Registrars to start dropping .Tel soon ?

As many of you are aware I have a large portfolio of domains for sale at http://www.Domains123.com and I also have further ones not listed for sale such as http://www.BoatSearchEngine.com which are fully developed web sites.

I use several registrars for the various extensions I own (mostly .co, .com, .net, .tel) and so get to talk with them now and again regarding bulk deals for my domain portfolio.

I was talking to a few registrars today and got the feeling that some of them may not carry .tel for much longer.

Here are the reasons they gave me - point 4 seemed to be the most critical::

1. .Tel carries the overhead of running the CTH (Community TelHosting) system which uses up resources not required by other extensions.

2. .Tel does not provide the opportunity to upsell with the likes of web hosting etc. since this is already included.

3. The 1000+ new gTLDs coming onboard soon provide a far more attractive revenue proposition with altogether less hassle.

4. They are aware of the Telnic subsidiary Telnames selling the http://YourBusiness.tel style .tels and don't like them doing this - no retailer likes a supplier selling direct to their own potential customers - particularly with a product that many view as more desirable.

So don't be too surprised if in the next 12 months your registrar drops .tel - the business case for them trying to sell the old Telnic subdomain .tels which are no longer being marketed is looking flimsier by the day !

http://MikeSeaton.tel

I get the impression name.com don't like telnames either as when I was transferring a domain out to telnames, I received some none automated customer account support emails that resulted in a small back and forth.

And a mention about him being aware people had asked name for a custom "proxy" in the past and etc "no promises" but it's something they're looking into or have done / might be still on the table etc.

Conclusion? transfer to telnames and if they notice and you get a none automated email you can probably guess they hate telnames or having to deal with them.

Though that's just my impression as I've never been with a registrar that bothered to contact me direct about my account unless I asked for help.

In fact selling domains to end users, albeit through a subsidiary, had never been seen by a registrar. Dangerous move that, on the other hand, brought only 2000 new registrations.

Well, we'll have to remember to renew our .tels only annually not to risk our money. ;-)

@mike, which registrars said this?

There are many registrars with a very small number of registrations, as example about 30 registrars have less than 50 domains from Tenlic registered:
http://www.teltalk.org/t443-total-tel-domains-per-registrar
Why should they keep supporting .tel?

Telnamer wrote:There are many registrars with a very small number of registrations, as example about 30 registrars have less than 50 domains from Tenlic registered:
http://www.teltalk.org/t443-total-tel-domains-per-registrar
Why should they keep supporting .tel?

Because just keeping the offer for .tel doesn't cost them anything - and in case .tel sees a turnaround they still can participate in a few years.

mikeseaton wrote:4. They are aware of the Telnic subsidiary Telnames selling the http://YourBusiness.tel style .tels and don't like them doing this - no retailer likes a supplier selling direct to their own potential customers - particularly with a product that many view as more desirable.

Are you sure? Are they not amused that an advanced product was created to take their business away while they are left behind with an out-dated product and a small margin for them? They should be happy, because less business means less work and less hassle!

Rambo wrote:

mikeseaton wrote:4. They are aware of the Telnic subsidiary Telnames selling the http://YourBusiness.tel style .tels and don't like them doing this - no retailer likes a supplier selling direct to their own potential customers - particularly with a product that many view as more desirable.

Are you sure? Are they not amused that an advanced product was created to take their business away while they are left behind with an out-dated product and a small margin for them? They should be happy, because less business means less work and less hassle!

Let's find out
by asking ICANN.

mikeseaton wrote:So don't be too surprised if in the next 12 months your registrar drops .tel - the business case for them trying to sell the old Telnic subdomain .tels which are no longer being marketed is looking flimsier by the day !

It may be that Telnic don't care if they lose some or all of their registrars who are only able to sell the old-style subdomain .tels ?

This would force new users to register their .tels at http://www.Telnames.com at over twice the revenue to Telnic/Telnames and would of course help build up the numbers from the pitiful 2,605 Telnames .tels as shown today by http://www.Dottel.net

Make of this what you will - but Telnic's Registrar Liaison guy Adrian Snell left a few months ago (see http://www.internetnews.me/2012/05/21/telnic-senior-staffer-departs) after 4 years with the company and AFAIK no-one has been appointed to the vacated position of full-time Registrar Liaison.

http://MikeSeaton.tel

This list is very useful information !

http://MikeSeaton.tel

PS.Thanks for the link go to Telnamer.

kprobe wrote:@mike, which registrars said this?

I would like to know too.
Time is money and I do not want to waste yet further time shuffling yet again my .tel domains around (hoping to get a registrar that will implement the .tel control panel and features to the full)

Mike, do you have some info? Was it domain monster? Name? Please let us know.

Boracay wrote:Time is money and I do not want to waste yet further time shuffling yet again my .tel domains around (hoping to get a registrar that will implement the .tel control panel and features to the full)

Mike, do you have some info? Was it domain monster? Name? Please let us know.

I have no intention of going into the nitty-gritty of which individual registrar I spoke to said exactly what to me, but the overall feeling I got from my conversations is fully covered in the posts
http://www.teltalk.org/t639-registrars-to-start-dropping-tel-soon#3311 and http://www.teltalk.org/t639p8-registrars-to-start-dropping-tel-soon#3347

It should be fairly obvious that retailers (ie. registrars) do not like, and after a while will refuse to accept, their supplier (in this case Telnic via Telnames) selling direct to their own potential customers.

This situation cannot continue for much longer without something giving - this may be some .tel registrars saying "enough is enough" (after all they have 1000+ new gTLDs coming along to sell soon) or it may be Telnic start allowing their registrars to sell the Telnames offering ?

The latter solution could of course either be to allow the Telnic registars to be the only retailers of .tel (as existed before Telnames), or to be in addition to Telnames, in which case this represents only a partial resolution of the issue.

But a look at the dwindling month-on-month registrations (see http://www.hosterstats.com/DomainNameCounts2012.php and http://www.dottel.net) shows the current situation cannot continue for much longer if the .tel project is to have any real chance of survival.

I believe Telnic/Telnames realise this - if you look at the Telnic shareholder list there are some very influential people/companies - it remains to be seen which way they jump ?

htttp://MikeSeaton.tel