Re: [ga] The Future of Domain Registry Pricing, if left uncapped
At 01:46 PM 08.8.2006 '?.' -0700, George Kirikos wrote: Veni, George, Why don't you run for the board, and represent registrants effectively? So far, besides criticts from a couple of people on this mailing list, I haven't somehow seen the registrants thinking at all about their being represented at ICANN. At all. There were once elections, which can't happen today (and you are an intelligent person - you can respond to this question on your own). On second reading of your first sentence, you want ICANN to be the FTC, not the FCC. Or, to use even something more close - in Bulgaria, it will be the Commission for protection of customers. Another regulator. they have won a tender for operation of a registry with very specific terms. They want presumptive renewal. They want unlimited pricing power. Those terms were NOT in the original contracts. They are gaining something. What, pray tell, are consumers, registrants, and the broader group of stakeholders gaining? I still don't understand - why do you think the registrants, the normal registrants, who pay today between $ 10 and $ 35 / year, would care about what you care? Somehow I don't see this as a concern. I see other items, which you are not covering. Why? the "rules" (i.e. the first rule is that there will be no rules). Then, let those who want to register in that TLD do so, via that full disclosure and at their own peril. George, why today there are companies that charge more than the $ 6? Will they increase their prices, if VeriSign increased their price, or they will keep the price, and lower their profit? You care about registrants, you say. I do, too. But for the normal registrants, not for the commercial ones. You say you care about registrants, but do you believe they will be influenced by price increase? Or by new TLDs? Why not use the ccTLDs? In the real world, to gain something, you typically have to give up something. That's what a negotiation involves. Yet, what have the registries given up, so that consumers can gain? Nada. I still don't understand - the consumers would have gained what? What did they gain from the .ORG or .NET bids? Which consumers? The end users like me, who have one domain name to take care of, or the ones that have tens of thousands, or half a million domain names, and make money from that? Yes, for them a 7 % increase means $ 210,000 / year. For me, if Network Solutions decides, it will mean no change at all - they can easily utilize the 42 cents in their own profit. But even if it's increased from $ 35 to $ 35.42, that will be about 1.2 % increase. I can handle that, I think. And for people from countries, where $ 35 is a lot (e.g. Bulgaria), and who can't elect the ".bg", because it is $ 180 for the first two years, they will go with .org, or .net, or .com from Tucows, where it's cheaper. Etc., etc. Veni
|