RE: [registrars] 66% needed for approval

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Monte,

As Ross pointed out, that 15% cap will not be difficult to increase. If we
start down that path with the 15% cap as our goal, we will be disappointed.

Tim


-----Original Message-----
From: Monte Cahn [mailto:monte@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 3:44 PM
To: 'Tim Ruiz'; ross@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Rob Hall'; 'Jean-Michel Becar'; 'Registrars Constituency'
Subject: RE: [registrars] 66% needed for approval

My email was not directed to you specifically, it is just to lay a
foundation about this issue that we continue to go around and around since
it was released.  I feel that the registries should be paying more...after
all, they are far more profitable than all of us and we are their customer.
I said this before and if they have a cap on what they can charge us, then
good.  Let them raise with caution.  If their cap to us is only 15% then our
cost goes up $.09 per domain (or less) vs. $.18....

None of us win with this increase.  The registries still win with the
increase.

 


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 Tim Ruiz
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 4:34 PM
To: 'Monte Cahn'; ross@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Rob Hall'; 'Jean-Michel Becar'; 'Registrars Constituency'
Subject: RE: [registrars] 66% needed for approval

Monte,

I never meant to suggest that we shouldn't be firm. I am concerned that if
we are not careful we may take ourselves out of the process altogether. All
we are really doing when we vote is deciding whether we want to pay ICANN
directly, or through the registries, we do not really *approve* the budget. 

Our leverage and/or opportunity to affect the budget is because of this
vote. After ICANN has worked its way around that once, I believe our voice
may be drastically diminished from then on.

Tim


-----Original Message-----
From: Monte Cahn [mailto:monte@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 1:56 PM
To: 'Tim Ruiz'; ross@xxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Rob Hall'; 'Jean-Michel Becar'; 'Registrars Constituency'
Subject: RE: [registrars] 66% needed for approval

Well - it appears we are not left in a very good position today.  I feel
that just laying over and letting this happen without putting forth a firm
stance on what our position is on this issue is a big mistake.  Look what
just happened to us as Registrars this year.  What makes you think that this
process will not continue next year (or in 3 years) and the year after.
Let's not be afraid to make a stance with ICANN, we are being too easy on
this issue.  Look at the letter that Paul Kane put out.  Be the squeaky
wheel that needs oil!

Let's draw a definite line in the sand regardless of what happens to us this
year so that next year/years we do use our leverage with the registries and
other sources to supplement the increase yet to come.   Also we are spending
way too much time away from our business complaining, disagreeing with each
other based on our relative business models and size.  Don't you think that
ICANN knows that the top 10 Registrars control 80% of the domains today and
the reason they were consulted with only them?  Although I see that top 10
picture changing over the next 12 months, it is important that we all stay
unified and together as a group on the future of our industry.  Internet
users are predicted to double again in the next 3-5 years and we can all
share in the registrations and complementary services if we stay together.

Just my thoughts.


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: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 3:30 PM
To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx; 'Monte Cahn'
Cc: 'Rob Hall'; 'Jean-Michel Becar'; 'Registrars Constituency'
Subject: RE: [registrars] 66% needed for approval

Exactly. Also, once they have this worked out where do you think that is
going to leave us next year and the year after that as far as having a
significant voice in this process?

Tim


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ross Wm. Rader
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 8:58 AM
To: Monte Cahn
Cc: 'Rob Hall'; 'Jean-Michel Becar'; 'Registrars Constituency'
Subject: Re: [registrars] 66% needed for approval

On 5/27/2004 10:41 AM Monte Cahn noted that:

> I think we are on to something here.....

Doubtful. It only requires the consent of ICANN to modify this contract. 
  I think it would be pretty easy for the various registries to draw up a
quick Christmas list of things they want in exchange for signing a revised
contract that lifts these caps. I also expect that this could be done in a
couple of weeks, behind closed doors and likely seal our fate permanently.

The problem of the size of the budget doesn't go away no matter how many
  potential angles we come up with. We can either focus on that or, in my
opinion, lose (big).
-- 

                        -rwr








                 "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions.
                                            All life is an experiment.
                             The more experiments you make the better."
                         - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
My Blogware: http://www.byte.org