[ga] Re: [icann-delete] WLS - Better Margins for Registrars

["Eric Schneider" <eric@unames.com>]

> > COMPETITION
> > Just because WLS, if implemented, may stifle other secondary market
> > models
> > does not mean in the slightest that WLS stifles competition amongst
> > registrars.  Currently, secondary market models and proposals other
>
> Competition is stifled. All that happens is that existing competitors
> get the privilege of being resellers of Verisign services, instead of
> being allowed to innovate as they are now.

One competing proposal is that of an auction model.  Tell me, how will
auctioning be stifled from WLS.  End-users don't have to wait for a domain
name to expire to make a bid.

Competition has emerged by developing solutions in response to an expiration
event.  If a competitor was truly innovative they would've realized that
there would be merit in providing services to consumers at any time without
waiting around for the condition of an expiration event.

It is precisely because competitors are as you say "innovating as they are
now" the reason why they have not seen that there could be other solutions.
You snooze, you lose.  After a company ramps up a new service, they tend to
make innovation less of a priority and possibly fall asleep at the wheel.
Those companies who innovate unconditionally 24/7 are the ones that will
emerge from the herd and lead with new products/services in new markets and
new directions.

New technologies emerge everyday that can shift marketshares in an instance.
That's what business and competition is all about.  I have no pity for a
competitor that could not see the forest from the trees.


> > Personally, I think that the first-time purchase of a back-order
> > should be treated as a fixed expense of sorts.  There should be no
> > price competition between registrars for the initial purchase with
> > the price set at $100 for anyone, anytime, and anywhere.  By so
> > doing all constituencies including ICANN, Registry, and Registrar
> > get paid fairly.
>
> You leave out the "registrant". Basically, your pricing scheme is a
> centrally-planned model, similar to what central-planners did under
> communism. They'd set a price based on what they thought was "fair",
> rather than allowing the market to set the price and mechanism through
> competition. To be blunt, if you want to be a central planner and want
> a price that is "fair", you should not be in the domain business, which
> is run on free-market principles. I'll rely on a competitive
> marketplace to determine prices and valid business models, rather than
> a single individual (you), monopolist (Verisign), or cartel (all
> registrars co-ordinating to price-fix).

You are taking this out of context and are commenting on only one component
of the proposed pricing model.  The intention of my initial comments was an
attempt to be more creative of how a service such as a WLS might be priced.
Most subscription pricing models are time based by charging some kind of
periodic rate ($69 per year).  The point is that by proposing a price model
that is EVENT BASED rather than TIME BASED, there would be the advantages of
a FIXED RISK at the time of purchase.

Regards,
Eric Schneider




--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html