ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


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

[ga] RE: [icann-delete] Market research report on WLS pricing


Title: Message
Ron,
 
There are so many errors in your document that it makes my head spin,
but one that I'd like to correct now is that eNom's "club-drop" fee is
$2,500 per month (and limited to 10 participants), not $5,000
per month as you report.  I'll be correcting your other misconceptions
in a future email but I'd also like to say now:
 
1) Registrars will NOT make money on WLS due to fierce price competition among us,
no matter how many times you say "you guys will be able to charge $99". 
Most of the volume will be done by the few registers that are efficient
enough to charge $1-2 over cost.  If any registrars (or, heck, customers) are reading this,
I'd like to announce that eNom will charge very near cost if WLS is implemented. 
Many registars probably won't even offer it because they know they won't make money on it.
Most only offer registrations now because it leads to other sales.  I doubt
that the few WLS subscriptions sold to mainstream customers will lead to
much, if any, other sales.
Also, the price we registrars will be able to charge has nothing whatsoever
to do with the "value" of the name attached to the WLS subscription.
In fact, the subscription can be changed to any of 3 different names at any time!
Your other argument is based on the stats for the top registrars
who command fantastic brands and have large marketing budgets in order
to be able to charge high margins on registrations.  The WLS market
will be much different.  It will not be as brand-sensitive since most non-FUD WLS
sales, will go to sophisticated purchasers
(not the mainstream customers you purport) and therefore the majority
of the market will go to the lowest priced producer,
especially since registrars will have no other differentiation.
Also, I assume you've noticed (since you putout the, I must say quality,
"State of the Domain" report) that the largest registrars, who charge
the most per registration are losing market-share to the efficient,
low-cost producers, dispite their brands.
 
Most of the WLS subscriptions will go to sophisticated users/registrars
(the people who do most of the volume nowadays with the current setup)
who know for sure which names will be dropping, and as soon as they know it,
will grab the WLS subscription for it.  Only stupid people will risk (blow)
$40 ($99 in your document, yea, right) on names that probably won't drop. 
 
2) Just because you charge X for SnapBacks, doesn't mean Verisign
should impose that price on all of us.  If, you believe as you say, that about 1.3 million
WLS subscriptions are sold, and if your current wait-list system cost $3 million (you
got ripped off if it did), then I suggest a price less than $3/1.3 per WLS subscription.
 
Paul
eNom Inc.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Wiener [mailto:Ron@Snapnames.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 12:39 AM
To: 'icann-delete@total.confusion.net'; 'ga@dnso.org'
Subject: [icann-delete] Market research report on WLS pricing

SnapNames has been asked by several constituents to share the market research which had been cited wrt VeriSign's proposed WLS pricing.  A summary document is attached in response to that request.  Because of the higher empirical value of actual sales data of comparable products, we are exposing within this document information specific to SnapNames business performance which we would ordinarily consider to be highly confidential.  We do this in the interest of assisting registrars, registries, and other affected constituents, to understand the business case for the suggested pricing.

 

We hope that you find it useful in your overall consideration of VeriSign's WLS proposal. 

 

Cheers,

Ron



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