ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


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

Re: [ga] ICANN Board postponing further sTLDs


At 02:20 04/11/03, Don Brown wrote:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Your logic escapes me, and I suspect most of us. Shed those rose colored glasses (break them). Take a look at reality, because reality is the way it is.


Almost everything is based upon revenue - I'm sorry to break the that news to you, but that is really the way it is.

Agreed. And if you believe there are revenues in bare names, try to get a VC believe that. Wake-up! you made a long way from the 60's, still a few steps ahead to understand where money really is.


Try this: what does NSI do wrong to lose 80% of its potential sales? Go to their site and look!

Again, there is no money in names, but in what people make or are made to make with them.

I grew up in the 60's; the flower power era. However, I figured it out all by myself. Think about it. There are motives that don't match the way you think it should be . . .

Yeap. You misread me. I said there is no money in the way ICANN is leading the nets. Because they focus on their own task as a registry and they want to have affiliates (registrars, resellers, etc.). They even never considered QA and user support. Look, if you want peole to make money with you, you do not take a product sold $ 50 by a single one and make it sold $ 10 by 100. This means that the new commers will get 0.2% of what the single one made.... Unless the single one keeps its internal rate of $ 6 and makes the new commers its own customers, forgetting about the end registrants. This way the fostered competition is not in selling cheaper to the users, but in buying more to itself.


Real money is - and IMHO there is a plenty - in promoting new usages on the nets which will call for new names - IDNA was a good idea by i-DNs. But NSI and ICANN plaid it so poorly that it will be a net loss for long for many.

Plenty of people should make money with the new usages: Registries will get some part of it. Forget about Registrars: they take on Registries share. Use Registrars as registrant consultants. You will not pay them, and they will get paid more by the registrants as an help to fight the Registry for quality. Tell me when last you saw "service quality" listed among ICANN priorities? Caring about consumers? They keep them @large. They plaid well the democracy ringmarole to make everyone forget about good service.

What is too bad is that we could have money, service quality, development, new services, end user satisfaction, happy manufacturers with new products, etc. With just 2 cents of imagination and understanding about what a human network is and expect from an eletronic network : services and no spam. You know what they say: if bankers and lawyers known about the market they would not be lawyers and bankers, they would be rich.

I explained they will make IPv6 a complex system calling for a complex registry system. They will be happy to sell that registry in a complex way. Wasting money and opportunities. When they could make a simple registry and promote IPv6 usages which would call for more addresses to sell.

IMHO we are in agreement, Don. Don't invest in ICANN's affiliates.
jfc





Thanks,


Tuesday, October 28, 2003, 9:42:09 AM, J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin <jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
JFCJM> On 15:25 28/10/03, Don Brown said:
>>Who benefits economically from not launching additional TLDs. Follow the
>>money . .


JFCJM> Yes?
JFCJM> the actual point is that there is _NO_money in names.
JFCJM> The money is in what people will accept you do with them.

JFCJM> The absudity is that ICANN wants to make believe shadows have a value (a
JFCJM> name is an IP address shadow).


JFCJM> But never mind, the way IPv6.001 numbering scheme is designed ... it will
JFCJM> need a UMS (unique machine system) copied on the DNS in order to know that
JFCJM> 00100100010001000111000100101000100010001111000000000000001
JFCJM> is right now the same machine as:
JFCJM> 00110010111011001001000100010011111001110101011100111001000
JFCJM> just because they do not want to allocate one host sub-number by
JFCJM> registrant. As if you had one different mobile ttelephone number per
JFCJM> carrier you may use....


JFCJM> And wait for the application of IDNA and "internationalized" mail names.

JFCJM> Dont' be afraid the ICANN system is not ready to die. Plenty of occasions
JFCJM> to make money with the wind.
JFCJM> jfc







---- Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc. donbrown_l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.inetconcepts.net PGP Key ID: 04C99A55 (972) 788-2364 Fax: (972) 788-5049 Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate ----




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