Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Capturing feedback from today's face-to-face

[Elaine Pruis <elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Though I agree that local registrars in developing economies are  
scarce, I strongly disagree with the concept of JAS working towards  
propping up registrars in developing economies. It is outside our  
charter and would be a diversion of funds that (as soon as announced)  
have been proclaimed as too little for the charted task.  The ccTLD  
operators would be the most natural avenue for registrar creation and  
growth in developing economies, and with the impetus coming from the  
ccTLD space, these new registrars would have a market ready-product to  
cut their teeth on before new gTLDs are delegated sometime in 2013.
Elaine

On Jun 23, 2011, at 12:05 PM, ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Colleages,
>
> Mouhamet Diop suggested that the scope of assistance to applicants
> include the issue of the sales channels the applicants will have as
> registry operators, independent of the selection of registry platform
> service provider.
>
> There was spirited discussion, and as a participant I hope I'm not
> doing an injustice to the participants who expressed the concern
> that registrars are out of scope, or can come later. In my view
> registrars in developing economies are useful, possibly necessary,
> and need starting as soon as possible, selling existing inventories,
> and building local presence as an alternative to North American and
> European registrars as default registrars.
>
> I propose that we submit through our co-chairs to the sponsoring
> organizations statements to the effect that supporting applicants
> in developing economies extends to the market channels available
> also in developing economies, possibly local to the applicant as
> an eventual registry operator.
>
> Eric
Elaine Pruis
VP Client Services
elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
+1 509 899 3161