Response to Telnic - Why did you choose not to provide specifics, details nor transparent disclosure to any of the questions I asked?
- To: tel-tld-agreement@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Response to Telnic - Why did you choose not to provide specifics, details nor transparent disclosure to any of the questions I asked?
- From: "Michael J. O'Farrell" <michael.ofarrell@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 01:09:29 -0400
Unfortunately, Mr. Rose's response on behalf of Telnic to my queries about
the proposed .tel ICANN-Telnic agreement were not answered directly nor
specifically in any thread of this .tel ICANN-Telnic proposed
agreement discussion forum nor through his response to Mr. Nevett and Mr.
Understanding that Mr. Rose and the team at Telnic may feel that responding
to open forum queries about .tel Supporting Community interests
and related information - as outlined in my 2006 May 06 posting
- with substantial detail or transparent disclosure may be difficult at this
time, I do believe that it would be in the best interest of the TLD
community if Mr. Rose, Telnic and/or any ICANN stakeholder could provide
some specific details and clarity on the following questions as taken from
my original posting:
1. The Telnic .tel TLD concept is interesting, unique and has
potential merit, but who is the Supporting Community? Why hasn't it been
2. Without the explicit support from technology standards bodies,
industry trade organisations nor the global Information, Communication and
Telecommunication (ICT) vendor community, how can it best be determined if
the Telnic proposed .tel TLD has the potential to fulfill its promise to
deliver on its unique TLD value proposition? And, what are the potential
risks and associated consequences to the TLD industry if it can not?
3. As its Supporting Community has not been clearly identified, will
Telnic look to other TLD markets to leverage its granted .tel TLD if it not
successful with its current unique value proposition offer?
4. Will the proposed ICANN granted $0.15 per domain Telnic price-point
advantage be detrimental to current TLD industry viability?
And, as previously mentioned in my 2006 May 06 posting:
In order to provide the ICANN stakeholder community with more insightful
information as well as demonstrate the true value and potential for the
proposed .tel TLD, Telnic should provide more transparency into its
Supporting Community, market studies, market sizing, and
pre-commercialization interests. An independent study evaluating the
potential success and viability of the .tel TLD would also be helpful to the
ICANN stakeholder community. In order to provide more clarity and
transparency, Telnic should be more open to disclosing information around
the potential success of the .tel TLD and prove its viability before final
ICANN approvals are granted.
With Telnic's full cooperation for disclosure, ICANN stakeholder due
diligence should be able to adequately address the Supporting Community,
viability and preferred pricing queries outlined in this posting. After
future review and acceptance of the ICANN-Telnic proposed .tel TLD by ICANN
stakeholders, I look forward to Telnic securing and successfully launching
its proposed .tel TLD in order for global communities to take advantage of
emerging TLD innovations in a fair and openly competitive manner.
Michael J. O'Farrell