[registrars] Just saw this announcement on ICANN website

["Bhavin Turakhia" <bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-21nov05.htm

The announcement has several carefully worded statements (some of them
vague) that may confuse registrants and stakeholders -

Q1.1 Can VeriSign raise its prices under the current .COM agreement? Under
the proposed new .COM agreement?

A1.1 Under the current .COM agreement, VeriSign may increase prices with
thirty days notice and with ICANN approval (which may not be unreasonably
withheld). VeriSign has not raised its prices since the contract has been in
effect, and has indicated that is has no current plans to increase prices.

Under the proposed new .COM agreement, VeriSign may raise its service fee
(currently US$6.00) for domain registrations by up to 7% per year starting
in 2007. VeriSign will be required to give six-months notice before any
price increase, and to continue to offer registrants the option to lock-in
price for up to ten years of registration service at current prices.


Q1.2 Why is it appropriate for VeriSign to be allowed to raise its prices by
up to 7% per year?

A1.2 In order to provide for a transition to allowing market forces to
determine prices, ICANN and VeriSign agreed to relax the current price cap,
which has remained unchanged since ICANN came into existence, on a graduated
basis


Q1.4 How is the average .COM domain name holder expected to be affected by
the allowed price increases?

A1.4 Prices have dropped from US$50 per year for a .COM domain name to as
low as under US$10 since ICANN introduced registry and registrar competition
in 1999. In terms of the typical .COM domain name holder (an individual who
holds one domain name), they will benefit from VeriSign's investment in the
.COM registry,


Q4.1 When will the current .COM agreement expire, and would there be a
competitive bidding process when it expires?

A4.1 The .COM agreement executed in 2001, which concludes at the end of
2007, did not include provisions for a re-bid; rather, it had a presumption
of renewal that could only have been overturned in the case of a
"substantial material breach." Historically, this has been a feature of the
.COM agreement; the original .COM agreement of 1999 contained very similar
presumptive renewal language.



Q4.3 Under the previous .COM agreement, VeriSign agreed to expend
US$200,000,000 on certain research, development, and infrastructure
improvements. How did they invest it and why does the new agreement contain
no similar investment requirement? 

A4.3 VeriSign has demonstrated the commitment to make substantial investment
in its infrastructure to ensure continued stability and security. It is
clear that the need for significant added investment will be required every
year in the future and not just through 2007, as usage increases and the
complexity and sophistication of security threat grows more prominent. 



Best Regards
Bhavin Turakhia
Founder, Chairman & CEO
Directi
-------------------------
 <http://www.directi.com> http://www.directi.com
 <http://www.logicboxes.com> http://www.logicboxes.com
Tel: +91-22-56797600
Fax: +91-22-56797510
Board (US): +1 (415) 240 4171 ext 7600
Fax (US): +1 (320) 210 5146
-------------------------