Re: [ga] domain tasting comments

[<chris@xxxxxx>]

Debbie, not so. Most people do not know there is anything called an AGP or 
what it is for. Many people find the Internet a complete mystery and this 
includes many business owners. They do not see business on the web the same 
way they see offline business. I know most members on this list assume that 
the average user knows about some of these things, but they don't I deal 
with business owners every day and some of them have to have hosting 
explained to them. They have no clue how things work on the Internet. They 
are not technical people.
Assuming people know they can return a domain name is an erroneous 
assumption. The registrars certainly do not do anything to make sure they do 
know it either. So for them to claim that they want to keep the AGP even 
partly to protect consumers is a smokescreen. If that were untrue, as I said 
before, it would be clear to anyone registering a domain name and currently 
it is not clear.
So, if keeping the AGP is important as the registrars and registries claim, 
and part of that claim includes they are trying to protect consumers, then 
add a provision that states that registrars must make it clear at the point 
of registration that the consumer has this protection.
Chris McElroy

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Debbie Garside" <debbie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'GA'" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 1:06 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] domain tasting comments


> Chris wrote:
>
> > > It is not clearly stated at registrars during registration that the
> customer has 5 days in which they are allowed to change their mind about 
> the
> domain name they are registering. If you disagree with that statement, 
> then
> show me a place that does this. If the AGP had anything at all to do with
> protecting consumers/registrants, then this should be clearly posted. If 
> the
> registrars truly believe they are keeping the AGP to protect registrants 
> why
> is this information not offered clearly to every registrant during the
> registration process?
>
> Then we would need a policy in place to stop registrants from abusing the
> system.  ;-)
>
> Let's face it, as a consumer if you purchase something from a shop and you
> no longer want it you usually know within a day or so and contact the
> company asking for a refund.  Tis the way of business.
>
> Best regards
>
> Debbie
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of chris@xxxxxx
> > Sent: 03 April 2008 17:14
> > To: Roberto Gaetano
> > Cc: 'GA'
> > Subject: Re: [ga] domain tasting comments
> >
> >
> > The trend below would suggest that it is working, therefore
> > why not make it 40 cents to see if it will work even better?
> > Then if that doesn't eliminate the problem, 60 cents, etc. etc.
> >
> > The percentages still do not reflect the number of legitimate
> > grace period drops. Just common sense to note that 1/3 of
> > domain registrants do not accidentally misspell the name they
> > want nor do that many change their mind.
> > I doubt 1/3 of domain registrants realize they have a grace
> > period at all. I would be willing to bet that no more than
> > 2-3% of all domain name registrants know they have 5 days to
> > change their mind.
> >
> > It is not clearly stated at registrars during registration
> > that the customer has 5 days in which they are allowed to
> > change their mind about the domain name they are registering.
> > If you disagree with that statement, then show me a place
> > that does this. If the AGP had anything at all to do with
> > protecting consumers/registrants, then this should be clearly
> > posted. If the registrars truly believe they are keeping the
> > AGP to protect registrants why is this information not
> > offered clearly to every registrant during the registration process?
> >
> > Insiders and professional domainers and tasters know they
> > have the AGP. So nearly every single deletion within that 5
> > days is a taster. Show me proof that I am wrong on this. Show
> > me proof that suggests registrars are actually trying to
> > protect the consumer with the AGP. Since it does not come up
> > in the registrtation process, this is a very hollow claim.
> >
> > Take netsol for example. You search for a domain name. You do
> > not register the name. They register it in their name. They
> > claim they are doin g it to protect me in case you want to
> > come back and register it. In the meantime it is unavailable
> > at any other registrar. If they were protecting you, then why
> > don't they register or reserve it in your name? In that 5 day
> > hold anyone can register the name as long as they register it
> > at netsol and not anywhere else. Why don't they or other
> > registrars ask you "would you like us to hold this domain
> > name for you for 5 days in case you still want it?". If they
> > did they would satisfy the requirement that they have a
> > "reasonable" expectation they will be paid for the domain
> > name. Just a search query is not a "reasonable" expectation
> > the searcher will want to register the name.
> >
> > So whenever the registrars claim they want to keep the AGP
> > and that it has something to do with protecting the consumer
> > you can easily see why I do not believe them at all. If they
> > begin notifying people who register a domain name that they
> > have the option of changing their mind within 5 days, then I
> > might begin to believe them.
> >
> > Chris McElroy
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <chris@xxxxxx>
> > Cc: "'GA'" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 1:13 AM
> > Subject: RE: [ga] domain tasting comments
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Chris:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> So how many drops have there been during the grace period for
> > >> dot org since the 20 cent fee. You say it's proven so there
> > >> should be some proof of that somewhere.
> > >
> > > Indeed.
> > > Please have a look at http://www.icann.org/tlds/monthly-reports/.
> > >
> > > For .org, this is the situation of the percentages of
> > delete within grace
> > > period from Mar 2007:
> > > Mar 2007: 90.3%
> > > Apr 2007: 90.82%
> > > May 2007: 91.88%     ***** please note the sudden drop next
> > month, when
> > > the
> > > new policy was started *******
> > > June 2007: 47.48%
> > > July 2007: 8.17%
> > > Aug 2007: 29.24%
> > > Sept 2007: 31.58%
> > > Oct 2007: 29.63%
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Roberto
> > >
> > >
> > >