ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


<<< 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 12:06:10 +0200 (CEST)
  • Cc: "'Marcus Faure'" <faure@xxxxxxxxxxx>, registrars@xxxxxxxx
  • In-reply-to: <20050706095304.CFE309373D@mail.intern.globvill.de> from Bhavin Turakhia at "Jul 6, 2005 03:22:50 pm"
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > 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.
> 
> Therefore by signing this contract is ICANN in violation of any contract or
> their RFP process in any fashion?

At least the conditions for Verisign were changed *after* the "selection" of
the new registry operator.
There are a number of other aspects which raise my concern about the process.
Telcordia has explicitly stated that the scope of the evaluation was limited.
About every ICANN SO and .net bidders have asked ICANN for a statement on the
aspects that were not considered by Telcordia. I have not seen an answer
to that. Verisign's blue flag for ICANN compliance is a keyword here.

Marcus



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