RE: [registrars] Issues with Verisign Waiting List proposal

["Rob Hall" <rob@momentous.ca>]

It should also be noted that the retail price today includes 2 things absent
in the proposal.

First, it includes the actual registration of the domain for a year.

Second, it includes a profit for the registrar that signs up the client.

I think Bavin said in an earlier email that either of these could be as high
as $ 13.  That would be $26 of money being paid out to registrars, leaving
only $23 for the actual running of the backorder system (by snapnames).

If snapnames can run it for $26, and I bet one of their biggest expenses are
the engines they use to try and aquire the names (something VGRS does not
need to do), then it should be cheaper for VGRS to run (especially given the
100% guarantee).

However, if VGRS is simply licensing snapnames to do this, and snapnames
presumably would still want their $ 26 dollars, and then VGRS adds their
profit simply because they control the registry, I see why the price may be
so high (although I don't agree with it).

It is also interesting to note that VGRS has set the system up so that it is
indepenent of the SRS.  Given that they say they have to licence the
technology, and they have set it up to run as a seperate entity, I agree
with the earlier statements that it should be tendered openly.

Perhaps it is time that VGRS disclose exactly how they are planning on
implementing this.  Giving VGRS millions of dollars more simply because they
hold the monopoly on the registry (and hence, are basically getting a huge
fee just for licencing this out to a third party) is not something I
willingly want to do.

Perhaps ICANN should tender this new function out (ie: license it out).
Given that it seems that it could generate millions just with the licensing
alone, it would be great to see the money go to ICANN, and thus lower the
burden of the registrars supporting the majority of ICANN's bills.


And I don't buy the argument that the registry must somehow stop speculators
by pricing their services high.  Does that mean that domains too should not
be $6 but $40 to try and stop speculators ?  The Registry's job is to
operate a database.  They should not be setting domain name policy by
controlling the price of their monopoly.

As a lot of the domains registered are domains that previously existed, this
effectively means that our cost to register a domain is now $ 40 plus $ 6.
Given that it will be hard to explain to clients why they must now pay so
much more, I suspect many registrars will simply end up eating a lot of
their profit.

If I were to put a conspirsacy theory hat on, Verisign could simply not ever
delete a domain until it was on the "wait list". This would ensure them a
profit of $ 46 dollars for each domain that ever existed and was
re-registered.  Given Verisigns problems with deleting domains in the past,
and the fact that we are still living with their inability to properly
delete, I wouldn't want to head down this road.

We must make sure that we are not creating new monopolies, especially ones
that have no governance. If this is to be implemented, care must be taken to
ensure there is oversight of any new policies (and yes Chuck:  oversight of
the costs as well !  Monopolies typically do have to disclose their costs
and profit to a regulator.  I am not against making a profit, but with a
monopoly, there should be some oversight).

One of the principal reasons ICANN was setup was to ensure fairness and
competition.  Competition is typically one of the ways you lower pricing.
Let others compete for this service and you will see the price lower than
proposed by VGRS.  Lets not create another monopoly.

Rob.


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Bhavin Turakhia
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2002 7:01 AM
To: Nikolaj Nyholm; registrars@dnso.org
Subject: RE: [registrars] Issues with Verisign Waiting List proposal


> To my best knowledge, there is no reason that registrars have to continue
> the malpractice of marking services up $0.50.

that is my point exactly. if the registry themselves charge $46 (which is
the RETAIL price today)  then Registrars cannot mark it up much (maybe a
dollar or two).

In order for the Registrars to mark it up the Registry must sell it at way
below tha TODAYS ACCEPTED Retail price