New TLD registries might need to go direct to consumers in addition to the existing registrar channel.
There has been an established channel for gTLD domain name registrations for a long time.
The registries offer domains to registrars, who in turn sell them to people like you and me.
This channel has been mandated in top level domain contracts with ICANN because of the way these contracts were handed out. Verisign’s contract, for example, prohibits the company from owning a registrar that sells domains to the public.
But new top level domain names are different. There’s no restriction on a new TLD applicant also owning a registrar and selling directly to the public.
There’s a lot of debate whenever you upset and established market channel. Some issues and questions about registry-registrar integration include:
- A registrar could do the hard work to get initial registrations, then a registry could coax those customers away to its own registrar
- Registries want registrars to push their domains, but they might not want to if they’re also competing against the registry’s own registrar.
- Registrars owned by the registry can undercut competing registrars. For example, Name.com offers domain names from its parent company Rightside at very close to the wholesale cost other registrars pay. It doesn’t need to make margin at the registrar level since it can make it at the registry level.
I’ve been thinking about this idea of “vertical integration” lately in the context of what we know about new top level domain marketing and demand 9 months after new TLDs started launching. I also watched LogicBoxes’ webinar on vertical integration between registries and registrars this week.
My conclusion: most registries should go direct to customers, but they should tread carefully.
A lot depends on the type of domain the registry sells. If it’s a very broad generic, existing registrars will be the key channel. If it’s a vertical or geo domain, on the other hand, it’s going to be difficult to see the light of day at a domain name registrar. Even if someone comes to a registrar looking to register under a particular top level domain, it can be a difficult experience.
That’s not to say a registry should cut out registrars. It needs to work with them, even on vertical and geo domains. Registrars have sold a bunch of vertical domains like .photography and .plumbing. They’ve also helped register lots of geo domains like .London.
But once a domain is launched, it’s going to be up to the registries to sell these domains to end users. And when they do so, saying “Go to RegisterABC to register your domain” won’t cut it. They’ll get there and be overwhelmed by choice. (One way to make it easier to sell through a registrar partner is to set up a dedicated page on their site, such as GoDaddy.london).
Registries don’t necessarily have to become a registrar to realize the benefits of direct selling to end users. It could be as simple as becoming a reseller.
Another option I like is partnering with a company in a particular vertical to sell domains. That’s what Rightside did with Momentum Event Group. Momentum puts on a lot of conferences that target lawyers. It has the database already, so it set up shop at MomentumNames.com to specifically sell .lawyer and .attorney domain names.
Registries can also work with affiliates to drive registrations to their platforms.
Should .bar pay people to go door-to-door at bars in their city and get them to register a .bar domain? Absolutely.
Should .build register domains on site at construction conferences? You bet.
Should .photography have an affiliate referral program in which photographers that tell their photographer-friends about .photography get paid? Of course.
There are a lot of new TLDs languishing below 10,000 registrations. Even moving the needle 100 registrations is big for these guys. Going direct to consumers makes a lot of sense.
EnCirca (@EnCirca) says
Andrew,
I agree that Registries should be engaging their target end-users directly.
The typical process flow provided by most registrars simply is inappropriate for the user experience many new TLDs are striving for.
One approach is to find a Registrar partner willing to create a customized user experience for the TLD. This means relying on the Registrar as a technology partner so the Registry can focus on marketing.
Tom
Sam says
It’s always interesting when these great money-making ideas come from people outside the industry. The insiders never think of new places to market their product. Meanwhile, the outsider has no voice with the organizations in desperate need to change and so nothing gets accomplished…
Joseph Peterson says
It’s especially important for registries with non-Latin script TLDs such as شبكة. or موقع. (in Arabic) and .在线 or .中文网.
Their task isn’t simply to present a new option to consumers — a .GURU or a .CLUB to be considered alongside a .ME or a .COM.
No, these registries have the much more challenging mission of changing the online expectations of hundreds of millions or billions of people.
.PLUMBING can subsist on the plumbing niche here in the USA because it really isn’t much of a departure from SomethingPlumbing.com.
But these Arabic and Chinese TLDs require a much more fundamental paradigm shift.
These registries need evangelism. If they expect registrars to convince all of China or all of the Middle East for them, they will fail. Unless they are constantly communicating directly to the people — their end user customers and the audience of their end users — nothing much will happen.
Joseph Peterson says
P.S. Sorry if the non-Latin characters aren’t showing up correctly. After I post, they get mangled in Chrome but look fine in FireFox. Might be an on-site setting worth fixing, Andrew.
Andrew Allemann says
They seem to be showing up fine for me in both Firefox and Chrome.
www.TelTalk.org says
The contract with ICANN for the TLD .tel prohibits the registry Telnic from owning a registrar that sells domains to the public, too.
But Telnic violates this contract since April 2012 with the subsidiary Telnames.
More information at http://www.teltalk.org/t559p120-icann-complaint-against-telnames
Rubens Kuhl says
Registrars have equal access to registries, but the opposite is not true: registrars can pick and choose registries the way they see fit. That’s why vertically-integrated registries make sense: when the registrar channel won’t adopt that registry for any reason (IDN was mentioned, but other factors apply), registry’s own registrar will.
I think registries wouldn’t mind ditching vertical integration if equal access to registrars was established, but doesn’t seem to be the case.