Re: [ga] ITU Resolution 102 -- four years later

[Leah G <ldg@wecn.net>]

On Sunday 20 October 2002 07:56 am, J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
> I just wander why there is any revenue over the name, and not only over the
> registration act. What is the renewal task which justifies the same amount
> of revenue as the registration.

To me, it's a simple answer, Jefsey.  In order to maintain the service, the 
registrar must have ongoing revenue.  The cost of maintaining the system and 
customer service is not going to to decrease yearly, so the renewal cost is 
the same as the original registration.

I don't know how things are done in France, but I tend to compare it to an 
insurance premium.  It must be paid each period to keep insurance in force.  
Just because the initial application took more time to fill out and get 
approval, it doesn't mean the renewal premiums would be any less because I 
don't have to reapply each year.  It's a subscription service like any other.  
If you don't like the insurance analogy, use any membership in its place.  
Would you rather see a charge for every time you access customer service or 
the website to made changes to your domain account?  How about calling it a 
yearly support fee?

In any case, renewal fees are justified, IMO.  They should be reasonable for 
the services provided, though, but still provide a resonable margin for the 
registrar and the registry.

My 2 cents.

Leah

--
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