Re: [ga] ICANN Board can intervene to stop domain tasting for 1 year

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

George and all,

  Your math is good and your intent for such a "Tasting fee" is fine
as well, however such a fee for such an practice does not directly
address the problem, but rather addresses the symptom.  Better
would be to hold registrars and registries directly responsible thorugh
a policy that has penilities for Tasting AND for Tasters whom are
caught to be severly punnished in a more comprehensive way...

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827

George Kirikos wrote:

> Hello,
>
> --- Roberto Gaetano <roberto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Dominik Filipp wrote:
> > I fully agree. $0.20 re-registration fee is an insufficient solution.
> > I am
> > always feeling some sort of domain speculation in mind when listening
> > to
> > such proposals. If I cannot order a pizza and then cancel the order
> > just
> > paying $0.20 fine, why should have I an extra privilege regarding
> > domain
> > names?
> >
> > Agree.
>
> The economics of pizzas and domain names are entirely different. A
> pizza has labour, material and delivery costs that are far above 20
> cents. A domain name is an electronic record in a database where the
> marginal costs are close to zero for the registry operator, far below
> 20 cents.
>
> A 20 cent fee would make any speculation totally uneconomic for domain
> names. This is borne out by the fact that on the order of 99%+ of
> tasted domains get deleted during the AGP.
>
> Suppose that one tastes 1 million names. If 99% are deleted, and 1% are
> kept:
>
> A] Tasting is free:
> Cost to taster is 10,000 * $6.62 + 990,000 * $0 = $66,200
> (in first year).
>
> B] Non-refundable 20 cent fee:
> Cost to taster is 10,000 * $6.62 + 990,000 * $0.20 = $264,200
>
> The cost to the taster has increased by 300%. On a per successful name
> basis, the average cost is now $26.42.
>
> The numbers are even more horrible to the taster if the ratio is 99.7%
> (i.e. 1 in 300 profitable names), etc.
>
> The risk/reward is also entirely different. Under "A", there is
> essentially zero risk to the taster, because suppose that less than 1%
> of the names were profitable, then their costs scale linearly with the
> number of good names they discover. Under "B", if in a scan of 1
> million names they find a tiny amount of good names, they're still on
> the hook for a minimum of $200,000. Now the payoff is entirely
> non-linear, and the risk/reward ratio is terrible.
>
> PIR has essentially eliminated tasting in .org with their
> non-refundable fee. The same would happen in .com/net should ICANN move
> forward. It's simple economics, which the automated tasters understand,
> but it seems some folks don't.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/