ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] ICANN to hire economic consultants to study competition issues

  • To: kidsearch <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, icann board address <icann-board@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN to hire economic consultants to study competition issues
  • From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 21:16:56 -0700

Chris and all,

  Again spot on and also stated in many different ways in the past on
this forum amongst a host of other similar forum's publicly.  It never
ceases to amaze me, and I am sure others how ICANN can continually
defy, deny, and/or obviscate stakeholder/user input so blatantly and
so boldly.

kidsearch wrote:

> Exactly right. A consulting firm's report or a study or survey or poll will
> have results based on the parameters set by those funding it. If I want to
> prove cigarette smoking is not bad for you, I can pay for a study and make
> sure the study supports my opinion.
> The researchers always know which side their bread is buttered on. If their
> results don't please the funding source, there is no more funding for future
> studies. Job security is the primary function for much research. A
> university would have been a better choice than a pro firm, but still the
> results can be skewed.
> I know this is pessimistic before the study is even completed and I can be
> proven wrong with this one. Just been past experience with ICANN and with
> "studies" that they can be assumed to be using this as a way to approve the
> contracts with the study making them to have appeared to have performed due
> diligence.
> There have been several businesspeople here on this list, on the public
> comments, and the web references pointed out by memebers of this list who
> all already advised ICANN it would be anti-competitive. They already have
> advice where they are supposed to get it from. There is a bottom-up
> consensus no that indicates the contract needs to be rewritten on several
> points and now ICANN's BoD has decided once again that bottom-up consensus
> should be ignored since it does not agree with what they already want to do
> and have decided to do.
> This is status quo. If something different happens, I will be shocked and
> awed.
> Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
> http://icann.thingsthatjustpissmeoff.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "George Kirikos" <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <biz-tld-agreement@xxxxxxxxx>; <info-tld-agreement@xxxxxxxxx>;
> <org-tld-agreement@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 12:34 AM
> Subject: [ga] ICANN to hire economic consultants to study competition issues
> > Hello,
> >
> > The adopted resolutions of today's Board meeting were just released:
> >
> > http://www.icann.org/minutes/resolutions-18oct06.htm
> >
> > They're going to hire an outside economic consulting firm to answer
> > various competition related questions. Until one sees the report, it's
> > unclear whether this is good or bad. One can hire "experts" to say the
> > world is flat these days....
> >
> > However, given that they seem to continue to plan to give presumptive
> > renewal to the existing registry operators, I don't see this
> > development as a positive. On the bright side, they didn't approve the
> > existing proposed contracts, yet.
> >
> > Any economic consultant should study whether consumers would experience
> > lower prices if the registry contracts were regularly re-tendered,
> > compared to having presumptive renewal, and what the optimal contract
> > length would (i.e. 3 years, 5 years, 8 years, etc.).
> >
> > Ultimately, ICANN is making this decision more difficult and complex
> > than it should be. It's obvious that the maximum public benefit would
> > occur if the contracts were of fixed term, and given to the lowest
> > bidder for a tender with a baseline of operational
> > standards/specifications. Countless government and private contracts
> > are bid in this exact same manner, everything from supplying
> > paperclips, to outsourcing of call centres, to plane orders. Any other
> > solution is not optimal for the public, and begs the question "Why?"
> >
> > Using Google as our friend, one can see pages about procurement like:
> >
> > http://www.optimalauctions.com/solutions_procurement.jsp
> > http://www.osec.doc.gov/ogc/occic/apec.html
> > http://www.corwm.org.uk/content-512
> > http://www.statnett.no/default.aspx?ChannelID=1209
> >
> > and see how many strategic rules and principles ICANN would break, in
> > failing to reach an optimal solution in its procurement, should it have
> > approved the proposed contracts (and process) to date. Presumptive
> > renewal, where the suppliers get to set their own prices, would be
> > laughed at as a proposed procurement strategy. That's simply a giveaway
> > to the suppliers, and no sane and accountable organization would adopt
> > -- they'd be canned on the spot by their superiors.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > George Kirikos
> > http://www.kirikos.com/
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.5/483 - Release Date: 10/18/06
> >
> >


Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obediance of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy