<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [registrars] [Fwd: [council] Removing Price Caps on Registry Fees]
- To: Bhavin Turakhia <bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [registrars] [Fwd: [council] Removing Price Caps on Registry Fees]
- From: "Marcus Faure" <faure@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 10:48:41 +0200 (CEST)
- Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <200507050534.j655YCmd000898@pechora.icann.org> from Bhavin Turakhia at "Jul 5, 2005 11:09:29 am"
- Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,
this is the first time ever that I hear about the possiblity to have the
registry decide itself what the pricing should be. VGRS has received a
superior ranking in the Telcordia support for its pricing. If the domainyear
would again cost 6 USD in 2007 (or maybe 6.75 USD including ICANN fees?)
the logical ranking VGRS should have received would be the worst of all
bidders.
As I have not even seen an official announcement that VGRS is its own
successor, I believe that they have used the negotiating power of the
timeline to pressure ICANN to accept this "favour". I am sure that, if
ICANN really signs this version, it violates its own process and will be
an easy target in a lawsuit.
Yours,
Marcus
>
> Never a dull moment in a registrars life ....
>
> This is definitely serious. There are no market forces at play when it comes
> to a registry. Especially the .net registry. If com and org are being sold
> to registrar at 6 bucks, nothing really prevents .net being hiked to 6 bucks
> again.
>
> I was under the belief that the pricing to registrars was one of the
> variables in the bid and that the same would apply throughout the duration
> of the contract.
>
> Is this consistent with the .NET RFP? Did the RFP have a provision that
> stated the price would not be capped?
>
> Marcus or someone from CORE could shed some more light on this - considering
> they were one of the RFP applicants. Was this a part of the .NET RFP.
>
> Meanwhile I am adding this to the Luxembourg agenda
>
> bhavin
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ross Rader
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 2:39 AM
> > To: registrars@xxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [registrars] [Fwd: [council] Removing Price Caps on
> > Registry Fees]
>
> > I'm rather surprised by this. It is a very concerning development.
> >
> > - -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: [council] Removing Price Caps on Registry Fees
> > Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 13:36:24 -0700
> > From: Bret Fausett <bfausett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > CC: ALAC <alac@xxxxxxxxx>
> > References: <DHEIJCFHPEMGGMBMIIDAIEALGJAA.michael@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Council Members (with copy to ALAC):
> >
> > You may recall that in the draft .NET contract posted for
> > comment several weeks ago, the pricing section was blank,
> > with the following
> > comment: [To be negotiated consistent with .NET RFP]. See
> > Section 7.3 here:
> >
> > http://www.icann.org/tlds/dotnet-reassignment/draft-net-agreem
> > ent-9mar05.pdf
> >
> > When the final negotiated version was published, I went to
> > that section to find out what pricing had been negotiated and
> > was surprised to discover that ICANN will lift the price caps
> > on registry fees effective
> > 1 January 2007. The language is here:
> >
> > (a) Prices for Registry Services.
> >
> > From 1 July 2005 through 31 December 2006, the price to
> > ICANN-accredited registrars for new and renewal domain name
> > registrations and for transferring a domain name registration
> > from one ICANN accredited registrar to another, shall
> > not exceed
> > US$4.25 (consisting of a US$3.50 service fee and a
> > US$0.75 ICANN
> > fee). On 1 January 2007, the controls on Registry Operator's
> > pricing set forth in this Agreement shall be eliminated,
> > provided that the same price shall be charged to all
> > registrars
> > with respect to each annual increment of a new or
> > renewal domain
> > name registration, and for transferring a domain name
> > registration from one ICANN-accredited registrar to another
> > (provided that volume discounts and marketing support and
> > incentive programs may be made if the same opportunities to
> > qualify for those discounts and marketing support and
> > incentive
> > programs is available to all ICANN-accredited registrars).
> >
> > (b) Adjustments to Pricing for Domain Name Registrations.
> >
> > Registry Operator shall provide no less than six months prior
> > notice in advance of any price increase for domain name
> > registrations and shall continue to offer domain name
> > registrations for periods of up to ten years.
> >
> > See Scetion 7.3 here:
> > http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/net/net-registry-agreemen
> > t-01jul05.pdf
> >
> > This strikes me as a significant departure from past
> > practices, and I do not recall any discussion of this at
> > either the Council level or within the ALAC. I wonder whether
> > market forces will be sufficient to prevent Verisign from
> > raising the .NET registry fees significantly. At a minimum,
> > we should have had a conversation about this. Have I missed something?
> >
> > Bret
> >
> >
> > - --
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > -rwr
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Every contrivance of man, every tool, every
> > instrument,
> > every utensil, every article designed for
> > use, of each
> > and every kind, evolved from very simple beginnings."
> > - Robert Collier
> >
> >
> > Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
> > My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)
> >
> > iD8DBQFCyaV/6sL06XjirooRAtkcAJ9dAwmewRA+i6ldX7IaGeFzNhBrRgCcDB+A
> > kVK2m0SbvLTwHnW3tOiMwDk=
> > =4jU7
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|