ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]

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

Re: [registrars] Followup/clarification on yesterday's statement in confcall

  • To: Marcus Faure <faure@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [registrars] Followup/clarification on yesterday's statement in confcall
  • From: "Marcus Faure" <faure@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:37:24 +0200 (CEST)
  • Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kurt.pritz@xxxxxxxxx
  • In-reply-to: <200606210830.k5L8UNgE019847@brian.voerde.globvill.de> from Marcus Faure at "Jun 21, 2006 10:30:23 am"
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
That should read 0.05$, 0.10$.. of course.

Yours,
Marcus

> 
> Hi all,
> 
> thinking about yesterday's call I realised that I created a
> misunderstanding. 
> CORE's position on the 25c per-domain fee for registrars is that this
> model will not work for certain TLDs that are looking at high numbers
> and may want to promote their TLD by free promotions that would allow
> registrars to bundle a domain with another product. We encourage a
> different model that introduces a variable fee based on the registry
> price to the registrar. This can either be a percentage or we can
> define price ranges, e.g.
> 
> rregistry price ICANN registrar fee
> 0-1$            0.00c
> 1-2$            0.05c
> 2-3$            0.10c
> 3-5$            0.20c
> 5-10$           0.25c
> 10$-20$         0.35c
> 20$+            0.50c
> 
> 
> 
> Yours,
> Marcus
>
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>