RE: [registrars] Re: NSI free transfers

["Rob Hall" <rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Of course, that still means a year of lost revenue for the registrar they
transfered from and then back to !

Rob.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Larry Erlich
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 2:32 PM
To: Monte Cahn
Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
Subject: [registrars] Re: NSI free transfers


Monte Cahn wrote:
>
> Larry,
>
> Before the big "Fire Sale" is complete, why not try to kill all the
> other registrars while it costs VeriSign nothing?  There is nothing like
> having the ability to pay yourself or decide not to pay your self.
> Since their loss of revenue for free transfers does not matter any
> longer to VeriSign, why not try to get 15% of the renewal revenue in
> years to come when everyone is stuck there.

Sure. And another way to look at it is that at least
one deal variable (for the acquiring company) has
to do with how many names are under management w/o regard
to the cost to acquire the customer.

What I'm thinking is that some of the people
who have large blocks of names with high volume registrars
might have a temporary migration to NSI and then
a transfer right back to the original registrar in
order to get a free name added on to their account.

Larry Erlich


>
> Monte Cahn
> Founder/CEO
>
> Monte@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Monte@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> O - 954-984-8445
> F - 954-969-9155
>
> Moniker.com - ICANN Accredited Corporate Domain Management Services
> DomainSystems.com - Domain Sales & After-market Services
> CoolHandle.com - World Class Hosting and Email Solutions
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Larry Erlich
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 12:40 PM
> To: Thomas Keller
> Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [registrars] RE: Acceptable Delivery Method (Fourth Draft
> of GAINING registrar form for transfers)
>
> Thomas Keller wrote:
> >
> > Larry I understand you reason, but how do you want to proof the
> > legitimacy of a transfer if you don't have anything on file?
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> (Also see Another issue:
> "Network Solutions Free Transfer" below).
>
> I'm not sure how it would work in your country but
> from past experience it would be up to the
> "trier of fact" in each case to determine if it
> was reasonable that a transaction happened on
> verbal approval. Past transactions with the same
> customer would be considered. I have been involved in thousands of
> transactions (in other businesses dating back many
> years) where things were done on a "handshake". It
> is not uncommon. I'm sure many registrars
> take renewal orders over the phone with the customer supplying credit
> card information. In this case there is nothing to prevent the customer
> from denying the transaction took place. Of course even with a written
> order the customer can say that it was forged etc if they want. Once
> again it would be up to the trier of fact to decide who is telling the
> truth.  (I have also been involved in multiple transactions where there
> are written signed contracts but the cost of enforcement exceeds the
> value of the contract and it is of no use.)
>
> Let me also restate the original point that I made:
> It is reasonable for a registrar with an existing
> business relationship with a registrant to initiate a
> transfer request for that registrant without a
> written order. This may not be practical for large
> registrars who don't have a personal relationship with
> their customers but it may be practical for small registrars.
>
> Another issue:
> ---------------
> Network Solutions is allowing people to transfer
> to them at no charge. Free transfer. Free Renewal. No charge. No limit
> to the amount of names you can transfer to them. We just received the
> email.
> Anybody that wants a copy let me know.
>
> Larry
>
> > To put it differently I guess you (and your customer)
> > would loose every dispute, appeal etc. if you are not able to show any
>
> > facts.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > tom
> >
> > Am 17.10.2003 schrieb Larry Erlich:
> > > Legally you are correct. But
> > > I think it goes against basic business practice
> > > to require a customer who you have an existing
> > > relationship with to have to always fax something because it might
> > > be needed after the fact for a dispute.
> > >
> > > The only protection should be for the gaining registrar who may need
>
> > > to feel confident that the customer won't say they didn't approve of
>
> > > the transfer for some reason. If they trust the customer at their
> > > word, they should be able to, at their own risk, not require written
>
> > > backup.
> > >
> > > This is really no different
> > > then when you might call your favorite wholesaler
> > > and say "Give me 3dz widgets and bill to the
> > > credit card you have on file." It happens everyday
> > > all over the country.  There is nothing to prevent the
> > > "widget-orderer" from denying after the fact that they placed the
> > > widget order. It is the word of one person against the another if
> > > there is no written backup. The way a large registrar
> > > might want to design their system for these things,
> > > because of the quality and training of their CS
> > > staff, is not going to be the same as a small registrar.
> > >
> > > Larry Erlich
> > >
> > > Elana Broitman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > even in the case of an existing relationship, I think you'll need
> > > > written proof if there is any dispute later. as for fax #, you
> > > > don't need it in the whois - presumably the gaining registrar can
> > > > get that directly from the registrant, as long as the registrant
> > > > or adm
> > > >
> > > > Elana Broitman
> > > > Register.com
> > > > 575 Eighth Avenue
> > > > New York, NY 10018
> > > > Phone (212) 798-9215
> > > > Fax   (212) 629-9309
> > > > ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Larry Erlich [mailto:erlich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 11:07 AM
> > > > To: Bruce Tonkin
> > > > Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: Re: [registrars] RE: Acceptable Delivery Method (Fourth
> > > > Draft of GAINING registrar form for transfers)
> > > >
> > > > Bruce Tonkin wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello Larry,
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is it possible for the gaining registrar approval "letter" to
> > > > > > be delivered by a method other than email? If not, does this
> > > > > > assume that if the registrant does not have a current email
> > > > > > address with the losing registrar, or does not have any email
> > > > > > access, they can't transfer registrar?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We have yet to see the proposed contractual changes etc, but my
> > > > > understanding of the policy development outcome was that you
> > > > > could send the form to the registrant contact via:
> > > > > - email, fax, or post
> > > > > (it using the contact information available in the WHOIS).
> > > >
> > > > Thanks. This seems to indicate that the fax # needs
> > > > to be in the whois? Note that the fax is often
> > > > not in the whois. Melbourneit.com, DomainRegistry.com, Godaddy.com
>
> > > > don't have their fax # in the whois for example.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The issue with voice is probably one of proof.  Although I guess
>
> > > > > you could record a conversation where a notice was read out and
> > > > > an affirmative answer received.
> > > >
> > > > I think that you need proof of the
> > > > affirmative answer either in writing or electronically except in
> > > > cases where the registrar has an existing relationship with a
> > > > customer (meaning the "registrant" has an existing relationship -
> > > > not a reseller).
> > > >
> > > > >  You may then need some way of verifying
> > > > > that the voice in the recording was the registrant.  It is all
> > > > > technically possible - although an email is fairly cheap.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Bruce
> > >
> > > --
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
> > > 215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Gruss,
> >
> > tom
> >
> > (__)
> > (OO)_____
> > (oo)    /|\     A cow is not entirely full of
> >   | |--/ | *    milk some of it is hamburger!
> >   w w w  w

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----------------------------------------------------------------