Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hence, a x100 price hike on .com would ensure that low-cost domain parking is squeezed out. It’s not linear. A domain at $2000, which costs the squatter $14 a year, would certainly go down by 75% if it costed the squatter $200 a year. Because the prospect of keeping it for 10 years goes from $140 to $2000, so the seller would make more benefit selling at $500 today than $2500 in 10 years. A squatter who’s squatting 1…
Yeah, no. That's entirely contrary to the point of the domain name system. It was always designed with a capitalistic, first-come-first-served, mentality. Stake claim to your domain and hold it. The issue is those domains that are parked and never used should be forfeit, recycled back into the pool. DNS should work both ways. You're free to add records, so long as they can verify usage. It's the last part that isn't…
See how it sounds when you just change it from domains to real estate?