Re: [registrars] Re: Registrars Collecting on Multi-Year Registrations

[Larry Erlich <erlich@domainregistry.com>]

Elliot Noss wrote:
> 
> We need all remember that we are currently pushing the Verisign registry to
> change the auto-renew policy to an auto-delete/explicit renew

Who is pushing this? I don't remember seeing any 
discussion, at least on this list, about this. This
is a bad idea.

Larry Erlich

http://www.DomainRegistry.com


> which would
> free up significant dollars for all of us that currently gets tied up in
> maintaining an unnecessarily high float with the registry.
> 
> I believe that the Verisign registry understands the issues here and may
> consider changing the policy (I urge you all to pressure them further in
> this regard). If this change is made, some of the comments below no longer
> hold.
> 
> FWIW, I agree with Donny's interpretation of the agreement and if I recall
> correctly ICANN previously published an advisory against this practice.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Elliot Noss
> Tucows inc.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> > Behalf Of Rob Hall
> > Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 12:22 AM
> > To: David Wascher
> > Cc: registrars@dnso.org
> > Subject: [registrars] Re: Registrars Collecting on Multi-Year
> > Registrations
> >
> >
> > Actually, it is simpler than that.
> >
> > The registrar doesn't need to do anything but not delete the domain for 4
> > years.  Because the Registry automatically renews the domain, and charges
> > the Registrar, all one needs to do is not delete the domain.
> >
> > Of course, the Registrar needs to be clear in their contract that
> > they pay
> > the Registry in this fashion.
> >
> > On the plus side, are
> >
> > 1) Better customer service
> > 2) Reduced liability for fraud and changed minds
> > 3) And yes, last but not least, the Interest earned on the money (that is
> > typically held in a deposit account) goes to the Registrar, not the
> > Registry.
> >
> > I would be happy to reconsider should the Registry implement a
> > system that:
> >
> > 1)  Allows a Registrar to delete a domain, and returns to the Registrar a
> > credit for any remaining full years (after all, the Registry gets to sell
> > this domain again for the same time it has already sold it)
> >
> > 2)  Allows a Registrar to delete a domain for Fraud and chargeback and
> > obtain a full refund
> >
> > 3)  Charges a Registrar less for multi-year registrations,
> > recognizing that
> > interest is earned by the money sitting in the Registry account  (for
> > example, on a 10 year registration, if the Registry were to buy
> > an annuity
> > that paid out $6 per year, it would only them less than $45 (or 4.50 per
> > year).  Why should the Registry reap all the rewards of Interest
> > on service
> > not yet delivered. Registrars can use this Interest to offer a lower cost
> > registration to consumers. It would also encourage us to sell multi-year
> > registrations.
> >
> > Rob.
> >
> >
> >
> > David Wascher writes:
> >
> > > So Rob,
> > > If a customer wants a domain for 4 years does the customer pay
> > upfront for
> > > the 4 years? Then the registrar system has to keep track and do
> > a renewal
> > > every year on the date of expiration.
> > >
> > > This allows the registrar to keep the registration fee of $18
> > as a float for
> > > 3 years instead. If the registrant transfers the domain the
> > first year what
> > > happens to the other 3 years worth of money?
> > >
> > > This may be a business model but practical for who the registrar or the
> > > registrant?
> > >
> > > David
> > >
> > > ::-----Original Message-----
> > > ::From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> > > ::Behalf Of Rob Hall
> > > ::Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 2:26 PM
> > > ::To: registrars@dnso.org
> > > ::Subject: RE: [registrars] Registrars Collecting on Multi-Year
> > > ::Registrations
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::This is a valid business model for many reasons.
> > > ::
> > > ::It is not against our Registry contract, and should not be until the
> > > ::registry model changes.
> > > ::
> > > ::Rob.
> > > ::
> > > ::-----Original Message-----
> > > ::From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
> > > ::Behalf Of Mike Lampson
> > > ::Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 1:17 PM
> > > ::To: registrars@dnso.org
> > > ::Subject: [registrars] Registrars Collecting on Multi-Year
> > Registrations
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::All,
> > > ::
> > > ::This is a terrible business practice as documented by VeriSign.
> > > ::Prohibition
> > > ::against such practices needs to be in our Code of Conduct.
> > > ::
> > > ::Regards,
> > > ::
> > > ::Mike Lampson
> > > ::The Registry at Info Avenue, LLC
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::----- Original Message -----
> > > ::From: "VeriSign Global Registry Services"
> > > ::To: VeriSign Registrars
> > > ::Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 12:42 PM
> > > ::Subject: Registry Advisory: Multi-Year Registrations
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::To All Registrars:
> > > ::
> > > ::As you know, running effective renewal campaigns depends upon keeping
> > > ::accurate customer data, including contact information for
> > reaching them by
> > > ::e-mail, direct mail, or phone. Equally important is ensuring
> > expiration
> > > ::dates between VeriSign Registry and registrar are consistent.
> > > ::
> > > ::The sale of a multi-year registration that is registered with VeriSign
> > > ::Registry for only one year will create a discrepancy in the
> > > ::expiration date,
> > > ::meaning you have to manage separate expiration dates for
> > registrations,
> > > ::adding cycles to your renewal efforts and increasing the chance that a
> > > ::registration may be inadvertently deleted.  Additionally,
> > registrants who
> > > ::have paid for a multi-year registration but later become
> > aware that they
> > > ::only received a one-year registration may question the
> > > ::registrar's right to
> > > ::engage in such a transaction. Indeed, processing multi-year
> > > ::registrations as
> > > ::one-year registrations will create a liability on the part of the
> > > ::registrar
> > > ::should the registrant choose to transfer its registration to another
> > > ::registrar.  The transfer process causes the discrepancy to
> > surface because
> > > ::the full registration term purchased by the registrant will not carry
> > > ::forward to the new registrar. All registrars are required to
> > process all
> > > ::domain name registrations and renewals through VeriSign
> > Registry with the
> > > ::same term length as was agreed to by the registrant.
> > > ::
> > > ::All registrars should periodically crosscheck their data with VeriSign
> > > ::Registry data available in the weekly Domain Name reports.
> > Our Customer
> > > ::Service Representatives are always available to assist you with any
> > > ::questions you have on discrepancies between your registration data and
> > > ::expiration dates with VeriSign Registry. If you have any
> > > ::questions regarding
> > > ::this Registry Advisory, please contact Customer Service
> > > ::
> > > ::Chris Sheridan
> > > ::Manager, Customer Service
> > > ::VeriSign Global Registry Services
> > > ::www.verisign-grs.com
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > > ::
> > >
> >

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@DomainRegistry.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------