Well it was bound to happen.
We have been talking about this issue for months.
Tucows.com has been building up a portfolio of hundreds of thousands of domains by taking ownership of expired domains of its customers instead of letting them drop or sending them to a public auction like, well, almost every other registrar in the world (there are over 900 registrars).
Tucows announced today that it has started Yummydomains.com to sell tens of thousands of those domains.
“”””YummyNames, a new service providing exclusive access to a large selection of premium domain names from the Tucows Domain Name Portfolio. Created especially with marketers in mind, YummyNames allows people to search for and obtain the perfect domain name for their organization from tens of
thousands of high-quality domain names.””””””
Nice.
This should help Tucows bottom line since the sales they devrive from the domains is 100% profit. After all they have no cost in the domain, they just took them, from their customers.
Some of the teaser names they list are countryrock.com,divorced.com, lemons.com, listener.com, mygarden.com, thepub.com, tool.com and veggies.com
Not only will Tucows sell the domains, but they will lease them as well.
Once again we think this practice should be outlawed by ICANN.
As far as we know this is the first site ever set up by a registrar to sell domains owned by the registrar which comprise domains taken from their ex-customers;
If I was a customer of Tucows who let their domain expire only to find the domain was kept by their registrar, and now see it for sale by my registrar, well that would piss me off.
I hope some of these customers raise up and yell like crazy.
YummyNames is just another reason for ICANN to take action to stop this practice once and for all.
Tucows share are down $.02 this morning at $.32.
1. I understand your concern about registrars keeping the drops but if I don’t pay my renewal, it is no longer MY domain. That is the fact.
So, whether the domain goes through the drop cycle or proprietary arrangement for a “pre-order” drop, the FORMER owner/customer has no rights of ownership after expiration date plus any extra days as outlined in the registrar agreement.
2. Why isn’t tucows going through afternic as they are now with their dropping domains?
3. How do you know that the name going through yummy are former customer domains?
I was reinstalling my OS and came across the Tucows.exe on one of my folders. Not remembering I did a what is tucows and came across this section and from what I have seen I have to ask what has happened since this was first published back in 2008 to as recent as 2011.
Last year I saw my Churches domain name up for grabs and so I got it since the person who was supposed to be looking after it dropped the ball and it was lost for 3 or 4 years. SO I bought it not for a year but paid in advance for 10 years.
My thought is if you like it the buy if for a life time and then prevent what I have been reading here about the scams that has been taking place with Tucows.
Rob
1. I believe their is a fiduciary relationship between a company and its customer especially a registrar and a registrant.
There are too many possible abuses that could take place.
I have talked about the appearance of impropriety.
That is you should not place yourself in a position were you ethics or business practice can be called into question.
In this instance the question can be raised how hard is Tucows trying to get the customer to renew their domain if the end game is to keep the domain after it expires.
Many people who have lost domains have complained that they never received proper notice of the renewal. Some registrars just e-mail a notice, some send many follow up notices, some only send the first one. Some registrars mail a notice as well, some do not.
If you are a regulated industry such as registrars are, in my opinion your company business practices and reputation must be beyond reproach.
Especially true if your a public company, where your actions effect thousands of shareholders.
2. There could be many factors I could guess at. One is they don’t have to give Afternic a piece of the sales off their inhouse site, more for them, less for everyone else. Seems to fit the pattern.
Maybe the Afternic relationship has not been as productive as Tucows hoped.
Your guess is as good as mine.
3. Have no proof for sure that they are customers domains, but in all the press items I have read on Tucows own portfolio all indications are they came from customers domains. I have never seen or heard of them buying domain at drop auctions or in industry auctions like the rest of us. I also cannot recalling seeing the domains in drop auctions.
Tucows has “bragged” about their growing portfolio and on all occasions they talk about the retained customers domains, which I believe is in very large, if not its entirety the inventory they are now selling
Thank you for the very detailed explanation.
I understand your position much better now.
I hope ICANN takes a very thorough look at this issue and opens up their discussion to include comments from the public so people can tell their stories.
First, thank you Michael for writing what I would of. 🙂
Second, @ Rob Bill Sweetman of Tucows clearly stated on my blog that “some of the names are retained by Tucows for our own portfolio” in regards to expired domain names.
Comment # 3 http://www.dotweekly.com/2008/04/16/tucows-holding-back-expired-4-letter-coms/
A couple recent domains they decided to “keep” are:
Taster.com
MyDirect.com
ButterPecan.com
I tracked all these and know they kept them! Bill has also pointed out domain names they “chosen for Tucows Portfolio” http://www.dotweekly.com/2008/07/12/could-you-explain-tucows/
Great post – Tucows.com has been building up a portfolio of hundreds of thousands of domains by taking ownership of expired domains of its customers instead of letting them drop or sending them to a public auction like, well, almost every other registrar in the world (there are over 900 registrars).
” People come into your life for a reason, a season, or a lifetime. When you figure out which it is, you’ll know exactly what to do.”
Michelle Ventor
Whores! An absolute conflict of interest and domainers better wake up to abuses by registrars and no longer support them!! Especially ones that have already proved that they will throw their own customers under the bus. These guys make me sick.
Only conduct business with companies/individuals that have integrity, ethics and high standards. Post No. 9 sums it up in a nutshell.
I agree, registrars and employees at registrars should have limits placed on what sorts of domain buying they can do. You can’t always have your cake and eat it too, unless you run your registrar like a dictatorship right? They dictate all the rules that ICANN hasn’t regulated yet and let us do what we want as long as its not inconvienient for them, and we are the suckers that follow this crap. Historically speaking though, things don’t always end well for dictators.
They have access to alot of things that we don’t have access to. Perhaps you could also call this insider trading.
I like where Rick called them Whores, but on the flipside, the lack of proper regulation on the space right now is what really makes this industry great to be in. There are alot of opportunities in the space that come and go in recent times that down the road, once everything has been regulated, will not be there for the average joe anymore. This is just one example of such an opportunity that registrars are able to capitalize on.
Who will be the first to register:
Registrarblacklist.com
And put tucows on it? As well as Enom and a select few others who dont recognize domainers property rightsw.
Whether they park their stolen names, sell stolen names, or just hoard them, they are still stolen names. If laws written by Icann aren’t enforced properly it doesn’t make an action right.
We tried having this discussion on Namepros a while back but it went no where. http://www.namepros.com/domain-name-discussion/487472-expired-domain-skimming-by-registrars.html?highlight=tucows
Tucows has been called a thief and treated like dirt by honest domainers for good reason. The only people I have ever seen come to its defense are those that buy from it. Find something else to do for a living because these turds will go down sooner or later. I suggest you move your precious commodities out to fabulous or moniker.
Is this really any different than Network Solutions profiting from auctioning an expired name at NameJet?
JS,
VERY good point. So they get to keep the money rather than the domain.
So long as the renewal and dropping process are standardized and not abused in anyway then I don’t see the problem with what a registrar does with a domain after it is no longer registered by the registrant.
JS
I think there is a major difference
NSI are dropping domains.
They are making it available to the general public.
They are not hoarding the domains for themselves.
If no one back orders the name at namejet.com, then the domain drops and can be re-registered by anyone in the world for $8.
Yes NSI is making money off the domain if they get bidded on at NameJet, but they make nothing if the domain drops.
Let’s not forget that none of us would be in business if NSI would have adopted Tucows policy from day one.
NSI would own tens of millions of domains and we would never had a change to own any of them.
Why not support the hundreds of other registrars that don’t take their customers names and keep them for their own and sole benefit, and stops you from owning any?
Many other registrars subscribe to this practice as well.
While I’m most certainly not for it, forbidding this practice is also likely to lead to regulation of pre-drop auctions such as the ones on Namejet, SnapNames and Afternic. So if we’re asking for a change in policy, we should be clear on how those auctions should be handled.
If we see a difference between the two, that needs to be explained along with the complaints.
What a scam!!!
Whether a registrar sends dropped names to another company to sell at auction, or whether the registrar retains them for its own account, these are two sides of the same coin.
In the options market, at the time of expiration, if the option you own is in the money, the option self executes and the proceeds are deposited into the option owner’s account.
This recognizes that the benefits that flow from an option follow ownership. Imagine what would happen if all option owners were required to manually execute the sale of their options prior to expiration, and if they didn’t, the broker would sell these options at the last second and pocket the proceeds. I suspect all hell would break loose.
Of course there is a fundamental difference in that options expire worthless, while a domain name does not. In many ways, this makes the situation all the more unacceptable.
Without having to propose sweeping changes with regard to how this industry is regulated, here’s how this situation can be addressed now:
During the current grace period following expiration, in which the clock continues to count down the days leading to the domain owner losing all right, title and interest in his or her domain name, the registrar should implement an automatic, self-executing function that sends the domain name to auction for the benefit of the domain owner. Of course, the registrar would be entitled to a small commission.
It seems to me the first registrar to adopt this policy will forever change the nature of this industry by recognizing that it is the domain owner that is the life blood of this business, and it is the domain owner who should most benefit from the outcome of his or her efforts.
@Sid, there used to be several registrars that did actually share (or at least try to share) the proceeds of a sale with the original owner of the domain, including Tucows and Networksolutions.
I’m not sure if anyone is still following this practice, but also I’m not convinced it works in this market, especially since often domains expire because the original owner’s contact information is out of date, so the registrar would have a hard time paying many of those users anyways. Not that this would be a real problem for them…
#20
Frank,
If we begin with the proposition that domain ownership should be treated like most other property rights, then precedent exists to handle virtually any situation.
When a bank, lessor or other money holder can’t locate an owner due funds, it’s generally treated as abandoned property. Each state has it own rules and regulations, but it affords opportunity for the owner to make a claim instead of allowing an outright forfeiture.
It seems to me that we first need to agree on what domain ownership is. If it’s like most other vested property rights, then it should be treated accordingly. Forfeiting the value of a domain name to a registrar that could have as easily acted on your behalf as on its own makes me think that something more needs to be done.
Frank
It would make me very sad to see the end the end of domain drop auctions and a return to the old days when the domains simply dropped and went on a first come, first served basis
Sure I will miss paying thousands of dollars for domains having to spend a whole $8 to register them instead.
Network Solutions and their partner Name Jet are as guilty as Tucows. The only difference is that they hide the activity in a very clever manner.
No, MHB, they do NOT let the domain drop so the public can grab it for $8.
If someone happens to use the NameJet.com service to backorder a domain that NS has, you have just guaranteed that domain is going to be used and abused by NS and NJ to get every dime it can. And if they fail, you have just guaranteed it goes to good old AquireThisName.com (domain squatters extraordinaire).
Here is what just happened to me. The domain I wanted which I knew from its current owner was no longer wanted was set to expire on June 30, 2008. It was registered through NS.
I kept checking for it to drop through the normal process. I checked back in 30 days, then 60 days and still no drop from NS.
By the first week of September when NS still hadn’t dropped I began to think maybe I should try their backorder service with NJ. I placed my order for the minimum $29 that NJ asks for.
On 10/11 I get an email that my bid is now too low and has gone to auction as the domain was now in pending delete status. Oddly enough, the minimum bid I was required to place was $69–the exact amount NS wanted to renew the domain name. Hmm…
Unfortunately, circumstances were such that I missed my bid “opportunity.” On 10/14 the domain was registered with AquireThisName.com. I don’t have anything to substantiate it but I would bet there is a connection between them and the NS/NJ arrangement.
My search on Google reveals nothing but grief in relation to ATN. They take the domain auction scam to a whole new level of absurdness asking for thousands of dollars and sending out automated emails making all kinds of ridiculous claims.
Once your domain hits ATN or their like, you might as well kiss the domain good bye for several years. Unless, of course, you hold a registered trademark to the name or have thousands of dollars to squander.
I give up on ICANN and all others who claim any sense of fairness can be achieved in .com-ville.
LOL! I agree with your sentiments exactly, MHB, in your post# 22 that hit right before my last one.
I feel very cheated and frustrated this evening with the entire debacle that has become the current domain name registration process.
I think all domains should now drop on the 30th day of expiration and move immediately to eBay. Highest bidder wins and their money is sent to the registrar that dropped it and the site is immediately registered with them again. The new owner now has 30 days to move to any other registrar of their choice at no cost.
That’s my New Deal plan for .com-ville!!! LOL!
Tony for President of .com-vile
Tony post 23
My understanding is that the minimum bid on NJ is $69. They will default to $29 if you do not specify a price, when you place your backorder but you will always get “your bid is not high enough notice”, to make you go to $69 before the backorder is accepted.
My point about NJ is if NO ONE back orders a NSI name then it will drop and will be available for be re-registered for $8
@MHB: Yes, the good old times 🙂 However what will happen now if this issue is addressed with the help of ICANN, we might just end up with the Verisign-Proposed Wait-List-Service (WLS), which would mean a centralized subscription based service. Only one person could place a backorder for each name, but has to place the order without knowing if the name will actually drop (in order to be first to place it).
I am not quite sure if that’s what we wish for, so we have to make sure to suggest an alternative along with the complaints about warehousing.
Frank
You maybe right.
For those newer to domaining this was proposed many years ago and works as Frank describes.
Basically like the old snapnames.com when it first started.
I have no problem with this either.
All registrar having a uniform method of dealing with expired domains, no registrar would be allowed to just keep domains and all domains would be priced at say $69 for the backorder, so no more thousands and tens of thousands for each deleted domain and once again if there was no backorder on a domain under the WLS it would simply drop and become available for registration.
Actually I like it better than the current mess we have.
The last few comments seem to take as a given that the registrar has no choice but to keep, for its own account, proceeds of a domain name that is in the process of being sold through a drop auction.
What I am suggesting in #19 above is that registrars can implement a system that protects the equity interest of a domain owner in the event of a drop. While its true that domainers drop worthless domains all the time, I think nobody would suggest that a domainer would voluntarily drop a three character .COM. Yet it happens all the time. This is not the result of intention, but rather mistake or neglect.
A registrar can implement a system to automatically sell an expiring domain on behalf of a registrant prior to cancellation just as easily as it can on its own behalf. So nothing changes in regard to the domain being sold. The difference is that the domain registrant is able to benefit from whatever gain is realized a s a result of the domain sale.
If somebody drops a wallet, we tell them. Even if they are careless in the way it is being carried. We don’t wait until they’ve left the area and help ourselves to the cash. The technology exists for registrars to protect domain owners from dropping their “domain wallets” without compensation. I’m unaware of any explanation that provides a rationale for coming back later and helping ourselves to the cash.
Sid
You are correct, registrars could do this but unless and until there are uniform rules on what registrars must do, you would not expect any to do the right thing.
I wanted to weigh in here and provide my view very specifically. apologies in advance as I am famously long-winded (stop laughing berryhill)
first. what do we do? we have been very open in what we are doing, what our grace periods are and how we implement them. we have been open about it since we started in 2006. we review names for brandability and revenue potential. we provide, if I am not mistaken, the longest grace periods in the industry and, again I believe, are perhaps the only registrar to honor redemption grace period on names other than as dictated to us by the auction providers. I would note here that in negotiating with the auction providers (and we have spoken to all of them) they are clear that they are not interested in us allowing an auction to be subject to a grace period for the benefit of the original registrant.
after the grace periods we retain names in our discretion. what we do not choose to retain (I believe this to be over 98%) goes to auction. what does not go to auction is dropped.
I would note that our grace periods and our specific practices are clear and available. we do not play hide the peanut. we do not have sister companies that take ownership. we understand many other registrars are a little more opaque in their practices.
second, in my view there are only two differences in what we are doing and what a registrar who has all their names flow into auction is doing. before the differences though, the more important point, as many of you have noted, is the similarity, that the registrar is capturing the excess economic value.
the two differences are timing and path. in terms of timing, a registrar who sends to auction sells the name to a wholesaler who will then either keep it in a large portfolio for revenue or wait for the best-use end user to buy it. most often both are true. the registrar gets money immediately at what will usually be a lower level than if sold to an end user directly. the registrar trades money for timing and certainty. by the way, after doing this for three years what we are doing may or may not be better.
the other difference is path. in an auction the domain most often flows through a domainer before reaching an end user and will sit in a domainer portfolio collecting revenue in the interim (or not), just like it sits in our portfolio.
third, I think it is instructive to look at the history of the drop. there have been three clear phases, the wild west, the primacy of the auctions and the last couple years.
in the wild west guys like scott day, gary chernoff and frank schilling flourished and those who knew the secret handshake benefited.
in the primacy of the auctions guys like rob hall, paul stahura and clint page flourished and there was a higher degree of standardization, but not if you were the registry (who got hammered) or ICANN (who were inundated with hundreds of “registrar” applications from the same entities in an orwellian arms race).
the situation of the last few years is a further evolution with the markets becoming more efficient.
the one thing I will guarantee going forward is that the market for secondary domain names will continue to evolve and will continue to evolve towards efficiency. I will also note that in rapidly evolving markets smart entrepreneurs skate to where the puck is going. when the market evolved from stage one to stage two scott, gary and frank did not whine and complain, they figured out how to thrive in the next phase. when it evolved from stage two to stage three, rob, paul and clint did not whine and complain. they figured out how to thrive in the next phase. people who look back on how rapidly evolving markets were and try to legislate or wish them back in to existence are sort of like the music industry looking at the Internet.
an interesting historical note. we were one of the last registrars to get into taking advantage of expiring names. in 2004, before NSI launched their original snap names auction for their expiring names, I tried to get the registry and the large registrars to agree on a framework not unlike some of what was discussed above. in that framework I stressed the rights of the original registrant. I was met with derision from registrars and domainers, greed from the registry and apathy from registrants. it was only long after it was clear to me that I would be unable to effect change in that direction that we went down the path we did.
lastly, I think this whole issue is a sad distraction. registrars and domain owners (and we are both) have common cause in two respects, registrant rights and fighting against overreaching IP interests. Tucows has an unmatched record on these two issues. you did not see our names handed over to the state of kentucky.
we have spent more time, money and effort on transfers, whois and so many other registrant rights issues from the dawn of competition than any other registrar. both the ICA and the ALAC recognize that. we have spent more time and money fighting IP interests inside of ICANN and the courts of two countries (and of course in UDRPs) than any other registrar. we have the most generous grace periods, the fairest and most transparent transfer rules and, by the way, some of the VERY largest domain holders as customers.
I am more than happy to dig into this stuff deeper. I have no doubt many who are here disagree, but at least hopefully this will help us focus on what it is we disagree on.
Elliot,
Would you address why there isn’t a system that would protect the equity interest of a domainer similar to what I described for the option markets (in #19 above) that would automatically execute (send to auction on behalf of the domain owner) prior to loss of ownership and control?
With so many different registrars and portfolios of hundreds and thousands of domains names, its unreasonable to penalize domainers, by forfeiture, when expiration dates are inadvertently missed.
Let’s look at intent:
If we all agree that no domainer would ever knowingly allow a three character .COM to expire along with many other domains that have value beyond their reg fee, then create procedures that provide for such circumstances.
Notwithstanding boilerplate, any registrar action that results in the loss of equity to a domain owner would clearly be in conflict with what is clearly the domainers’ intent.
In hospitals, there are DNR orders. How about the equivalent for domainers at the time of registration?
Example:
***
If prior to expiration, we do not hear from you or are unable to make contact, you authorize (Registrar Name) to sell the domain at auction, on your behalf, and deposit the proceeds (less a 15% commission) into your PayPal account.
***
To argue that a domainer losing a domain is preferable to any other alternative just doesn’t make sense. And of course, any new perceived risk on the part of the registrar can be addressed by new and better boilerplate from the lawyers.
I’d very much appreciate your comments.
CORRECTION
The last paragraph of #32 above should read as follows:
To argue that a domainer losing everything (both domain and domain equity value) is preferable to any other alternative just doesn’t make sense. And of course, any new perceived risk on the part of the registrar can be addressed by new and better boilerplate from the lawyers.
Sid
I’m going to move this to a new post
sid, it is an interesting idea, but I would generally agree with frank’s comment in 20 above re: the real administrative challenge of effecting that for owners of one or two names.
as a service for a domainer who owned a larger number of names it might be different. I think your comment is a good one.
Frank M is correct when he says most registrars do what Tucows does — that is sorting through the customer domain expirys and picking or collecting the best, parking them to watch their performance and then after 28 days doing a “pre-purchase” on them with their registry to hold the domain. Then after the final RGP of 15 days passes, they take control.
If the previous owner of the domain complains during this approx. 45 day period and makes a claim for the domain again, usually 99% of the time, the registrar will release it back to the owner upon an “upgraded” payment, averaging about $149 per domain.
Enom does this regularly. I love to watch some of my domains go into expiry, and then sacrifice one or two that have obvious generic value among 10 or 20 that aren’t so great, all expiring on the same date, and I’ll see the OBVIOUS better domains get immediately pushed to the $149 pricing to “renew” it, as opposed to older domains which the registrar will let “sit” and take the standard renew price for it. In other words, a “good looking domain” will be sorted by the registrar immediately at the end of the 28 day expiry period and be pushed to the $149 renewal price, where other poor domains, expired on the same day, are still at the $8 pricing or whatever.
As far as Tucows is concerned, I was the first to point the finger at them when they bought the notorious ITSMYDOMAINS.COM registrar, which was a registrar that never updated whois info on domains they sold through Snap and Pool drop auctions. I had two domains with them that I lost because they never updated my whois info, and only sent me one renewal pricing, which at that time was the day of or after the domain expired.
When registrars have this “conflict of interest” about profiting from expiring domains of their customers, it is a questionable practice, and it leaves a bad taste in your mouth that it is allowed. What to do about it? I don’t have an answer. The domain industry is now rolling along with this “setup” and the unsavory registrars are positioned to benefit greatly off the misfortunes and/or unfair business practices they employ.
My first article about this at the beginning of the year was thorough on presenting the evidence of ITSYOURDOMAINS.COM shenanigans, and then a follow-up that Tucows bought the registrar and didn’t fix it, allowing the shenanigans to continue.
http://www.successclick.com/itsyourdomaincom-tries-to-pull-a-gw-bush_2008_01_21/
http://www.successclick.com/tucows-reveals-they-have-domains-holy-double-cow-crap_2008_02_27/
Significant screenshots to back up claims…
Elliot,
Following a dropped domain auction, it should be no more difficult to execute a script that pays the domainer (whose payment information was captured at the time of initial registration) than it is to deposit the proceeds in a registrar’s account.
This appears to be more of a policy decision.
I think most people would agree that for every incredible eye-catching domain that appears on a dropped auction list, there is usually a domainer who is (or will soon be) sick to his stomach over the opportunity that slipped away. Not only have I heard the stories, I’ve also been the one with the stomach ache.
How it came to pass that the very person who registered the domain name – who had the insight and intuition, who paid the money and took the risk – should be denied all right to participate in the benefits of his or her labor is difficult to understand.
It seems to me that any business model that relies on a continuing stream of foreseeable anticipated customer losses, as a means of adding to the company bottom line, probably needs to be reworked a little bit.
Sid
Please place your comments under the new post on this issue:
http://www.thedomains.com/2008/10/31/tucows-responds-to-yummydomainscom/
registrarfly pulled the same dontpay, appearedpaid, letexpire and stealgame. outright theft.
Registerfly actually never stored the correct whois data for thousands of registrants properly from the first place, which appears to be where their problem started.
From: Ivan DelValle
World & LocalSuperCenter.com
Enom Does Hide Domains
I am going to tell you a short edited and sweet version of the most recent of many, of what has happened to me
I renewed all of my expired domains on October 6 2008, and i renewed every single domain on the expired list, not one was left and I mean there was not 1 domain left on my expired domains list. Enom hid the domain InternationalsuperCenter.com so that it would not be listed as expired. it expired on September 24th with a 30 day grace period. when i went to renew my domains, on October 6 2008, i renewed every last domain that was listed as expired, when i checked again November 7 2008 the name Bank500.com was expired and they wanted to extort $160.00 and i paid it, and also InternationalSuperCenter.com also expired and they basically told me you will accept our extortion plan or lose your domain. I declined the extortion plan. Why? because i knew i paid off every expired domain, there were no domains left that were expired.( Not One ) the expired list was cleared. I was in negotiation with them, and they decided to teach me a lesson and they took the domain away completely. I want my domain back, this is not the first time Enom has done this to me and hundreds of other domain holders, And as i have discovered there are thousands of others that have been taken advantage of and have suffered damages by Enom and this this man and his unethical company. these people target the weak the frail and foreigners, and or people whom they feel are unable to do any thing about getting robbed and extorted, either through lack of money or lack of knowledge, distance barriers. This is a crying shame for the oppressed to be even more oppressed, some of you are scum, makes me sick. And it makes God sick.
And what makes me and the world sick is when a lot of you warped greedy people Create distorted lies and excuses so you to can continue to rip off the weak and defenseless..
I know for a fact that that this practice should be outlawed by Icann, to remove all incentives for companies like Demand Media / Enom To electronically manipulate and extort customers accounts to there advantage.
So I am not going to let Enom rob me anymore, I want to Organize a class action lawsuit against Richard Rosenblatt from Demand Media and Enom and put a stop to his crimes against the defenseless.
I know firsthand that Enom does exactly what Ivan states. Since I had over 1200 domains at the time with them, I complained and they reset my domains they “sucked up” out of my sight and allowed me to renew them. What they do is give domains they like a ‘different” title so when you sort through your domains, the best domains end up at the bottom of the list, as “cast offs”, or so you think. And yes, sometimes I found domains I didn’t see before that had expired, suddenly appear again at the $160 price.
People, this happens, and if you have a large amount of domains with Enom, and allow many to expire while you’re sorting them out and structuring your budget for renewal, some of the best domains will “disappear”. I forgot that this had happened to me on two domains last year. I got them back though after complaining.
My current issue with them is they keep asking me why I’m transferring my domains away from them, and I keep telling them “I designed the best domain management system at Bulkregister.com, along with Eric Rice, and you guys bought BR and didn’t implement these features, including sorting your domains by nameservers. And your pricing is not conducive to a large domainer’s portfolio pricing. Lower my renewal pricing, and implement the ability to view my domains by nameserver ONLINE, and I may reconsider.”
Enom ignored it. Consequently, they’ve been losing about 150 domains a month as I transfer them out to Moniker or Fabulous.
Good story Ivan. Thanks for reminding me of that exact experience I had in 2007
My domain expired and I was told to contact some unknown user for a request to get my domain back.
This person
Alex Fenemore
Tucows Park
*TUCOWS Inc.*
96 Mowat Ave.
Toronto, ON CAN, M6K 3M1
http://www.tucowsinc.com
wrote me:
Hello,
Thank you for your email regarding this domain name.
The asking price for this domain name is $499USD.
———
I find this company functioning with malice to request this kind of money for a domain that only cost me 9.99 to begin with. It is unethical. This behavior by Tucows needs to be dealt with. I would like to know who the owner of Tucows is to formally complain. What can be done for legislation to oulaw this practice!!!!
lele, for the facts you state to be the case, the domain would have had to expired over 105 days previous!
you are welcome to contact me offlist (if so, please make sure you CLEARLY identify yourself) and we can see what is possible but at some point you are asking for legislation to protect yourself from yourself.
if you are a real domainer the best help you can get is with your domain management tools to ensure you do not let valuable names expire.
Wow! what an idea ! What a concept ! Beautiful .. Amazing
one good thing with all of this is that it signals that the domain market is still in its early years, as there is so many scams and inefficiencies to be solved.
there is no possible reason for a registrar to keep a domain. none.
it’s even hard to accept the “up the ladder” trend in getting the domains at their early stages of expiration, where it is supposed to exist a democratic and equal opportunity to grab a domain (oh, you don’t have much money to bid? bad luck! go reg fee available domains), but a domain should be put on auction or return to the public when it expires. anything else is a clear conflit of interest and it is incredible how all these scams keep getting bigger until they are so absurdely evident that finally the competent entities take some measures.
Tonecas
This is not a scam, it is unfortunately allowed by ICANN and registrars are able to do whatever they want with their customers domains, auction them off, let them drop or keep them
MHB,
it’s allowed by ICANN by inaction or by lack of policy rules? or both?
in the case of (another) scam, the “add grace period” (this time practiced by different players), that was exploited for so long, it was a result of inaction from ICANN but also by lack of policy rules that permited the use of this loophole.
in the case of what a registrar can do with expired domains lets look at the following in http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/eddp.htm
”
3.7.5.2 Where Registrar chooses, under extenuating circumstances, to renew a domain name without the explicit consent of the registrant, the registrar must maintain a record of the extenuating circumstances associated with renewing that specific domain name for inspection by ICANN consistent with clauses 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 of this registrar accreditation agreement.
3.7.5.3 In the absence of extenuating circumstances (as defined in Section 3.7.5.1 above), a domain name must be deleted within 45 days of either the registrar or the registrant terminating a registration agreement.
”
i’m sure there will be extenuating circunstances for all the warehousing at Tucows, Dotster, and others.
and if we take as an example two of the most known and reputable (?) registrars, Network Solutions and ENOM, we can read in their service agreements that they do not feel obliged to comply with the Redemption Grace Period that is for instance imposed by Verisign on their managed gTLDs. they are so above the rest of the plain humans that they do not feel that they need to obey to rules, and can make their decisions based on their sole discretion.
to be fair, they, and most of the other registrars, give registrants a grace period to renew a domain after it expires without need of extra fees but this is a poison apple and i’m still today not sure if they can immediatly put a domain in Redemption Grace Period (see Auto-Renew grace period and the (technical) need to keep the domain in the zone for the registrar renew grace period in http://www.icann.org/en/tlds/agreements/verisign/appendix-07-01mar06.htm)
all in all this is a big pot of mud that is a direct result of these legal “should”, “must”, “may” that open the door to all kind of dubious practices but that only exists because there are so many “big guys” that are getting big bucks out of all these scams and the “little guy” is allways being pushed around.
Is there a way NOT to use TUCOWS? I’m in the same situation!
Yes Tucows is scamming-away many sites registered through their sister company, Servage … including mine. Suddenly appearing at Domcollect. Go figure. I was told that my address was outdated and this resulted in my domain being deleted – however, the records for change of address was performed two (2) years prior – and I have screenshots to prove it. However, wherein DENIC and ICANN don’t actually enforce anything – it’s a mugs world.
May they all drop dead with flies in their mouths.