ICANN Auction Rules.

["Brian and Coral McHenry" <rbmchenry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

My objection is this...the ICANN auction rules are unfair in that they
provide substantially more favourable winning potential to the bigger,
deep-pocketed players by providing them with a strategy to remove the weaker
contenders. The post below is a view posted on a LSE bulletin board
highlighting this point. 

 

It is my view that ICANN should give all of the applicants involved in
resolving contended names a deadline date that all must meet for their
individual contentions to be resolved by Private Auction. Unresolved
contentions after this date will go to ICANN to resolve under the exact same
rules as the private auctions. This removes any bias or benefit to those who
wish to use the ICANN auction to their strategic benefit. Please read the
post below which highlights how the ICANN auction rules could be used to
favour the bigger players..         

 

The following post was placed on the TLDH London Stock Exchange bulletin
board on 8/1/2014.

 

As much as I/we would like to see TLDH secure at least one of the killer
gTLD's like .blog and .app, we need to face reality. There are strategies
that are likely to be used by the bigger players to prevent us from doing
so, not least the use of the ICANN auctions. If the current ICANN auction
rules remain as they are then anyone who is thinking that impact gTLD's like
.blog and .app will go to private auction, needs to think again. The rules
do not favour the small players and for that reason I hold the opinion that
the 'potentially big' revenue generator gTLD's that google and amazon are
contesting, will, in my view, never see the light of day at a private
auction. Amazon and google have war chests in the billions of dollars. They
know it and we know it, which means we all know that they can and will
out-bid everyone else for any and all of the top names that they are
contending and that they want to own. The above gTLD's .blog and .app for
example will sell for multi-millions based on the probability that annual
revenue generation for the owners of these killers will likely top somewhere
in the region of $200-$500 million. Work that one through on a multi year
basis and you will get some idea of the intrinsic value of these big ones.
Where amazon and google are involved in contention battles for these impact
gTLD's they are likely to win them whether we like it or not. They have the
financial mussel to do it and they will use it. Anyone thinking that either
amazon or google will then be just delighted to see the multi-millions that
they have bid on securing these names divided out amongst their competitors
at the end of a private auction i.e. ending up on the balance sheets of
their competitors, needs to wake up and smell the coffee.  For this reason
all the impact gTLD's being contested by the big players, including any JV
partnerships, will, in my view, end up in ICANN auctions. Further, from a
purely strategic perspective, choosing to resolve contentious gTLD in ICANN
will have the added benefit to them of  persuading/encouraging the smaller
contesters to withdraw leaving only the bigger financial players to bid it
out between themselves, the minnows know they can not win the bidding war
that will ensue and they also know that there will be virtually nothing in
it for them at the end of it i.e. llosers receive a meager 20 percent refund
($37,000) of their initial $185,000 gTLD application fee. Bmac.