Talk:Domain name registrar

message: The first paragraph should be rewriten, it is wrong. registrar of ICANN can only register some domains (better domains under the non sponsored  gTDL). the ccTLD authority can have registar for (some) domains in the ccTDL tree.
Agreed. I have edited the orignal authors information.
The Transfer Scams section has a non-factual line stating that people being scammed should contact their resident "computer guy."  I'm going to remove the line as it takes away from the content of the article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigmantonyd (talk • contribs) 22:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Because there is more than a thousand ICANN registrars and Wikipedia is not a links directory. Jmccormac (talk) 11:39, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

message: I notice on this page we both have discussion of registrar's market share over time, and also a graph showing how GoDaddy, Enom, Tucows, Network Solutions and Dotster compare.  Unfortunately, there are no citations for either the text or the graphic.  I am concerned that this data might be US-centric, or perhaps US-only.  I have doubts that GoDaddy is popular in China, Japan, or Germany, for example, but they have large numbers of registrations in those countries.
Further, it is not clear which market these registrars have a share in.  The .com market?  The US market?  The global market for all domain names?
Can anyone provide clarity, or better yet, sources to back the data we are presenting on the page?  Cheers —fudoreaper (talk) 17:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would be very wary about using webhosting.info's data for anything as their .com figures alone are over 2.5 million domains in error. The only reliable ones at the moment are those from ICANN and those that use ICANN data. Jmccormac (talk) 12:30, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Registrar market share source? 

message: It would add value to this section to plainly state what a domain registrar is charged per registration. This section hints at those costs with the US$4000 cost to become a registrar and a $6.86/year fee to verisign for a .com address (and administrative fee of $0.20/year per domain to ICANN(?)). Since the domain registration purchase price varies wildly between designated registrars, this information would be helpful for consumers to determine a fair price to pay.  I am still mystified why a registrar might charge more to register one domain verses another (example: why is .mobi/.me more expensive than .info/.com?) 173.19.142.10 (talk) 19:32, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Designated registrar 

message: Gary King moved this content from List of domain name registrars but commented that he wasn't sure if it made sense here. 
I assembled the bullet list in the List of domain name registrars article. There, the original reason for citing all the major ranking lists was dispute over which list was authoritative. Digging a bit deeper, the reason for citing them all was that each provided different information in terms of frequency of update, TLDs included, whether name servers or registrar of record was used as the metric, whether reports were real-time or time-delayed, and whether the reports are run by an organization with a direct financial stake in the numbers.
I think the bullet list is valuable, partly because I think it includes all the notable reports, partly because they were difficult to track down, partly because they contain useful information. I think in the past it was a valid question whether this bullet list should appear in its original article or this one, but now that the original article redirects to this one my sense is that the content should remain because it's the type of encyclopedic information that's Wikipedia's mission, and if it exists only in the original article it's lost completely. Thirdbeach (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed Registrarstats.com from the listing as the site has been offline for a few months now. I've also added dotandco.net but they also rely on ICANN data. Jmccormac (talk) 10:12, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Market-share-ranked lists of domain name registrars 

message: "The maximum period of registration of a domain name is generally 10 years. Some registrars are offering longer periods of up to 100 years, but such offers involve the registrar renewing the registration for their customer. The 100-year domain name registration would not be in the official registration database."
Q: Why "generally"?
Q: What is the maximum  period in the official, central data base -- 10 years?
Q: Do all registrars have the same maximum?
Q: What  regulation governs the maximum period allowed?
Q: The "up to 100 years" -- is that governed by some regulation, or is it just that no registrars happen to offer a period of more than 100 years?
--Pgan002 (talk) 16:03, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maximum registration period 

message: It is very difficult to find this information in Google. A lot is from the providers that apply their own rules. Would like to see here a more extensive explanation, explaining what tld are affected by this delay, what is mandatory, what is optional and what may be decided by the registrars themselves.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erniecom (talk • contribs) 13:45, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  60 day delay 

message: I've just discovered they charge about $12.00 to transfer a domain name.  Is this regulated?  What keeps a registrar from charging $100.00?Jonny Quick (talk) 18:47, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Generally when a gTLD domain name is transferred from one registrar to another, a year is added to the expiry of the domain.Most of that $12 would, probably, be the cost of the extra year's registration fee. The gTLD market is quite competitive and a registrar charging $100 for a .com registration might find it hard to get customers. Jmccormac (talk) 02:04, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about Domain Name Transfer Fees? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Domain name registrar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170607183437/https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/approved-with-specs-2013-09-17-en to https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/approved-with-specs-2013-09-17-en
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:15, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified