ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] The Future of Domain Registry Pricing, if left uncapped


At 07:13 AM 09.8.2006 '?.' -0700, George Kirikos wrote:
Hello,

--- Veni Markovski <veni@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >Was ICANN lying to the court that price caps are considered
> >pro-competitve? Or were they telling the truth?
>
> Again, questions which result in you expecting an ICANN position,
> should be addressed to the President, or the Chair.

Nice try at not answering. :) If you did answer, it would destroy your
argument, that is why you prefer to pretend you're not allowed to
answer.

Dear George,
I don't pretend, and I don't say I am not allowed to answer. Again - a good example of how you are using my words to fit your ideas. I am afraid, that's a wrong approach.


That's because there is no way to wiggle around the question and
explain how ICANN can say in court that caps are pro-competitive, but
then introduce contracts that eliminate caps. Either caps are
pro-competitive, or they are not pro-competitive.

But that's your question, and you are free to address it to ICANN. Have you done so?


It's very simple. Choosing not to answer is an
admission

You wish it's simple. Fact is that you are speculating on what someone has said somewhere, and you continue not asking this someone what exactly they said (if you can't read it on your own), or misinterprete what you read. And in any case, the response you are getting does not fit your goals, that's why you prefer to ignore it, and start a discussion with me, and asking me what I think. That is, to say, you move the conversation from the real topic, to a fake one, created by you.


NSI is still charging $35 because they can get away with it due to
automatic rebilling, unwillingless to lose bundled services
(email/hosting), inertia etc.

Excuse me, but what's your background? How many experience in the Internet industry you have, and in what capacity? I have a reason to ask you thi.


Your veni.com is registered with NSI. If
you try to transfer your domain to another registrar, watch what
happens -- they will send you offers to lower the price of renewals. :)

Have you tried that? I happen to be admin contact - for historic reasons (people in Bulgaria didn't have a credit card, I did) - to more domains at NS. I've moved quite a lot of them to Tucows. Don't remember ever having a problem, or getting offers as you say. I wonder why... Perhaps because they have not consulted with you?!


Price does matter.

Really? So, do you drive accorss the city to buy cheaper gas?

No it's not irrelevant. It's entirely relevant, because it destroys
your argument. GoDaddy is twice the size of NSI, and started from 0.
They've gained that market share largely due to price.

Can you quote some source for that conclusion? Survey, business analysis, etc.?


Very few people
actively "choose" NSI -- they're at the default legacy registrar for
historical reasons, and due to things like rebilling, or lack of
technical expertise at moving their domains to other registrars, or not
wanting to lose bundled services like e-mail or webhosting, and often
due to FUD, scare tactics that if they switch from NSI something bad
might happen.

Can you quote some source for this statement? Or these are your observations?


> > > George, why today there are companies that charge more than the $
> 6?
> > > Will they increase their prices, if VeriSign increased their
> price,
> > > or they will keep the price, and lower their profit? You care
> about
> > > registrants, you say. I do, too. But for the normal registrants,
> not
> > > for the commercial ones. You say you care about registrants, but
> do
> > > you believe they will be influenced by price increase? Or by new
> > > TLDs? Why not use the ccTLDs?
> >
> >Your "solution" is for people who already have established their
> >presence on the internet is to switch to a different TLD, or a
> ccTLD?
>
> Will you be nice enough to point me how did you reach from my words
> to your conclusions? I somehow don't see the link. And I think it's
> not on purpose that you've made it on your own.

Sure, I'd be happy to point out how. You wrote "Why not  use the
ccTLDs?"

I wrote something more. You can, but you should not quote only parts of what one says. You should know by now quite well that rule. Read everything, from the beginning, read my statements at the Board, and then come back here.


amount, money that they could spend on other goods and services. We're
talking billions of dollars in aggregate,

No, I am talking about probably 7 % of $ 6.

haha And you respond by asking a "leading question"!! :) I ask
questions that you can't wiggle out of, that are very direct and
precise. That's why you prefer not to answer them directly, or at all.

That's typical of your questions. You ask me something that you should ask the CEO and the Chair. Then you make a point why I don't respond to you. Well, here's a simple answer: I respond to questions which are addressed to me. If you ask me something about ISOC, I will not respond, and will point you to Lynn St. Amour. There is some order in questions, and there's some order in answers.


P.S. Did someone at ICANN suggest that registrants eat cake, while you
were feasting on lobster, caviar and filet mignon?

Actually someone alredy suggested that I should not be responding to you (based on history, I guess). But fact is I am not responding to you. I just can't let such statements remain unanswered. So I am rathter responding to the other people on the list, than to you.


And you surely have noticed that my response to you is quite different from my response to Karl, for example.

veni




<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>