I had an interesting question in one of the forums about the topic of a domain industry association. The question was, 'Why is Michael doing this?' This question really caused me to think why I was spending time thinking about a domain association and it justified an answer.
I looked at the two associations (thedna.org and ICA) and it was clear to me that they really didn't represent the interests of the typical domain owner in any way. For a start I have a real problem with any association where board seats can effectively be purchased. This is fine for companies where profit is the motive but in my opinion it is not OK for an association.
If an association is to truly represent members then EVERYONE needs to have an opportunity for a board seat....hence the concept of classes of members and an allocation of board seats per class that individuals could potentially win via an election in their class.
There also needed to be different fees per class (hence the financially modelling at the end of the presentation). The great majority of domain investors aren't able to afford $5K/year but many would put up their hand for $250/year.
Given the challenges I saw with the current associations I wanted to push the discussion forward in such a manner that it at least reached the two associations and a dialogue established at the domain investor level. So where am I at with my goals?
1. The ICA was represented by Andee Hill in the webinar (she is not a director of the ICA). The other directors of the ICA are trying to work out when they are able to jump on a call with me.....I think that many of them have been on vacation.
2. I have been contacted by the chairman of thedna.org and he is connecting me with the CEO. They are completely open to everything to embracing domain investors. This includes changing their constitution to ensure that domain investors have representation at the board level. It was actually a refreshing conversation with the chairman.
I find that the bigger challenge is to engage the domain investment community themselves. What has surprised me is the general apathy towards both associations and the discussion itself. There appears to be a disconnect in the VALUE provided by either association for domain investors. This could be a function of us tending to be "lone wolves" but I actually don't believe this is the cas e as domain communities do exist. Fundamentally I believe that both associations have failed to prove their value.....and more importantly for me.......I've failed in someway to proactively engage the community as well.
For example, out of the whole industry about 9 people said they would attend the webinar.....6 turned up. I've run webinars before on topics such as selling domains and had 18 people say they would turn up and 18 did. Just for the record I think that anything over about 15 people can become quite unwieldy. What's interesting is that over 500 people have read each of the articles in the series on "A domain association". This tells me that the topic is important to people but they aren't willing to engage as yet.
I would be interested to know if I am interpreting this correctly. I would also like any ideas on how we, as a community, can engage more effectively on the topic. Or, maybe we shouldn't and just let the chips fall where they fall . Should I run another webinar? Is the time wrong etc. Any feedback would be well received.....can't promise that I can do something but I would like to do my best and try.
I liked the picture of the key for this article as it has two sides to it. If only one side was present then the key wouldn't work. What we really need is for domain investors to speak to complete their side of the key and get their point of view across to the associations.......and myself for that matter. It's through an engaging dialogue that a better outcome for us all can be achieved.
I look forward to your feedback and comments.