Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant TLDs

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

hi,

But, the attacking the issue of equivalent access is a different matter.  The 
would be a reopening of R19, even by my standards.

a.


On 9 Apr 2010, at 13:04, Neuman, Jeff wrote:

> Or better yet, allow a registry to not have to use those resellers that don’t 
> act in the TLDs’ best interest.  Or allow them to pick and choose which 
> retailers to use giving some more preferential treatment than others 
> depending on how those resellers act.  Allow them to reward those resellers 
> that provide better service to consumers than others and to terminate those 
> that do not.
>  
> Both sides of the equation must be dealt with……
>  
> Jeffrey J. Neuman 
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
> of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or 
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have 
> received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, 
> distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have 
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
> the original message.
>  
>  
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Jeff Eckhaus
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 12:45 PM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant TLDs
>  
>  
> I agree with you on this. It is frustrating when a supplier lowers their 
> prices to differentiate themselves, but the retailers do not follow suit. To 
> make matters worse the retailer just lumps them in with everyone else and 
> raises prices.
> Wow, wouldn’t it be great if that supplier could do something about it?
>  
> What if the supplier were able to reach out to end users, consumers, and let 
> them know that their product is different, lower priced and guess what, you 
> could purchase it directly from a retail store the supplier has set up.
>  
> This is the world we live in with almost every industry and that is the world 
> of unlimited Cross Ownership.
>  
>  
> Jeff
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Neuman, Jeff
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 6:00 AM
> To: Avri Doria; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant TLDs
>  
>  
> Avri,
>  
> With respect to this point: 
>  
> "For example, have there been cases where a registry lowered its fees, and 
> the regisrar did not in turn lower theirs to the consumer but absorbd the 
> profit?"
>  
> The answer is YES.  Registries have lowered fees and registrars have not 
> passed those lowering of fees through to consumers.  See 
> http://www.icann.org/correspondence/switzer-to-twomey-23nov08.pdf.  In early 
> 2008, Neustar intentionally decided not to raise its fees to registrars when 
> most of the other registries raised their rates.  Despite this, every 
> registrar not only raised the rates of the other TLDs (that increased their 
> wholesale rates), but also raised the rates for .biz (despite the fact that 
> we did not raise ours).
>  
>  
>  
> Jeffrey J. Neuman
> Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Law & Policy
>  
>  
> The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use 
> of the recipient(s) named above and may contain confidential and/or 
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you have 
> received this e-mail message in error and any review, dissemination, 
> distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have 
> received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
> the original message.
>  
>  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 8:49 AM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant TLDs
>  
>  
>  
> On 9 Apr 2010, at 08:17, Volker Greimann - Key-Systems GmbH wrote:
>  
> > Allowing all nGTLD applicants to bypass the registrar system would 
> > effectively lead us back to the domain business we had a decade ago, which 
> > is IMHO definitely not in the interest of the consumer.
>  
>  
> Hi,
>  
> Humility* aside, please explain why this is.  I would like to understand how 
> this has helped consumers and how that benefit has been measured.
>  
> I have heard different theories about whether the current modality has helped 
> consumers or whether it was even necessary - so leaving aside for the moment 
> the subject of whether it helps or hinders innovation and creativity, please 
> show evidence for the ways in which having separate Registrars has benefited 
> consumers. 
>  
> For example, have there been cases where a registry lowered its fees, and the 
> regisrar did not in turn lower theirs to the consumer but absorbd the profit?
> I also am not sure I understand how any middleman who ads to the price, 
> benefits users unless they are offering some value add service.  So what 
> service have the registrars aded that was not doable by the Registries, 
> especially now that registries have effectively split into registry service 
> providers (RSP) and registry owners (RO) and we have full service resellers.
>  
> I really do not care too much about how the mountains of profit gained from 
> these consumers are split between the Registry Service Providers, Registry 
> owners, Registrars and Resellers - what I care about, in this instance, is 
> showing why having the Registrars, with the add on costs to the consumer in 
> their role as middlemen, has been a protector and a benefit to the consumer.
>  
> Again, I expect you can show this quite clearly and I expect that at the end 
> of the explanation we will most all accept the importance of having 
> registrars, I just think it would be helpful to have it explained.
>  
> a.
>  
>  
> * the humility in question is the H in IMHO, for those who may not know the 
> acronym: IMHO, In My Humble Opinion,
>  
>  
>