[ga] VeriSign + ICANN: be afraid, competitive procurement might be coming
- To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [ga] VeriSign + ICANN: be afraid, competitive procurement might be coming
- From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 04:17:51 -0800 (PST)
In light of the NTIA/DOJ letter strongly suggesting how competitive procurement
should take place, to lower costs for consumers, I am encouraged by today's
directive by the US government regarding contracting procedures:
"Those new rules, officials said, would make it more difficult for contractors
to bilk taxpayers and make some half-trillion dollars in federal contracts each
year more accessible to independent contractors."
"Obama will say that his administration will stop outsourcing to private
contractors many services that should be performed by government employees. He
also pledged to open contracts to small businesses and eliminate "unnecessary"
no-bid contracts that allow preferred contractors to take assignments even
though they might not be the least expensive option."
Obviously, the services provided by both VeriSign and ICANN can be performed
much less expensively by either in-house government employees or by competitive
tenders. Just like Neustar won the .us contract, VeriSign should have to
compete to provide .com/net registry services, as should PIR (who have raised
prices substantially) for .org.
It's clear that for any new gTLDs that the community agrees should be added to
the root, that there should be a tender process to see who would perform that
at the lowest cost. This is the exact opposite of how ICANN wishes to manage
things, auctioning off the new TLDs to the highest bidder to maximize its own
benefit (at the expense of consumers). ICANN has demonstrated they are not the
"least expensive option", as not only is their budget out of control:
but they actively propose to raise business and consumers costs through
ill-conceived programs like the new gTLDs boondoggle.