I'm sorry, your domain name is already taken.

"New Domains -- Just $5.95/yr!" Reading that makes me cringe. Sure, I'm glad I can save cash, but even still, I'm don't like it.

Why? The supply of decent domain names is inherently limited, and it seems to be running low. Thought of a good name for your new site? Don't worry, an ad farm beat you to it. Or a registrar's "parked page" for someone who hasn't done anything with their domain yet. Or a single "Site Coming Soon!" line. Or, on rare occasion, an actual website.

Why all this useful web space wasted? The obvious causes: ad profits, a site idea that was never really that serious, or because some fool wants to be the next Jack Marshall.

But the real culprit is the mechanism that allows the ad page making a couple bucks a month to be profitable, that allows the dude who thinks "maybe I'll make a site around this cool name sometime" to grab it for a few dollars, that allows the next site scalper to go on a binge. It is low domain prices.

One might think that domains can switch hands and the market will adjust things. A fair point. But is the reasonable price necessarily going to be enough money for the unused domain owner who still dreams of making The Next Great Site, or maybe scoring a few thou' from a Web2.0 startup who wants it more?

It'd be much easier to register the site yourself at a rate above what the casual domain purchaser would pay, but below what they might charge you. After all, if you're putting in the effort and server costs into making a real blog or website, $6 a year is a pittance--you can go a little higher.

I'm not saying that higher domain prices would shut down the ad-farm moguls like Kevin Ham. It doesn't have to, because his really profitable names probably aren't the ones that most businesses and creators want. His portfolio seems to be, firstly, generic domains like greeting.com or weddingshoes.com that only a significant business could afford, and that only online businesses would name themselves. And besides, these names have already long belonged to someone. Secondly, he registers typo names that no real website would want.

But, then again, looking at the math from the Business 2.0 article: "Since 2000 he has quietly cobbled together a portfolio of some 300,000 domains that, combined with several other ventures, generate an estimated $70 million a year in revenue." This 300,000 probably contains more than just generics and typos.

Well, $70,000,000 / 300,000 names = $233 per name per year. But with sites such as weddingshoes.com earning him $9,100 per year, some other domains probably earn much less the average, so a greater yearly fee might release them to the public.

I'm not saying I know who would collect a higher rate or what it would be used for. I don't know why registration used to cost $100; putting a name in a list isn't rocket science. I have no real proposal, but am just making the point that higher-cost domain registration might solve some problems.

Well, now I have to confess that I am part of the problem. I had a couple decent domain names that I never used, but I decided to let them expire. On the other hand, I still have NewsWick.com. Don't ask.