Premium .dev domain with Google costs $850
twitter.com
twitter.com
Since I looked at it in Turkish Lira, I thought at first that Google made a mistake when converting the currency, but it turns out that was not the case. Apparently, they are renewing generic domains like the one I own for $850 under the name Premium domain.
I could understand if I were to buy this domain from scratch, but I have been the owner of hundreds of domains for almost 20 years and I have never faced anything like this before. Once again, I realized that it is foolish to trust Google on any matter. Thank you, Google.
For another example of a premium domain name that is still available for registration (in case people here want to verify the user experience), perform a domain name search for money.dev at your registrar of choice. It will be clearly marked with its yearly premium price. You would have seen this same information when you initially registered forum.dev.
It's hard to take this seriously when $850/year is still way higher than other registrars charge for new domains. Are "legitimate registrants" supposed to be comforted that their extravagant sum is being paid on the primary market instead of the after market?
That's actually a great price for a good domain name. If the name is already registered by a squatter looking to profit off it, you're looking at five figures minimum. I think the mistake you're making here is you're thinking it would be $12 vs $850, but it's not; it would be 'already registered by a squatter within milliseconds of TLD launch years ago and listed on a resale site for 5 figures' vs $850.
And to be clear, premium prices are set at the registry (i.e. wholesale) level, not at the registrar (i.e. retail) level. That means that these names are premium at all registrars. Premium pricing is not unique to Google (either the registry or registrar); it's used by nearly all new gTLDs.
That's an absurd false dichotomy. Gmail doesn't charge me $850/year for an email address, but somehow they managed to avoid people squatting thousands of addresses and selling them on the after-market at an exorbitant markup, and Google doesn't charge me $850/year to search things, and yet if I try to use `curl` to send a single search request it blocks it, but the Google domains team somehow doesn't think that it would have been possible to stop people from squatting thousands of domains "within milliseconds of TLD launch"?
Sorry, it's way more believable to me that this decision was made out of greed rather than a lack of imagination. Overcharging is may defensible position from a business perspective or even an ease of engineering perspective, but let's not pretend this decision was somehow made purely for the benefit of customers.
Does that money go to the registrar?
He shared the invoice: https://twitter.com/emirkarsiyakali/status/16014366748564643...
According to that, he paid 4360TRY last year ($300), and now asked to pay 13040TRY ($850). You can’t even make up the difference with the exchange rate changes.
Also, 13040 TRY is worth US$700 at the current exchange rate, not US$850. That's actually a slight discount on the correct exchange rate, as another available domain name in the same pricing tier (e.g. 6b.dev) is showing as costing US$720/yr. So by paying in Turkish lira it looks like they're currently getting a discount of around US$20/yr, presumably because the prices displayed in Turkish are lagging the real exchange rate.
EDIT: You edited your comment which made mine lose context. You had claimed something like “he had paid equivalent of $850 last year”. That’s provably not the case here.
https://www.google.com/search?q=what%27s+usd+try+rate+in+dec...
Money is maybe a sufficient discriminator, but it is not a good one. Money is very unequally distributed around the world and this basically presumes that the only legitimate use of such a domain could be in an enterprise in a first world country. Or someone rich enough to not be price sensitive at all.
Fun fact, I reserved tty0.dev as a "vanity domain" during the presale, but someone decided to pay $300 more for the joke than me. And that domain still doesn't do anything "useful".
I just thought that it was a misguided allocation policy. Someone ended up buying tty0.dev at the $300 price point and uses it for... a fake `ls` output. This registrant wasn't more or less legitimate than any other. They just had more disposable income to spend on vanity.
Last year's invoice and Google Domain dashboard screenshots: https://twitter.com/EmirKarsiyakali/status/16014366748564643...
I got a premium domain for $20 and paying $260 every year to renew it (but I knew it'd happen).
Regardless, forum.dev was registered in 2021 (you can confirm via WHOIS), which was long after the Early Access Program for .dev ended in 2019.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33929354
Do you have proof of the initial price paid for registration or is this in some part speculation?
What's so premium about a domain? You're just pretending it has artificial scarcity and desirability. It's one step removed from NFTs in terms of fake value.
Would I pay for a premium domain name? Probably not. They might make sense for some uses though. I'd rather them be available at a public price than through someone who bought as many five letter words as they could and then sells them privately.
(I am omitting the actual name because HN is a public forum)
EDIT: The user reached out to me privately and the domain name in question is indeed reserved (because it is a Google trademark), and has never been available for registration. Looks like the registrar did not correctly display it as unavailable for registration.
Unethical & Predatory? Sure, but it's not illegal.
Yes it’s a common business practice. Doesn’t mean google has to encourage that industry.
The only thing that doesn’t seem great is that in the invoice shared by OP, the domain isn’t designated clearly as a premium.
This way if the renewal fee increases beyond what I’m willing to pay after I’ve already got infrastructure running on the domain, I have a whole decade to migrate to a better (cheaper) name.
$120 is a larger investment than $12 which means I buy fewer domains overall, but the stability benefits are worth it for me.
I didn't realize registrars let you buy for 10 years. The best I have seen are discounted pricing for 2-years.
I only have experience with Namecheap. They typically only offer discounted pricing for the first year, but you can pre-purchase renewals at the full price for several years (maybe up to 10, haven’t looked recently)
For example, I sold hackathon.co for good money (I even gave them the GSuite at that time). I also sold html5.in to Microsoft sub $10,000 (via a broker, unfortunately, which I realized way later) still for a pretty good sum. I have also sold quite a few more for low $100s.
And I donated thus.org to a Texas university for zero dollar and gave them the GSuite too. I'm happy that an educational institute is using it and the domain is alive.
I own nsfw.in, which was "a link shortener to warn you that it might not be Safe before opening". I got lazy and is on sale and I keep getting regular emails/contacts to buy it.
I do exactly the same. I also always stick to com. I leave "coolness" factor to other parts of the domain.
All other are cheap, junk or designed to extort.
you have just as much real control over domain as you have over entire DNS — zilch and a half — it all holds on trust and good faith, until greed comes into play
https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/1/22956581/russia-ukraine-na...
sure, an extraordinary example, but what stops anyone from wording their ToS ever so slightly vague, that any domain is held by a shoestring
> The parties acknowledge that the purpose of this Section 2.10(c) is to prohibit abusive and/or discriminatory Renewal Pricing practices imposed by Registry Operator without the written consent of the applicable registrant at the time of the initial registration of the domain and this Section 2.10(c) will be interpreted broadly to prohibit such practices.
I've been watching for it to happen to someone for years because I own a domain that would be at risk of getting reclassified as premium if it were allowed. I've been monitoring the same word as my domain on 300+ TLDs for about 2 years. I've never seen one get reclassified as premium without being dropped first.
Are you positive yours wasn't classified as premium with a huge discount for the first year?
I think the new TLDs would do much better if they'd quit with the pricing games and strengthen registrant rights instead. As a registrant, I want predictability and minimal risk when I register a domain. The only way to get that right now is to stick with .com AFAIK. It's too bad because I'm a huge fan of using 'somecompany.tech' plus 'somecompanytech.com', but, in my opinion, most of the new TLDs are too risky to depend on.
I'm really interested in any updates you would have because I always considered .app and .dev to be "safe" domains in the sense that I thought Google would always have transparent, uniform, predictable pricing without any exorbitant increases.
1. https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/dev/d...
Yep, that is a great takeaway. Another important example is GCP pricing, and their habit of killing off products and services as fast as they build them.
What Google is doing or charging today is not a reliable indicator of what they will be doing or charging tomorrow. AWS may have its own problems, but at least they don't do much bait-and-switch pricing, and they tend to support services for a while after they launch them.
I registered a .sbs domain for a couple dollars the first year, and they want $200-300/yr from me now.
This is highway robbery.. maybe even worse than being robbed.
Imagine if your mobile phone plan rate could vary on a floating basis year by year depending on how "premium" the carrier decides your number is. Gross.
This instance is straight up Google acting in bad faith with the bait and switch. Are they really that desperate to make a few extra bucks? What PM decided this was a good idea?
Day by day, Big-G is burning every ounce of public goodwill they ever had, speedily on their way to sinking down to FB Meta territory.
But the TLDs fix the price underneath, registrars are just resellers.
> The parties acknowledge that the purpose of this Section 2.10(c) is to prohibit abusive and/or discriminatory Renewal Pricing practices imposed by Registry Operator without the written consent of the applicable registrant at the time of the initial registration of the domain and this Section 2.10(c) will be interpreted broadly to prohibit such practices.
From what I've seen, people typically tend to be confused about what they bought when you see threads like this. In the past several years I've never seen anyone produce documentation or screenshots that show they registered a non-premium domain that was reclassified as premium while they had it registered.
1. https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/registry-agreements/sbs/s...
One of my domains got hit by it and now I can’t even move it because it’s market as premium.
Referring to TLDs as extensions is a telltale sign of someone who is semi-technically literate enough to have heard of file extensions but not enough to know why it's incorrect when talking about domains, nor that it outs them by making them sound silly.
Why are domain extensions like .dev and .app owned by Google?
Price tiers are generally controlled by the registry (Google Registry, in this case.)
This is going to happen to .tv too: sometime in January 2023 GoDaddy Registry, which just took over the .tv tld from Verisign, is adding premium price tiers when no such tiering had already existed.
In this case, Tuvalu owns .tv and they contracted with GoDaddy Registry to manage it [0].
It can be confusing because the lines are blurring. For example, Google has considerable vertical integration: they operate a registry, a registrar, and they own a few TLDs too.
[0] https://registry.godaddy/blog/dottv-contract-signing-release
https://domains.google.com/registrar/search?searchTerm=asdfg...
I think there's more to the story here.
For example, setting.dev is $180/yr https://domains.google.com/registrar/search?searchTerm=setti...
It is likely that there was no premium pricing in the beginning. It was established after the initial lease
The premium pricing was there in the beginning. We have never increased the price of a single domain name after it was initially registered.
After weeks of going back and forth with Google support I ended up initiating a chargeback.. They locked me out of my account and I lost access to all of the domains tied to it.
It took weeks to unravel the whole thing.
If Google would make the renewal prices available in the 30-day renewal emails this class of problem would go away. Omitting the price is a choice.
The incentives here are perverse: the registry knows that changing domain names has a high switching cost; we should not have the "market" dynamics encouraging them to start, effectively, extorting domain owners. "That web presence you built up? It would be a shame if anything were to happen to it…"
I actually thought there were ICANN rules against this sort of thing.
Typically the registry won't arbitrarily increase the renewal price of specific domains during a period of time where the domain is owned by the same individual. That seems like an incredibly scummy practice.
Domain names aren't something you can just "move out" of like housing if your landlord decides to increase the price one year by over 6000%. They represent identity, discoverability and trust. By arbitrarily increasing the renewal price like this, the registry is constructively repossessing your online identity. It's the same as if they suddenly took your domain from you and put it up for auction for their own benefit.
Registrars (not registries) can get away with increasing their prices, but that's different because you can always switch registrars to one that charges a lower markup over the registry. You can't switch registries without switching your domain name entirely.
… uh, it's not even possible to move out of that that easily, either. (Although a 6000% increase would certainly do it.) I think landlords are (also?) very much aware of switching costs in their yearly price uppings.
Amazon and Cloudflare does not as far as I know.
.sbs registry has done it with my domain in 2021.
.xyz has done it another one of my domain few years ago.
None of my regular old tld domains, and cctld domains experienced it.
-footnote- I used to buy domains for my own use only, my family names & stuff, never for resale or business or anything.
Every TLD is operated by a registry that has a monopoly over that TLD. .dev's registry is Google. .com and .net's registry is Verisign.
GoDaddy is a registrar which resells domains from the registries. You can register .dev domains on GoDaddy just like you can register .com and .net domains.
The bulk of the registration fee goes to the registry. What keeps .com and .net prices reasonable is not that there's no monopoly - Verisign totally has a monopoly - but that Verisign's registry agreement with ICANN forbids this kind of pricing shenanigans whereas Google's registry agreement for .dev doesn't. But I'm sure that when Verisign's registry agreement is up for renewal they will try to renegotiate this.
I bought a .dev domain from Google, when the auction was at $200/year. Every renewal period has been $100/year. If there is a way to decrease it to $12/year, that would be great.
EDIT: Looking at other comments on this thread, looks like that Google is dynamically price adjusting renewal costs? I am sad that yet another pillar of the original free internet seems to be falling even further pray to capitalism.
What I am wondering right now is if there is any regulation about buying a domain, building a popular product on top of it, and then having your registrar keep increasing the renewal cost. (Something that I never considered, but now looks possible)
I bought a Premium domain from them during the auction, and still pay for it. They've always been very clear about the renewal cost both before I bought it in the auction and every year on renewal.
The most famous example I can think of is the flower auction/Amsterdam clock.[2]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_auction [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAdmzyKagvE
.org was very nearly stolen by its operators.
https://www.eff.org/press/releases/org-domain-registry-sale-...
The difference is that Verisign's registry agreement with ICANN prohibits this kind of pricing shenanigans whereas Google's does not. Expect Verisign to try to renegotiate this when their agreement is up for renewal.
It’s a very different relationship with ICANN and domain name owners and has basically zero leverage to set prices beyond what it costs them to operate the service and have some reasonable profit.
Feels to me like it would be a lost cause depending on where you are.
If this is the first time people on Hacker News are hearing about premium domains, gTLDs and asymmetric renewal prices, color me shocked. There are even ccTLDs that have asymmetric renewals.
Not quite the same punch. A domain scalper can only demand a premium price once (when they sell/transfer it to you.) But, a registry may charge you a premium price every single year.
Presumably you can freely move your .dev domains between those registrars?
Registries (like Google for .dev, Verisign for .com/.net) set the pricing for domains under their TLDs. Registrars like Gandi add just a very slim markup.
Well fuck you and your squatting and how does it feel?
Old registries weren't able to participate in that process themselves without also owning a registrar that participated in the same competition; but, a few decades of hindsight means the newer TLDs are going after potential earnings that Verisign never got a chance to have.
Edit: "contact" to "contract"
All registries operate with ICANN. It's probably more due to their age and the contracts they have with ICANN given that age and ubiquity.
edit: nit: all registries that operate within the shared DNS the majority of the internet operates under
After a few years of paying the £500+ annual renewal due to its Premium domain status, my enthusiasm has waned somewhat...
Get a .com domain, preferably no-hyphen, and no_underscore.
If you have something like mydomainis.cool, then try to get mydomainiscool.com too. You can redirect mydomainiscool.com to mydomainis.cool.
However, why should Google or Verisign make money from selling names? Other than operational costs, it would be better to auction off domains fairly to extinguish the squatters and use the surplus for non-profit internet infrastructure work.
trouble.dev is $180/yr... meaning it's going to be $180 each year to renew
trouble.art is $10,764 for the first year, and then $36/yr for renewals.
There's plenty of non-premium .dev domains that are $12/yr.
I do agree that charging premiums every year is a shitty move, but I don't think they're being overtly shady about it.
I doubt forum.dev would have ever been $12/yr. Most single word .dev domains are marked as premium and vary from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars annually. I know because I had speak.dev at one point and it was $350/yr and renewal was $350/yr as well.
Now if by some chance they initially paid $12/yr for it and now it's $850, then that is not ok and means that any .dev domain is at risk of dynamic pricing, which I feel like would kill the whole TLD forever for me.
We can make this into a proverb at this point.
Technically they could, but it wouldn't end up well. Probably even nation states would have a word or piles of paper.
gTLDs on other hand are owned by likes of Google so they can do just about anything.
Google owns and operates these tlds and is effectively a monopoly
With .com, the contract between Verisign and ICANN specifies a maxium price and that price descrimination is not allowed.
Edit: I found the gTLD base agreement[1], but didn't go looking further. It says, the registry needs to charge everyone the same price unless the registrant agreed to higher renewal pricing at the time of initial registration. I didn't look to see if there is any more specific agreement for .dev. But it seems like if this wasn't disclosed and explicitly agreed to during registration, the registry is in the wrong. However, a lot of people agree to things without paying attention. Would be good to check original paperwork and then see about how to get the registry's attention.
[1] https://newgtlds.icann.org/sites/default/files/agreements/ag...
edit: as seen below, I'm wrong
It appears purpose designed to exclude only the low end indie and freemium developer.
If the information in this post is correct, it looks like google is just shaking down people who registered domains they control
Increase revenue.
> It's not like domain names cost much money to issue.
You charge what the market will pay, not how much it costs to produce.
poison pill the domain
file a trademark asap while you still have the domain, then when you lose access, sue them to prevent them from selling it to anyone else
(ideally bundle this with everyone else affected by this sort of price change)
(I'm not a lawyer)
Even if there is an argument to be made about supply and demand on names... at least it should be easier to agree that private entities shouldn't be allowed to profit from it; distinct from charging a reasonable service fee.
whatever happened to Google's Don't be evil? $850 for a .dev domain?
And my fee is morally justified. Finding compensation for a guy that was the victim of an injustice.
Am I an hero? Just doing the best I can.
EDIT: Realized racketering isn't the right term here I think but I don't remember the right term and need to go do bed.
Easier said then done, but if you choose to sue them over this you have my respect.
We NEED laws against dirty dark pattern business practices like this.
If you paid $12 the first year, it would have been labelled as a discount, with the renewal price being listed separately. It’s crappy and misleading, but it’s not retroactive. I sometimes explicitly filter out “discounted” TLDs so I don’t get distracted by listing like this.
Original post:
I'm looking through namecheap now, and all the available .dev domain I can find say they renew at (Canadian)$20.37 per year. Can anyone find listed ones that say they renew for way more?
Theft of what? You never really 'owned' a domain there in the first place since Google outright owns the TLD and can increase / decrease prices at any time.
It always has been 'rented', meaning you never truly owned it.
It's a bad thing for Google to do, but let's not act like it's illegal.
The OG model here is one of decentralization. In this model, the registrar (Google) isn't the owner of the domain. They're just a business that deals with the annoying details around registering a domain on your behalf, and you pay them a small fee to do so. Once again, the registrar can't sell or rent you anything, because they don't own anything to sell you. The registrar only sells the service of acting on your behalf.
Premium domains were originally seen as a shitty thing to do, because it put the domain registrars in the business of acting against their customers. Instead of registering a domain on behalf of their customers, they instead would buy the domains for themself, so they could then sell them at huge markup to their customers. Some registrars then took things further and pre-register domains their customers searched for, even if they never had any interest in buying the domain originally. Extra shitty.
The current .dev (or similar) situation once again feels really dirty to people thinking of the web under this traditional mental model. Domains aren't supposed to be just GIVEN to a single company to then charge whatever price they want. The web is supposed to be decentralized, and instead...we're here.
p.s. and no, I sure wouldn’t like my landlord to 70x my rent. Like from say 1,000/mo to 70,000/mo ? That’s like totally cool then right? How about let’s act like it _should_ be illegal, and then make it so.
Don't expect Google to care since they are after your money.
That a bunch of startups and small companies use a trendy .io suffix to their domain is entirely by the grace of the British Indian Ocean Territory's permissiveness on the matter.
CC-tlds are owned by their affiliated sovereign nation.