Why were 725 - mostly 5-digit numeric - .tels registered yesterday ?

Just checked http://registrarstats.com/TLDDomainCounts.aspx and noticed a very unusual thing - a day with a NET GAIN rather than the customary NET LOSS !

The New Regs were 725, Drops 279, giving a Net Gain of 446.

A bit of digging around found that the 725 figure was mostly made up of 5-digit numeric .tels - here's a few examples:

19999.tel - 19614.tel - 19227.tel - 16996.tel - 16651.tel

The question is WHY ?

http://MikeSeaton.tel

Someone had a temporary lapse of sanity?

Details: http://www.telcommunity.org/t45-725-new-tel-domains-yesterday

mikeseaton wrote:Why were 725 - mostly 5-digit numeric - .tels registered yesterday ?

Why were any .tel domains registered at all? No serious business should limit its web presence to bad design or to an one-pager.

mikeseaton wrote:
19999.tel - 19614.tel - 19227.tel - 16996.tel - 16651.tel

http://MikeSeaton.tel

All non-Telnames .tels

I hope in the future development of these domains and not a drop next year.

"Mohamed Nashat" is at it again, registering 5-digit numeric .tels in bulk for a second day running - here's just one example http://19800.tel

This has resulted in the second consecutive day of NET GAIN for .TEL, rather than the usual NET LOSS !

Incidentally all these 5-digit numeric .tels appear to be set up as "Personal" .tels in the Whois - see https://www.easywhois.com/?domain=19800.tel - selecting "Personal" lets you list virtually no registration data, whereas selecting "Business" requires you to list full contact details.

I hope he is not planning to build directories on all these domains - with Telnic subdomain .tels no longer being actively marketed (and may possibly be dropped ?) that would IMO be a risky use of both time and money !

http://MikeSeaton.tel

More about the registrant: http://dynamix.ws