Register.com Selects IDNNewsletter as the Exclusive Broker For its IDN Portfolio

[sprewellpj]

For those of you who wanted more detail on the above banner...

Register.com has decided to open the vault and sell a select portion of its IDN in-house portfolio names to the general public. It chose IDNNewsletter.com as the exclusive domain brokerage platform for this sale. Among the names that will be up for sale are ラブ.com ("Love" in Japanese) and כיף.com ("Fun" in Hebrew"). The IDNNewsletter / Register.com launch is planned for the first week of May and will only be available to IDNNewsletter.com subscribers.

[chrisofmel]

first week of may? so tomorrow or the next day?

[sprewellpj]

That's right. Probably Friday. Keep your eye on your inbox as these are priced to sell and the first to respond will get them.

[sprewellpj]

It is now hot off the presses . . . and we have already made multiple sales.

[yanni]

It is now hot off the presses . . . and we have already made multiple sales.

Hmm, I didn't seem to get my copy.

[sprewellpj]

If you PM me your email, I'll try to forward it.

[Dillpupp]

Hmm, I didn't seem to get my copy.

Me neither..

[markits]

I found it in the spam folder.

[MDM]

Is the portfolio inhouse (i.e. registered & held as own investments by Register.com itself) or it is collection from various registrants who registered the names in Register.com?

[alpha]

Is the portfolio inhouse (i.e. registered & held as own investments by Register.com itself) or it is collection from various registrants who registered the names in Register.com?

It's a "house" portfolio, meaning the names are owned by the registrar (register.com) themselves as a private collection.

[dnnames]

Ah i didn't know register.com held domains themselves...

[MDM]

Ah i didn't know register.com held domains themselves...


Many registars do hold house investments. Some even renew registrants' expired names and let them 'drop' to their own collections instead of available for public re-registration.

[idn]

Ah i didn't know register.com held domains themselves...

They hold some for themselves and some for private owners under the name m-renewals.

[MDM]

They hold some for themselves and some for private owners under the name m-renewals.

Yup have seen many domains under 'm=renewals' . Is this Register.com 's privacy service ?

[idn]

Yup have seen many domains under 'm=renewals' . Is this Register.com 's privacy service ?

I think so. :)

[Drewbert]

Some even renew registrants' expired names and let them 'drop' to their own collections instead of available for public re-registration.

That's what they are.

Ask Fin.

[Wot]

Many registars do hold house investments. Some even renew registrants' expired names and let them 'drop' to their own collections instead of available for public re-registration.

That would almost be like insider trading then would it not, as nobody else gets the opportunity to pick them up?

[Drewbert]

Not only that, it's also anti-competitive, because new entrant Registrars cannot compete with large established ones because they retain the best expired names.

One day the FTC might finally wake up to it.

[MDM]

Not only that, it's also anti-competitive, because new entrant Registrars cannot compete with large established ones because they retain the best expired names.

One day the FTC might finally wake up to it.

Some registrars even use inhouse "policy" and "discretion" to auction your expired names or charge ridiculously high 'redemption fees" and make profits even you still have right to renew / redeem them elsewhere.

[Giant]

That's what they are.

Ask Fin.

I know it too. Register.com took all these names from its customers when they (mostly) expired in 2002 - 2004.

[MDM]

That's what they are.

Ask Fin.

Fin = Testbb1 ? He's from Register.com?

[alpha]

Fin = Testbb1 ? He's from Register.com?

no. you're getting confused. Drew is suggesting that Fin (Testbb1) may have been the original owner of these.

I know it too. Register.com took all these names from its customers when they (mostly) expired in 2002 - 2004.

"took". Interesting choice of words.

To be clear, I don't know and haven't researched the background and history of these domains; but the procedure that Drew and Giant are referring to goes like this:

Domain owner does not renew domain

Domain enters the drop cycle and into Redemption period

Then a few hours before it moves into the final stages of the delete process (when it is not recoverable by anyone) - the registrar take control of it.


Back in 2004 Snapnames were not catching IDNs, so all that would have happened is the names would have dropped, and probably been picked up by Giant or RD.

Either way, the original owner was no longer going to be the owner, as after 60 days of not renewing it, it was going to be owned by someone else anyway.

While I don't condone some of the actions of registrars, "took" may be the wrong word to use.

[alpha]

That would almost be like insider trading then would it not, as nobody else gets the opportunity to pick them up?

you mean like how Snapnames have cozy little deals with registrars so domains never actually drop, instead they get relocated in the final hours.

Like everything in life, if you're looking to blame someone, then don't blame the people who are working within the rules (registrars); instead blame the people who make the rules (ICANN)

[MDM]

Then a few hours before it moves into the final stages of the delete process (when it is not recoverable by anyone) - the registrar take control of it.

This is not the case practically in some registrars like Godaddy, they can take control of your expired names 'by discretion' (they can show you their 'rules' and 'policies') around 12 days after expiry and send the names for auctions (or renew their own, = bidded by themselves and took the name?) and make profits, so you can lose your names as early as 12 days after expiry there theotically. So some registrars should be avoided.

[alpha]

This is not the case practically in some registrars like Godaddy, they can take control control of your expired names 'by discretion' (they can show you their 'rules' and 'policies') around 12 days after expiry and send the names for auctions (or renew their own, = bidded by themselves and took the name?) and make profits. So some registrars should be avoided.

I call Darwins theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection) on this. If you're dumb or unorganized enough to not renew your name, then someone else more intelligent or diligent should own it.

I don't see how excusing your stupidity for 12 days or excusing you for 60 days make a difference.

[bwhhisc]

When does the sale begin? I had seen something about the first week of May at one point. Will it be an auction?

[alpha]

When does the sale begin? I had seen something about the first week of May at one point. Will it be an auction?

lol.

Ok, to save you having to read the instruction manual ;) ....

The domains are being sold at BIN prices through IDNNewsletter, which means you will need to have signed up to receive it by email.

The first one was sent out a couple of days ago, and the next one is being prepared as we speak.

[Drewbert]

The Registrars are making the rules up as they go along, and Registrants have no say because Registrars have contracts with ICANN but Registrants do not.

Although domains should be returned to the available pool so a potential Registrant can chose ANY Registrar to register said name (which is why there is more than one Registrar in existence today) the Registrars are claiming ownership of names paid for by someone else. This is totally fraudulent.

[bwhhisc]

lol.

Ok, to save you having to read the instruction manual ;) ....

The domains are being sold at BIN prices through IDNNewsletter, which means you will need to have signed up to receive it by email.

The first one was sent out a couple of days ago, and the next one is being prepared as we speak.

I signed up 2x but have not received any emails or newsletters.

Why not publish the lists and prices here (as well) and link?

[alpha]

I signed up 2x but have not received any emails or newsletters.

I can see your yahoo email account, and it was mailed to it successfully, suggest you check your spam folder.

[IDNCowboy]

Any names left that didn't sell yet?

Any comments from Register.com regarding the success of the sale and possibility of more than 1 future sale ? How many IDNs do they have.

[idn]

How many IDNs do they have.

At least 2500, some of those are privately owned and only held by register.com.
Some decent, some junk, quite a mixed bag.

[IDNCowboy]

At least 2500, some of those are privately owned and only held by register.com.
Some decent, some junk, quite a mixed bag.

I meant register.com themselves
Too bad IYD won't sell any of their names in the $x,xxxx now ;P

They licked their chops from money they got from their previous sales of $xx,xxx each.

[Giant]

"took". Interesting choice of words.

To be clear, I don't know and haven't researched the background and history of these domains; but the procedure that Drew and Giant are referring to goes like this:

Domain owner does not renew domain
Domain enters the drop cycle and into Redemption period
Then a few hours before it moves into the final stages of the delete process (when it is not recoverable by anyone) - the registrar take control of it.

.........

While I don't condone some of the actions of registrars, "took" may be the wrong word to use.

No, these domains expired but never dropped. Either the original Registrants or the Registrar renewed them right after they expired, but they were later labeled something like "Unpaid Domains". The Registrants' info of these domains remained "Unpaid Domains" for about 2 years and then were all changed to "Register.com".

Yes, "took" is not a right word to use, maybe "owned", "grabbed" or "took control of" is a better choice, but I am not smart enough to know the difference....:-)

Actually, it's not Register.com's fault but ICANN is to blame....

[IDNCowboy]

No, these domains expired but never dropped. Either the original Registrants or the Registrar renewed them right after they expired, but they were later labeled something like "Unpaid Domains". The Registrants' info of these domains remained "Unpaid Domains" for about 2 years and then were all changed to "Register.com".

Yes, "took" is not a right word to use, maybe "owned", "grabbed" or "took control of" is a better choice, but I am not smart enough to know the difference....:-)

Actually, it's not Register.com's fault but ICANN is to blame....

This is standard practice... Many registrars take these domains into their posession by lowering your expiration window. They then try to sell them on their own market place or hoarde them.

[Drewbert]

If you read through some of the T&C's out there, you will see that some Registrars now have the ability to take over ownership of a domain immediately on expiration, if they so desire.

Let's be careful out there.

[MDM]

If you read through some of the T&C's out there, you will see that some Registrars now have the ability to take over ownership of a domain immediately on expiration, if they so desire.

Let's be careful out there.

Exactly! So who is going to study the Terms & Conditions for every registrar they are using? And at last it is the 'at the discretion' that is the Black Swan killer, you never know when will they apply this 'discretion' if there is no such pattern before.