Re: [ga] Tiered (Variable) Pricing

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

One thing I do know Michael. I bet I could sell more coop domain names. I
might give it a shot, but ICANN must give me make me an accredited
registrar. :)

Who does own chicken.coop anyway? Just razzing you Michael.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Michael D. Palage" <Michael@xxxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "icann
board address" <icann-board@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 2:40 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] Tiered (Variable) Pricing


> Chris and all,
>
>   Good questions Chris.
>
>   My answers are given Michaels representation of the .coop registry
> me thinks he may be feathering his own nest so to speak.  In any
> event and self interest aside, tiered pricing, variable or not, seeks
> to limit competition which is not healthy on the whole.  Nothing
> wrong with self interest though.  >:)  Michael *might* better his
> self interest if he advised his client ( .coop ) in more innovative
business
> methods/ideas to increase their revenues... Perhaps he can hire you
> Chris, as a business mentor consultant for his client?  Than you can
> present your "tiered pricing" consulting contract terms.  >:)
>
> kidsearch wrote:
>
> > Okay, Michael, not shooting at you but . . .
> >
> > 1. How does allowing tiered pricing foster competition on the web? (Not
just
> > competition between registries and registrars, competition for all small
and
> > large business owners)(ICANN's mandate to foster competition was not
meant
> > only between registries was it?)
> >
> > 2. How does tiered pricing benefit the average Internet user?
> >
> > 3. What do you mean by flexibility? (They make money from the current
domain
> > name pricing structure. As a business they are also allowed to sell
anything
> > else they want to improve their bottom line. The inability to create
other
> > revenue streams sounds like a management problem at the company's level.
> > Price hikes are not the only way they can survive or pay bills.)
> >
> > 4. Do you agree that giving more power to the registries, coupled with
ICANN
> > stifling innovation and a free market by not allowing more companies to
> > create better, commercially viable TLDs gives the appearance of
collusion
> > between ICANN and the current registries? Can you see where it appears
that
> > while ICANN limits the choices of consumers while allowing the
registries to
> > raise prices so the current registries make more money while keeping out
any
> > competetition so they can do so?
> >
> > 2 + 2 = 4 every single time.
> >
> > Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
> > http://icann.thingsthatjustpissmeoff.com
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Michael D. Palage" <Michael@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "'Danny Younger'" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 11:08 AM
> > Subject: RE: [ga] Tiered (Variable) Pricing
> >
> > > Danny:
> > >
> > > I respect the position of you and others with regard to this issue. I
> > > realized when posting this proposal I would be taking a position in
> > > between two diametrically opposed viewpoints where I was likely to get
> > > shot at by both sides. Notwithstanding this reality, I think my
proposed
> > > contractual changes are such that it provides the registry operator
the
> > > flexibility that it needs in its operations, while protecting the
> > > reasonable expectation interests of existing registrants.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 8:57 AM
> > > To: Michael D. Palage; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: [ga] Tiered (Variable) Pricing
> > >
> > >
> > > Michael,
> > >
> > > The Community has drawn a line in the sand.  Catering
> > > to the naked greed of registry operators is not an
> > > option.
> > >
> > > Your proposed compromise is not acceptable -- owing to economies of
> > > scale, prices should be going down, not up -- instead of increases, we
> > > should be discussing a fixed percentage annual decrease.
> > >
> > > All price hike proposals should be withdrawn.
> > > Registries should focus on profit enhancement only by
> > > way of new registry service offerings.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Danny
> > >
> > >
> > > --- "Michael D. Palage" <Michael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello All:
> > > >
> > > > In the interesting of continuing a very constructive
> > > > dialog with regard
> > > > to tiered pricing, I have published the following
> > > > article on CircleID,
> > > > see
> > > >
> > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/tiered_variable_pricing_compromise/.
> > > > Some of the initial comments such as George's
> > > > continues to take an "all
> > > > or nothing approach" to the current registry
> > > > contracts.  The purpose of
> > > > this article was to address what I saw as one
> > > > loophole which could be
> > > > closed to protect reasonable expectation interests
> > > > of registrants while
> > > > allowing registries the flexibility to use
> > > > tiered(variable) pricing in
> > > > their business operations.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > Michael D. Palage
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/434 - Release Date:
8/30/06
> > >
> > >
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>    Abraham Lincoln
>
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
> very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
> E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>  Registered Email addr with the USPS
> Contact Number: 214-244-4827
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/434 - Release Date: 8/30/06
>
>