Latest news of the domain name industry

Recent Posts

Spammy .loan makes Alibaba fastest-growing and fastest-shrinking registrar in June

Kevin Murphy, October 5, 2018, Domain Registrars

Chinese registrar Alibaba was both the fastest-growing and fastest-shrinking registrar in June, purely due to its dalliance with hundreds of thousands of cheap .loan domain names.

Stats compiled by DI from the latest monthly registry reports show that Alibaba’s Singapore-based registrar — which has only been active for a year — grew its domains under management by 720,669 in June, almost four times as many as second-placed NameCheap.

The huge increase was due to Alibaba’s DUM in .loan doubling in June, going from from 621,851 to 1,274,532. Another 50,000 extra domains came from .win.

Both .loan and .win are run by registry GRS Domains, the company that replaced Famous Four Media as manager of the Domain Venture Partners gTLD portfolio.

According to SpamHaus, .loan has a “badness” of just shy of 90%, based on a sample size of 45,000 observed domains. SpamHaus has .win at almost 39% bad.

GRS has promised to turn its portfolio around and cut off its deep-discounting promotions effective August 20. The June figures reflect a time when discounts were still in place.

The Singapore Alibaba had DUM of 1,771,730 at the end of June.

At the bottom end of the June league table was a second Alibaba accrediation, Beijing-based Alibaba Cloud Computing (aka HiChina or net.cn), which had a net DUM loss of 266,411, after seeing 345,268 deletes in .loan (along with 45,000 deletes in .xyz and 35,000 in .xin).

The second biggest loser was AlpNames, which is owned by the same people as Famous Four, which deleted over 114,000 names in the month. The vast majority of these names were in FFM/GRS gTLDs, including .loan.

The main, earliest Alibaba accreditation, Alibaba Cloud Computing (Beijing), which has zero exposure to new gTLDs, grew by 69,794 domains to end June as the seventh fastest-growing registrar with DUM of 7,672,594.

As of a couple weeks ago, Alibaba has a fourth ICANN accreditation, Alibaba Cloud US LLC, but that obviously does not figure into the June numbers.

Here’s the top 10 registrars for June by DUM growth:

Registrar (IANA ID)DUMTransfers InTransfers OutNet TransfersAddsDeletesChange
Alibaba.com Singapore E-commerce Private Ltd (3775)1771730230017228339416345720669
NameCheap, Inc. (1068)862443322140891613224418008253219187827
GoDaddy.com, LLC (146)59208467703796893114481131439951837153910
NameSilo, LLC (1479)1670604144276041838613653932107111151
Xin Net Technology Corporation (120)262370941275041-91415315466679102744
Google LLC (895)231378010763169190721253194944079148
Alibaba Cloud Computing (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (420)76725941907811732734622080515525869794
Network Solutions, LLC (2)708437552854143003855412243811062853712
GMO Internet, Inc. d/b/a Onamae.com (49)47051283043209195214625917494644668
TLD Registrar Solutions Ltd. (1564)12186886858-77239315232535877

And the bottom 10:

Registrar (IANA ID)DUMTransfers InTransfers OutNet TransfersAddsDeletesChange
Alibaba Cloud Computing Ltd. d/b/a HiChina (www.net.cn) (1599)446845116192891330202094509820-266411
Alpnames Limited (1857)3613027165366314273114254-112825
Chengdu West Dimension Digital Technology Co., Ltd. (1556)2270000422719452282148101269286-94937
Bizcn.com, Inc. (471)9202431203336-3216603663268-69862
eNom, LLC (48)6824378915328741-1958875665101336-52205
Domain.com, LLC (886)197492715348827-72932361958695-37594
Todaynic.com, Inc. (697)13652775154-79138527795-26771
Register.com, Inc. (9)197625412953484-21891918737626-26231
Wild West Domains, LLC (440)300078434777346-38693101546045-18883
Ascio Technologies, Inc. Danmark - Filial af Ascio technologies, Inc. USA (106)157968313143803-24891183828246-16839

You may notice that in both tables the net change column is not equal to the sum of adds and net transfers minus deletes. This is because, per ICANN contract, domains still in their five-day Add Grace Period are counted in DUM but not in adds, so many adds slip over into the following month.

At least one in 10 new gTLDs are shrinking

While the universe of new gTLDs is growing at a rapid clip, DI research shows that at least one in 10 individual new gTLDs are shrinking.

Using zone file data, I’ve also established that almost a third of new gTLDs were smaller June 1 than they were 90 days earlier, and that more than one in five shrunk over a 12-month period.

There’s been a lot written recently, here and elsewhere, about the volume boom at the top-end of the new gTLD league tables, driven by the inexplicable hunger in China for worthless domain names, so I thought I’d try to balance it out by looking at those not benefiting from the budget land-grab madness.

It’s been about two and a half years since the first new gTLDs of the 2012 round were delegated. A few hundred were in general availability by the end of 2014.

These are the ones I chose to look at for this article.

Taking the full list of delegated 2012-round gTLDs, I first disregarded any dot-brands. For me, that’s any gTLD that has Specifications 9 or 13 in its ICANN Registry Agreement.

Volume is not a measure of success for dot-brands in general, where only the registry can own names, so we’re not interested in their growth rates.

Then I disregarded any gTLD that had a general availability date after March 14, 2015.

That date was selected because it’s 445 days before June 1, 2016 — enough time for a gTLD to go through its first renewal/deletion cycle.

There’s no point looking at TLDs less than a year old as they can only be growing.

This whittling process left me with 334 gTLDs.

Counting the domains in those gTLDs’ zone files, I found that:

  • 96 (28.7%) were smaller June 1 than they were 30 days earlier.
  • 104 (31.1%) were smaller June 1 than they were 90 days earlier.
  • 76 (22.7%) were smaller June 1 than they were 366 days earlier.
  • 35 (10.4%) were smaller on a monthly, quarterly and annual basis.

Zone files don’t include all registered domains, of course, but the proportion of those excluded tends to be broadly similar between gTLDs. Apples-to-apples comparisons are, I believe, fair.

And I think it’s fair to say that if a gTLD has gotten smaller over the previous month, quarter and year, that gTLD is “shrinking”.

There are the TLDs.

TLDRegistryDomainsAnnual ChangeQuarterly ChangeMonthly Change
.网址 (xn--ses554g)KNET330554-7487-11016-3699
guruDonuts59631-5940-6219-448
ninjaRightside45705-3548-7272-6247
МОСКВА (xn--80adxhks)FAITID15190-2769-1075-87
موقع. (xn--4gbrim)Suhub760-2168-813-13
moscowFAITID17816-1296-624-160
directoryDonuts17203-1229-1963-180
futbolRightside3326-1192-76-4
..在线 (xn--3ds443g)TLD Registry34800-1161-1183-1124
singlesDonuts4585-1058-1003-24
cheapDonuts3504-826-29-36
estateDonuts9291-737-1083-192
bargainsDonuts2582-718-80-25
plumbingDonuts3709-478-583-11
voyageDonuts2627-452-474-22
floristDonuts2722-439-306-222
holidayDonuts5035-386-309-295
.شبكة (xn--ngbc5azd)International Domain Registry1103-379-150-84
immobilienRightside7827-336-52-42
democratRightside990-332-38-19
buildersDonuts3957-316-349-326
viajesDonuts1259-226-8-12
limoDonuts2728-201-266-24
contractorsDonuts4278-150-348-16
luxuryLuxury Partners1007-128-4-12
.ОНЛАЙН (xn--80asehdb)CORE Association2350-128-157-215
glassDonuts3410-89-176-217
qpondotCOOL538-63-10-4
exposedDonuts2731-42-14-71
versicherungDotversicherung-registry2580-40-79-83
kaufenRightside9246-38-10-8
hivUniregistry434-21-22-6
republicanRightside778-19-6-16
wedAtgron144-12-41-16
.САЙТ (xn--80aswg)CORE Association1072-8-46-65

Concerning those 35 shrinking gTLDs:

  • The average size of the zones, as of June 1, was 17,299 domains.
  • Combined, they accounted for 605,472 domains, down 34,412 on the year. That’s a small portion of the gTLD universe, which is currently over 20 million.
  • The smallest was .wed, with 144 domains and annual shrinkage of 12. The largest was .网址 (Chinese for “.website”) which had 330,554 domains and annual shrinkage of 7,487.
  • The mean shrinkage over the year was 983 domains per gTLD. Over the quarter it was 1,025. Over the month it was 400.

Sixteen of the 35 domains belong to Donuts, which is perhaps to be expected given that it has the largest stable and was the most aggressive early mover.

Of its first batch of seven domains to go to GA, way back in February 2014, only three — .guru, .singles, and .plumbing — are on our list of shrinkers.

A Donuts spokesperson told DI today that its overall number of registrations is on the increase and that “too much focus on individual TLDs doesn’t accurately indicate the overall health of the TLD program in general and of our portfolio specifically.”

He pointed out that Donuts has not pursued the domainer market with aggressive promotions, targeting instead small and medium businesses that are more likely to actually use their domains.

“As initial domainer investors shake out, you’re likely to see some degradation in the size of the zone,” he said.

He added that Donuts has seen second-year renewal rates of 72%, which were higher than the first year.

“That indicates that there’s more steadiness in the registration base today than there was when first-year renewals were due,” he said.

.xxx boss says new gTLD registries need to “wake up”

Kevin Murphy, February 23, 2015, Domain Registries

ICM Registry president Stuart Lawley may be just weeks away from launching his second and third gTLD registries, but that doesn’t mean he has a positive outlook on new gTLDs in general.

“I think people need to wake up,” he told DI in a recent interview. “If you do the math on some of these numbers and prospective numbers, it just doesn’t stack up for a profitable business.”

“The new ‘Well Done!’ number seems to be a lot less than it was six months ago or 12 months ago,” he said.

Lawley said he’s among the most “bearish” in the industry when it comes to new gTLD prospects. And that goes for ICM’s own .porn, .sex and .adult, which are due to launch between March and September this year.

While he’s sure they’ll be profitable, and very bullish on the search engine optimization benefits that he says registrants could be able to achieve, he’s cautious about what kind of registration volumes can be expected. He said:

If you add up everybody that has ever bought a .xxx name, including the Sunrise B defensives, we have got a target market of about 250,000 names. People to go back to and say, “Look, you still have a .xxx or you had a .xxx at some stage. Therefore, we think you may be interested in buying .porn, .sex or .adult for exactly the same reasons.”

So, our expectations to sell to a whole new market outside of those quarter of a million names is probably quite limited.

Lawley said that he believes that the relatively poor volume performance of most new gTLDs over the last year will cause many registrars to question whether it’s worth their time and money to offer them.

I can see why registrars can’t be bothered. How many of these am I going to sell? Am I going to sell two hundred of them? Am I going to make five dollars per name? That’s one thousand dollars. It’s not worth it to me to put in ten thousand dollars worth of labor and effort to make one thousand dollars in revenue. So, I think that’s a challenge that many of the small lone player TLDs may face.

Lawley said he’s skeptical about the ability of major portfolio players, such as Donuts, to effectively market their hundreds of gTLDs, many of which are targeted at niche vertical markets.

He said in an ideal world a gTLD would need to spend $20 million to $30 million a year for a few years in order to do a proper PR job on a single TLD — ICM spent about $8 million to $9 million, $5.5 million of which was on US TV spots — and that’s just not economically viable given how many names are being sold.

But he added that he thinks it’s a good thing that some new gTLDs are seeing a steady and fairly linear number of daily additions, saying it might point to better long-term stability.

A lot of the TLDs that seem to be doing okay — .club for argument’s sake and several others in that ilk — seem to be doing their three hundred domains per day ADD, or 32 or 12 or whatever the number is, in a relatively linear fashion six or seven months after launch, which I think is potentially positive if one extrapolates that out.

The full interview, which also addresses SEO, dot-brands, registrar pay-for-placement and smart search, can be read by DI PRO subscribers here.

Track all the popular new gTLD domains on DI

Kevin Murphy, July 15, 2014, Domain Services

Want to get a full daily list of which new gTLD domains have Alexa rank?

From today DI PRO subscribers can, with our new Popular New gTLD Domains feature.

Updated once a day, the report comprises a list of new gTLD domains that are used by the top one million web sites on the internet, according to data provided by Alexa.

The report currently has 635 domains, but it’s growing.

The report can be used to discover how early adopters are using new gTLDs and which TLDs are generating the most popular web sites.

Here’s a screen shot:

DI PRO subscribers can check it out here.

New gTLDs pass 200,000 registrations

The number of domain names in new gTLDs passed 200,000 last night, according to zone files.

The exact number, according to the DI PRO database, is 201,184.

It’s based on incremental organic growth over the last week since the last batch of new gTLDs went into general availability, rather than any big launch events or surges.

Here are the top 10 zones, all of which belong to Donuts.

guru41,161
photography25,308
today12,157
tips11,444
technology9,066
clothing8,270
bike8,232
directory8,194
land7,569
gallery7,383

What the 200,000 count does not reflect is the first day of general availability for Google’s first-to-launch gTLD, .みんな (Japanese for “everyone”), which I’m expecting to start showing numbers tomorrow.

In related news, the DI PRO new gTLD zone file league table service (here) was upgraded today to make it a bit more useful during periods of patchy data availability.

The service will now show all delegated new gTLDs that have started publishing zone files, along with the most-recent domain counts, on days when the file was for whatever reason not available.