ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


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

Re: [registrars] ICANN Proposed budget is out for public comment

  • To: "'Registrars Constituency'" <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [registrars] ICANN Proposed budget is out for public comment
  • From: "Nitin Agarwal" <nitin@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 13:41:58 -0400
  • References: <200405181719.i4IHJ7806949@pechora.icann.org>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I also agree that this is a plan to get rid of smaller registrars and am in
favor of the higher per transaction fee.

-Nitin


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bhavin Turakhia" <bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Registrars Constituency'" <registrars@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 1:19 PM
Subject: RE: [registrars] ICANN Proposed budget is out for public comment



> This is a plan to get rid of smaller registrars. That is my
> two cents on this situation. I would vote for $0.49 per
> domain flat, rather then making the smallest registrar in

I would much rather myself vote for a $0.49 flat fee per domain year than
vote for a model where smaller Registrars are bearing a higher cost than the
larger ones. Offcourse id even much rather see a portion of that $0.49 come
out of Registries who are already making fixed margins.

bhavin





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