the last wholesale .com.au and .net.au price decrease?
– Why still charge for COR when most countries have this FREE?
– When was the last international open tender for wholesale registry to offer innovation and benefits for Australian domain name consumers and resellers?
Even Deloitte Consultants said there is no benefits or business case or demand for another competing .au extension and that they think it may be a case of profiteering by supply and ” conflicts of interest” of how surveys etc where done. .. Lets see if this makes it into any reports for “accountability and transparency”! Deloitte is also briefed on the failed .uk and .nz results… but who is paying Deloitte and what have they been paid to do exactly.. justify the direct .au or what.. how can they do this in light of all the public facts?
Who will make money from another competing .au extension
– any auDA board members?
– auDA?
– Ausregistry/ Neustrar Inc?
– Icann
Etc
Deloitte told me they think wholesale pricing needs to drop and they are unsure why auDA the ” not for profit” has so much money in profits…
The new auDA CEO is very well aware of the facts lets see if he does anything or if he just folows the “supply” pushed profit agenda which has caused auDA to have the poor global reputation it has. They certainly do not consider the rights and feedback of domain name registrants and consumers it seems.
When auDA board members are making money from decisions and policy it really brings into doubt the whole set up of auDA as the Commonwealth Government contracted Australian domain name administration.
When is the auDA contract up for renewal itself? It was supposed to be 2017?
John, you make some good points and pose some important questions.
You and others are rightly seeking greater accountability and transparency from auDA.
As a general point, industry self-regulation in consumer markets is fundamentally and inherently flawed. The costs and risks of industry self-regulation in consumer markets outweigh the benefits.
This 2000 Taskforce report is worth a read, or at least a browse: Industry Self-Regulation in Consumer Markets <https://archive.treasury.gov.au/documents/1131/PDF/final_report.pdf>.
Yep, I can see the dark clouds forming… Do I get an umbrella or put my bathers on?
Start an Australian domain registrar and hosting business Ned. 🙂