Return to tldreport Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: jeffrey
Date/Time: Fri, November 10, 2000 at 6:19 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.0 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: Real versus artificial competition.

Message:
 

 
I would like to commend ICANN for at least addressing IOD as being unique.  I also sympathize with the ICANN members (real people) who probably feel anxious, hurt, and offended because IOD has been relentless in their efforts to gain the respect of ICANN. Having been more-or-less attacked by IOD and their supporters, I certainly understand why ICANN might at first sympathize with other applicants.  Being in the spotlight, however, they have no choice but to be cool and try to do the right thing.  IOD has backed off and ICANN has had an opportunity to now lash back at IOD in a formal way. The character and make-up of Chris Ambler’s operation has been “exposed”, by ICANN. So let’s get on with the business of choosing registries.

I firmly believe that IOD has presented itself with a reasonable application.  ICANN is certainly offended by the fact that IOD maintained a registry after they asserted, years after the registry was opened, that they disapproved of “pre-registrations”.  Well, what would ICANN have this existing registry do?  Shutting down an existing registration process is very different from avoiding starting a “pre-registration” process. Part of demonstrating the viability of any company is in displaying consumer trust.  To simply stop the registration process after these general comments about pre-registrations would instill a lack of trust in IOD supporters. That would’ve clearly had a negative impact on IODs viability.  If ICANN had specifically acknowledged IOD and told them directly to stop the registration process, then at least IOD would have had some rationale for doing so in the eyes of tens of thousands of supporters.  IOD is wanting to work with ICANN.  I would like to think that ICANN is wanting to work with new companies like IOD.

Regarding the price of registrations, I don’t think this should be a concern at all.  The IOD registration costs to consumers had been established a long time ago at a rate that was similar to other registrars.  Afilias naturally has a better likelihood of being successful because they are already established and are more comfortable operating at a loss for a longer period of time. So what. The likelihood of IOD being successful is also very high! ICANN will have to determine what the cost of adding competition is and be fair in dictating how IODs price structure should be changed.  ICANN is essentially awarding little monopolies and should take an active role in guiding the price structures so that consumers are treated fairly.  To suggest that existing groups of registrars can police themselves better than a new single company is plain nonsense.   ICANN can’t simply be a passive participant in pricing.

As far as scaling up operations, ICANN seems to provide circular logic.  They intimate that IOD doesn’t have existing quality technical staff, nor the resources to recruit them.  To suggest that they couldn’t recruit from an endless supply of qualified technical experts given the nod of approval from ICANN makes no sense.  Should they have been expected to do so thus far?  I don’t think so.  Maybe ICANN should’ve made the registration fee one million dollars instead of fifty thousand dollars.  That might’ve weeded out all new potential competition.

As far as I can tell, IOD was the only company to come forward with a “proof-of-concept” database without already being in the existing business.  What is not to like about that idea? I view IODs registry as an admirable mission that ICANN avoids recognizing and should be congratulating! If ICANN were an unbiased government sponsored granting agency, they would surely recognize IOD as standing head-and-shoulders above the rest with years of experience in registration and proof-of-concept data!  I think that ICANN should help new companies like IOD along in an effort to foster “real” competition.

 


Message Thread:


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy