RE: [ga] Tasting and other errant or illegal registration activity, was: Re: [ga] List Rules

["Michael Collins" <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Karl,

Someone with better research and analytical skills I have should be able to
reasonably estimate the cost of registration to registries if you make one
assumption. Assume that tasting is profitable to VeriSign at least for .com.
I think that assumption is a valid one because VeriSign is not voicing any
dissatisfaction with the process and they could, like the other registries,
ask for relief from ICANN.

Once you make that assumption, you only need to look at the revenue from
registration of domains that are kept at the tasting registrars divided by
the total number domain names registered by those registrars. This gives you
the revenue that VeriSign makes per tasted domain. VeriSign's cost must be a
portion of that revenue number. Even if you assume a low profit margin on
domain tasting, you should come up with a reasonable estimate.

Best regards,
Michael Collins
Internet Commerce Association

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Karl Auerbach
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 9:45 PM
To: Neuman, Jeff
Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ga] Tasting and other errant or illegal registration activity,
was: Re: [ga] List Rules


One of the data points that we need in order to comprehend the effects 
of "tasting" is how much it actually costs registries to process a 
domain name registration transaction.

Without have a believable, concrete number we can't really know whether 
the costs of this practice are being offloaded onto normal full-term 
registrants.

If the transaction cost is high, then we need to know how it is being 
covered by those who get the benefit of free short term registrations 
via AGP.  For example, we need to be able to analyze whether the amounts 
on deposit generate enough money to cover the costs engendered by those 
registrars that drive the bulk of AGP and other high-transaction rate 
activities.

And if the transaction cost is low then we need to understand how ICANN 
justifies the existence of registry fees that are much larger than would 
be expected via a cost plus reasonable profit formula.

I understand that "cost" is not a simple number, and that some simple 
numbers, such as the incremental cost, can be misleading.  What I am 
suggesting is this:  That registrars provide a mildly detailed 
breakdown of the cost elements of the various aspects of registration 
transaction processing and providing name resolution.

                --karl--