RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: "livability"

[Jeff Eckhaus <eckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mike,
Let me take off my policy hat for a second and put on my GM of a Registrar hat 
and tackle this one because I think it is a valid question. 

The cost of adding a new TLD for a Registrar is high. Each Registry has their 
own contract, their own rules that must be dealt with and a great deal of work 
to connect to that Registry. Then once the TLD is connected on the back end , 
the Registrar must do all the work on the front end, the customer facing side. 
Add the TLD to their offerings, their purchase path and their marketing. The 
engineering, legal and marketing costs to add a TLD are not trivial so to force 
all Registrars to add all TLDs would cause enormous financial strain to 
Registrars and probably force most to shut down. Those that would still be 
around would have to increase prices just to be handle all this work so we 
would see a dramatic increase in the price of a domain. 
The Registry would also have much higher costs because they would need to offer 
equivalent access to each Registrar and the upgrades needed to do that would be 
enormous, especially for a new TLD. This would likely cause the wholesale price 
of a TLD from a Registry to go up dramatically. So increased prices from 
supplier and retailer. Not something we would like to see.
What would make this a double whammy is the idea that Registrars could not 
participate in applying for TLDs but would now be required to carry everyone 
else's TLD is incredibly unfair.
Sorry to be all doom and gloom, but from running a Registrar I can tell you 
that the idea of a Registrar having to offer all TLDs just could not work. 


Jeff Eckhaus

________________________________________
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
Of Mike Rodenbaugh [icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 5:15 PM
To: 'Michele Neylon :: Blacknight'; 'Milton L Mueller'
Cc: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; 'Avri Doria'; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: "livability"

I think the point is that, if all registries must allow access to all
registrars, then why should all registrars not be forced to offer all TLDs?


It is an excellent question.

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087
http://rodenbaugh.com


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Michele Neylon :: Blacknight
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 12:30 PM
To: Milton L Mueller
Cc: vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Avri Doria; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: "livability"



On 11 Jun 2010, at 19:51, Milton L Mueller wrote:

>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> I do not get your argument of registries using being ineffective or
>> having to bear a large investment if they use registrars. Do not
>> registrars act as effective multipliers for most TLDs? Registrars also
>> reduce the need for end-customer support, thereby reducing costs. The
>> use of registrars will _help_ new TLDs to become viable, not obstruct
>> them.
>
> If that's the case there's no need to force them to use registrars, and
(vice-versa) no need to require all registrars to carry all TLDs

Milton

Sorry, but where are "registrars required to carry all TLDs"?

Or is this a hypothetical?

Regards

Michele


> Obviously the situation will vary from case to case.
>

Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
ICANN Accredited Registrar
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://mneylon.tel
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
US: 213-233-1612
UK: 0844 484 9361
Locall: 1850 929 929
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Twitter: http://twitter.com/mneylon
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845