.UK Annual Growth under 1% per year since Direct Registrations started

[snoopy]

The exact figure it is 0.7% annual growth rate (all .uk extensions combined). In the 34 months since direct registration started it has grown by a total of 2.0%.

Key Points

• In the first year of direct registrations .uk saw combined growth of 1.3%
• Last year the total declined -0.58%
• Most of increase in .uk has been matched declines in .co.uk
• Lately new .uk extensions registrations have gotten so low that it may soon start to decline
• .co.uk has declined by over 400,000 names but in 2017 has seen small signs of stabilisation.

Raw Data since Direct Registrations Started


Data Sourced from https://www.nominet.uk/news/reports-statistics/ (see links at bottom of that page)


Some unexpected details from the numbers: A Dramatic Slowdown in new .uk tld

Early 2016: Third level, (mostly co.uk registrations) outnumbered .uk registrations 7:1




Early 2017: .uk has declined to the point where the old tld now outsells the new 10:1




In the last 3 months .uk (second-level in the table below) has accounted for net growth of 10-20 names per day as an average (i.e. including expirations).




If this trend continues .uk may soon start to shrink. As can be seen from above third level (mostly .co.uk) just saw two months of rises, the first time this has happened since direct registrations started, however it is still down over 400,000 names overall.

 

[Scott.L]

 

[snoopy]

Cheers Scott, that one is a good graph showing the small recent turnaround in .co.uk.

 

[DomainNames]

I do hope auDA, Ausregistry / Neustar / Golden Gate, auDA Board members read this data...No excuses for not doing your homework on the true facts.

Pehaps data like this with the facts should have been included on the auDA surveys and the information put out by some at the Wholesale Registry and Registrars Melbourne IT, TPP Wholesale etc.

Certainly it is obvious to anyone that the .uk and .nz have not been "remarkably successful which was claimed by Melbourne IT and their related entities when they emailed out soliciting for yes only votes while also an auDA Board member. Ned wrote a very good story of that on domainer.com.au including the screenshot of the Yes Only Vote email they had sent out to their database which swayed the yes votes unfairly leading to where we are all at now. Ned can you post that link as I cant see a search feature on your blog?

 

[snoopy]

For anyone wondering “What was .uk registration numbers like before the change?”,

2012-2013 10.6 million
2013-2014 10.5 million

Source: https://www.nominet.uk/about/corporate-governance/annual-reports/

(That is as accurate as the number get in the annual report (one decimal place). Nominet only started providing exact figures when direct registrations launched)

 

[DomainNames]

For anyone wondering “What was .uk registration numbers like before the change?”,

2012-2013 10.6 million
2013-2014 10.5 million

Source: https://www.nominet.uk/about/corporate-governance/annual-reports/

(That is as accurate as the number get in the annual report (one decimal place). Nominet only started providing exact figures when direct registrations launched)

But an auDA Board Member George Pongas ( Ausregistry / Neustar / Golden Gate ) has been saying the additional .au will be " innovative" and help get another 3 million .au registrations? Is he wrong? Why did auDA accept such information was true or possible? It has not happened in ANY country by adding any additional extension. It did not happen in .UK or .NZ. .....
https://www.ausregistry.com.au/product-innovation-will-produce-the-next-3-million-au-domains/


If Ausregistry had the wholesale registry contract for .NZ AND .UK they probably would have tried the same campaign how can those registration numbers be increased by 100%... They cant is the fact. In no country has this happened. Look at the facts from the global extensions where they have been introduced.

auDA and the others on the auDA Board listened to the wrong people it seems.. Of course those in supply with a vested financial interest would push their cause but when the facts prove claims are wrong they need to be called out.. Especially when they have crated a massive mess which the .au namespace is now in.

Facts are Facts... Why did Ausregistry / George not include such .nz and .uk registration, non renewal facts in his public materials and even after it give updated more accurate information so people can be better informed for survey voting?

auDA and others on the auDA Board have not provided people with the facts. This seems to have been done on purpose?

Has auDA and the auDA Board actually looked at the .uk and .nz facts? They seem to give the impression Australia should just follow them as they have been successful when they are not!

No matter how auDA will try and spin it the "direct" .uk and .nz has failed.... their own admin bodies have even stated the drop off non renewals of the shorter direct extension.. as people stick with the .co.uk and .co.nz

 

[snoopy]

But an auDA Board Member George Pongas ( Ausregistry / Neustar / Golden Gate ) has been saying the additional .au will be " innovative" and help get another 3 million .au registrations? Is he wrong?

I believe that viewpoint was based on incomplete information. For example the Names Policy Panel looked at .nz immediately after the launch but would never have expected growth to fall so heavily within 12 months.

.UK similar situation in my view, Nominet got some growth immediately out of the blocks but it was still not a lot and now has mostly been eaten up by losses in .co.uk.

George talked a lot about "the threat of ntlds",

No matter how you spin it, the introduction of new Top-Level Domains has created increased competition.

https://www.ausregistry.com.au/product-innovation-will-produce-the-next-3-million-au-domains/

That comment didn't stand the test of time.

 

[DomainNames]

I believe that viewpoint was based on incomplete information. For example the Names Policy Panel looked at .nz immediately after the launch but would never have expected growth to fall so heavily within 12 months.

.UK similar situation in my view, Nominet got some growth immediately out of the blocks but it was still not a lot and now has mostly been eaten up by losses in .co.uk.

George talked a lot about "the threat of ntlds",
That comment didn't stand the test of time.

Since that was put out by Ausregistry and Melbourne IT( and entities) they have not updated their materials or changed their "Yes for another .au " push.

Surely now we have all the stats and have had actually for over 1 year people should be updating and saying.... Oh hang on what we said was fact or would happen is not actual fact now based on REAL facts and stats from the .UK and .NZ.

What was attempted was to say hey it was done in the UK and .NZ and everyone worked out great... But this is NOT fact.

You note the current survey notes other countries which have done it .UK AND .NZ... but the auDA survey does not provide the stats or facts.. this is done to give the impression all we are doing is what was successful in .uk and .nz .

This same misinformation has been given to Australian government as a reason from auDA to do it.. I have that in an official letter from government as to why they at the time thought auDA was ok to proceed.. Once government got the facts they have been more engaged BUT auDA has not been providing government with any true facts about .uk and .nz.. This is where the issue is... Government for too long had just trusted or let auDA and the board run loose....without proper oversight and fact checking...

The fact is I provided material to auDA and the board they could and should have been researching themselves on the .UK AND .NZ stats and issues... It should not have been a shock or news to them....Some on the auDA board have tried to push this through for their own possible financial benefit....Even though the facts do not back up their claims.

 

[snoopy]

Since that was put out by Ausregistry and Melbourne IT( and entities) they have not updated their materials or changed their "Yes for another .au " push.

Surely now we have all the stats and have had actually for over 1 year people should be updating and saying.... Oh hang on what we said was fact or would happen is not actual fact now based on REAL facts and stats from the .UK and .NZ.

Even if they now thought .au wouldn't result in more sales they still wouldn't say anything, it is very hard for anyone to ever admit they may have got it wrong. They are probably hoping for a different outcome to .uk and .nz also, in my view that won't happen.

Once .au comes out, the initial burst will simply come at the expense of future growth in .com.au.

 

[DomainNames]

Even if they now thought .au wouldn't result in more sales they still wouldn't say anything, it is very hard for anyone to ever admit they may have got it wrong. They are probably hoping for a different outcome to .uk and .nz also, in my view that won't happen.

Once .au comes out, the initial burst will simply come at the expense of future growth in .com.au.

auDA, Ausregistry and Melbourneit ( and enties) all have a responsibility to provide true information and update it especially when claims made are now proven not to be fact nor where they ever factual. Every board member and supplier has that ongoing responsibility.

The problem is the current auDA survey again leads people into acceptance in many ways by the questions and responses possible. I consider the survey again invalid. It largely insinuates the additional .au extension is already policy and they are just looking at implementation.

Also by having too many pages and throwing in questions about .org.au they will have a lot of people just give up and not complete it. They should have had more questions / answers/ fuller answer choices on the same page and just scroll down.

auDA should instead focus on better promoting the existing Australian extensions... What has been claimed that " horter is better and will also lead to better google results etc" is now proven to be false based on public data anyone can read and see.

The fact is Melbourne IT and Neustar promote to sell a lot of domain name extensions.. their loyalty is not to the Australian namespace...

 

[DomainNames]

Has auDA stated in their newsletter they are still proceeding with the un needed proposed .au direct registration and it will go to the first registered not necessarily the .com.au registrant?

This is opposite to what the Ceo and most auDA Board members have stated when they said of course if it goes ahead it will be first made available to the .com.au owners.

Strange to see they have not accepted the failure stats of the .uk and .nz even though it is now very well documented globally and by official registration numbers and the relevant admin bodies.

 

[DomainNames]

Does anyone doubt all auDA, Ausregistry, Melbourne IT, Crazy Domains, Icaan just want to make more money by selling new extensions?

There is NO need for another .au extension... options are NOT running out globally with over 1000 extensions now available.
It is a scam to say Australia needs it and the fact is the direct .uk and direct .nz have failed!.

FOLLOW THE MONEY $$$
https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/

THE SCAM LIST
https://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings
"Over 1,300 new names or "strings" could become available in the next few years."

 

[snoopy]

Found this mentioned a bit elsewhere,

https://switchedto.uk

After 5 years this person has managed to collate 14 examples, many of which are domain industry companies or government departments that always used .uk as opposed to switching. Sad situation.