Re: [net-com] Draft report version 4

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2004-05-24 09:42:38 +0200, Philip Sheppard wrote:

> Thomas the new wording on pricing makes explicit reference to
> value - previous wording did not. Have a read of Jeff Neuman's
> input on this - on list - and let me know if you disagre with his
> position.

My point here is that a key part of this group's mission boils down
to giving guidance on what "value" actually means -- what's the
desirables that bidders should be able to deliver if selected? How
should these points be taken into account when the selection takes
place?

In previous language, we had baseline stability + low price.  By
explicitly adding "value" as a criterion for selection, we are
re-inserting that unknown into the equation.  The new draft is,
essentially, bouncing the question back to ICANN staff that the GNSO
was asked to answer.

> The point that price registry to registrar is one thing and
> registrar to registrant another is also relevant.

To quote from Jeff's note, "rather than price, one needs to look at
'value'." All we need to know is that lower registry-to-registrar
pricing gives registrars less supply-side cost per domain name, and
enables more competition on the registrar market -- maybe in terms
of "value" to registrants, maybe in terms of price across all TLDs,
maybe in terms of price for registrations in a specific TLD.

-- 
Thomas Roessler  <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
At-Large Advisory Committee: http://alac.info/