Well ICANN seems to have said many unjust things about IOD, however the support from
you chaps seems to have made a difference.After reading this however, ICANN does
seem to have been acting on some mis-information which is a little worrying at this
late stage.
Here is the link and the text follows with my comments in addition:
http://www.icann.com/tlds/report/report-iiib1a-09nov00.htm
Note
about Image Online Design
Both the business/financial team and the technical team
each independently concluded after the threshold review that the application from
Image Online Design, Inc. did not justify further evaluation. However, because of
the large number of favorable comments in the ICANN Public Comment Forum, the ICANN
staff requested that the evaluation team examine Image Online Design's application
more closely in the evaluation process.
Well at least someone is listening.
It is a worry that thy didn't look into the application closely in the first place
though.
Operation of a large registry will require substantial technical
and managerial resources. A failure of a new TLD to service the global community
of registrars and registrants could fatally damage its reputation and the likelihood
of its successful adoption by the public, and therefore its ability to be a vigorous
competitor with .com. It could also seriously damage public confidence in new TLDs
that could be introduced in the future.
This is true and as a Network Solutions
customer I can confirm this. It is good that ICANN has noted that it is not just
sufficient to run the registry - a higher level of service is expected too.
Image
Online Design proposes to operate a very large registry that will compete directly
with .com. Currently, Image Online Design's registry operation is very modest(20,000
names) and, not being part of the DNS root, experiences little traffic.
A comment
here from Chris Ambler would be useful but I seem to remember the figure being 15000
when the application went in and 18000 about a week ago. While the numbers are not
significant in themselves it does indicate that public confidence in IOD is strong
and getting stronger. Don't forget the 5000 applications over the last month or so
are from people that have read all three applications and decided which is the better
one.
In its application, Image Online Design identified the need for a staff
of approximately 70 during its first year of operation. (Although this staff size
is larger than other large domain applicants proposed, this appears to be because
Image Online Design will act as both registry and registrar initially.) Image Online
Design identified only three employees who would form the core competency team of
the expanded company. Only one of the "core" employees has technical experience.
The principal experience of the other two, the CEO and the COO, is in the operation
of auto dealerships; their experience in technical management and operations comes
from their experience at
Image Online Design's currently modest registry operation.
Image Online Design's proposal describes a hiring plan to fill other executive positions.
Its proposed staffing plan for other personnel is premised on recruiting from colleges
located in the vicinity of San Luis Obispo, California. In contrast, other applicants
explicitly identified mature, capable teams and large pools of managerial and technical
talent to draw upon.
Come on ICANN - this is a lose lose situation you're offering.
They have more staff than the other applicants but it is not enough? You know as
well as the rest of us that they can attract the tallent. The only reason that Afilias
can attract the tallent before they get the domain is because they already run other
domains - thats why they have large pool of managerial and technical tallent lying
around.
Image Online Design proposes to support both registry and registrar
functions during the first year,3 including during the start-up period. It has proposed
no demand throttling mechanism to control initial load from the expected "land rush"
during this period.
In the judgment of the technical team, the small pool of talent
available to Image Online Design is a very serious deficiency in Image Online Design's
proposal. Given the lack of identified technical and management resources, the technical
evaluation team concluded that there is a very significant risk that Image Online
Design will not be able to react quickly to unpredictable surges in demand, especially
during the critical startup period. A failure to service a global customer base on
a 24x7 basis, particularly during the initial startup period, could fatally damage
the reputation of the new TLD.
So really if they identify the tallent thay
intend to use and explain the technical support arrangements there are no problems
with the application at all???
Since the assessment the IOD web pages have already
been updated and the site is now very much more streamlined and "professional looking".
It is good that in this section ICANN seems to display a genuine concern for the
well being of the internet - it reads very differently from the other sections
- different influence perhaps??
Nevertheless it is damaging to ICANN if they suggest
that IOD cannot do the job just because they are not already running the domain.
Perhaps
to this extent, if ICANN is genuinely concerned over this point, a trial period is
in order? If the whole thing doesn't run well then reserve the option to pull it
back.
If ICANN witholds .web from IOD and then Afilias has even the slightest hiccup
(much like NSI are having at this very moment on their own web site) then ICANN will
be held accountable and IOD will always be the better company that was never even
given the chance because of all the conflicts of interest. That could prove very
expensive for ICANN and very damaging for the internet.
It might be useful at this
stage if ICANN submit to IOD a list of demands. Criteria that must be met in time
for the meeting and vote. Most of the critisism aimed at IOD is based on inacurate
data (the capital they command for example is not $0.45M but $2.0M and $6.0M when
the domain is granted. These are big differences that ICANN overlooked. No wonder
the financial section wasn't impressed. They were out by over five and a half million
dollars in their calculations.
Despite this new competition, moreover, Image
Online Design anticipates maintaining its $15 registry price throughout the forecast
period.
This is not true!
ICANN is aware of this already.
The $15 fee
was in comparison with Network Solutions Fees ($35 when I registered). IOD have said
that the market will determine the fee. This is obvious really. NSI didn't drop their
fees until there was some competition in the market and then they had to or people
would shop elsewhere. That is the case here.
This is at least two and a
half times the registry prices anticipated by others in this category.
Afilias
already has 98% market to buffer a four year month on month financial loss. Ho do
you expect the likes of .per to compete with that?
This higher price is
likely to deter registrars and potential registrants.
I disagree but if
this were the case it would hardly last for very long before the price came down
would it?
In addition, with any new venture there are always many unknown
factors that will occur. For this category, becoming a viable competitor within the
existing structure is key.
IOD already do this and for five years the unknown
factors have been when the registry would be activated. They've done pretty well
so far.
Holding only $450,000 is a significantly weaker capital position than
the capital positions of the other applicants.
On one on earth can offer
a significantly stronger capital position than the other players in this field. That
is the point! Its always the point. Hoover was richer than Dyson but they did okay
there. GM was second in line to Ford but they're managing. AMD was overwhelmed by
Intel but they muddle through!
Imagine if Bill's bank manager has said "I'm sorry
Mr Gates but this "computer" field you're interested in is full of firms more successful
than you already".
Finally, based upon its historical experience, Image
Online Design has not demonstrated the ability to grow
This is an emotive
topic. Who's fault is that? They are a domain register that has been down trodden
and knocked back for four years. You cannot hold this against them. The've done better
than any other company in this situation on earth!
Overall, the other applications
in this group are significantly more realistic and would result in much more viable
competition for the .com registry.
Finally, this is the phrase that may
well come back to haunt you at ICANN.
So many of us can see that it is not true
I cannot believe that you are so blinkered!
HOW can giving .web to Afilias that
already commands almost 100% of the internet through its members result in much more
viable competition for the .com registry???
In any case it is not the domains that
are supposed to have the competition (there are already over 160 of them) but the
companies that run the domains (Afilias controls almost all of them).
There is
only one right pathway now. IOD should run .web and if ICANN is genuinely concerned
for the wellbeing of the net then negotiate with IOD targets that must be met. Do
the same with Afilias and .info then we'll see who is realistic!