Two problems I have with the SnapNames model are:
1. Their success rate, which varies from near 0% for the most actively
pursued names, to near 100% for names that only one person in the world
wants. I would guess that our customers attempt to register the "more
desirable" names "more often" than they try to register the "less desirable"
names, so the back order would fail "more often" than it would succeed.
(This is pure guesswork on my part.)
2. Only one customer gets a shot at a given name, so once the SnapBack slot
is taken, no other customer can back order it (at SnapNames). Since
expiring domain names are now well tracked by many hopeful speculators, the
SnapBack slots fill up very quickly for the more desirable domain names.
You can argue that SnapNames' model is more fair, or less greedy than other
models such as NameWinner, but the fact is that no matter how much a
customer might be willing to pay to register an expired name, they can't
have that SnapBack slot if someone else got there first. Any time a product
is priced at substantially less than its true (or perceived) market value,
someone will step up and remedy the situation. It all depends on who you
want to take the profit. Should it be a domain speculator, a registrar, or
a third party service?
My concerns with offering a "back order" feature for my customers have to do
with those two problems, first, I don't want to lead them to believe they
have a very good chance of getting a domain name when they don't, and
second, I don't want them to be frustrated that they can't even get the back
order entered, because someone else has it already.
My first instinct (and I haven't thought this through very thoroughly!) is
that OpenSRS should implement a bidding process similar to NameWinner, and
offer access to it through resellers who want to offer it. The high bidder
then has all of OpenSRS's resources thrown at grabbing the name when it
expires, and everyone who was outbid knows in advance that they lost the
chance to someone who was willing to pay more. (This would probably hurt me
more than help me, because I have registered a lot of expired domain names
for investment purposes, most through OpenSRS. But in principle it seems
fair enough.)
If OpenSRS isn't interested, and resellers are left with offering the
SnapNames service, exactly why would they need Tucows as middleman? They
could just partner directly with SnapNames.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mason Cole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 12:52 PM
Subject: ATTN: Resellers -- input requested on domain name back-ordering
> Dear TUCOWS Reseller:
>
> Several substantive conversations with TUCOWS' Elliot Noss and Tim Denton,
> specifically about the changing nature of registration services demand,
have
> developed into working ideas about what SnapNames can bring to registrars
> and their resellers to increase conversion rates. TUCOWS has asked us to
> forward our thinking and seek your input.
>
> As everyone knows, it's very hard to register a .com name because any
> sensible word or phrase has been taken. New registrations have fallen
from
> their all-time high of over 60,000 per day to about 30,000. That's why,
on
> average, only 3% of customers who came to register a name actually succeed
> in doing so. To the other 97% of ready-to-buy customers, credit card in
> hand, no sale is made -- everyone is dissatisfied.
>
> Meanwhile, the number of daily deletions has risen from only about 1,000
per
> day last spring to nearly 30,000 today. What that says is there's just as
a
> big a market in connecting customers with about-to-expire names as there
is
> in registering new names for them. And we've confirmed that customers
will
> pay substantially more to get an about-to-expire name. By operating at
the
> customer's point of greatest frustration (the failed WHOIS search
results),
> SnapNames' partners achieve over 9% conversion (it grows along with
> awareness) on a back-ordering service. Next to the text that says,
"Sorry,
> this name is taken," partners can put a link saying, "Back-order it now".
A
> lot of customers do. Our partners' revenue per clickthrough often exceeds
> US $1 per visitor.
>
> Additionally, SnapNames is the most efficient and scalable solution to the
> problem the Registry is reacting against -- we have great confidence we'll
> be a major part of the long-term solution.
>
> Our question is this: Would you be interested in OpenSRS offering
SnapNames'
> back-ordering services to you, and, ultimately, to your customers?
>
> Please let us know your thoughts. We'll answer more specific questions as
> they arise and as you wish.
>
> Regards,
>
> Cameron Powell
> Vice President -- Business Development
>
> Mason Cole
> Director of Corporate Marketing
>
