Return to Proposed Revisions to NSI Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: ChipMorris
Date/Time: Tue, March 13, 2001 at 4:12 PM GMT
Browser: Netscape Communicator V4.08 using Windows NT
Score: 5
Subject: Registry Agreements


        To Members of ICANN

As I read the political banter on this site, I fear that the cries of a manic few will deter swift and necessary action on the part of ICANN.  The proposed deal with Verisign (admittedly a large holding in our fund complex) is a decent, but not great, deal for both parties.  In this investor's opinion, it is a reasonable and pragmatic compromise.

Our "best case" scenario was a delay in implementing the prior agreement such that most of the Registrar competition would go bankrupt, forcing ICANN to crawl back to Verisign with a sweetheart deal.  Under the current market conditions, one would have to bet that most competing registrars are in serious trouble -- the best capitalized pureplay competitor,, sports an anemic market capitzlation of $240 million.

While some will cry foul citing government mismanagement or anti-competitive implications, both ICANN and Verisign have no choice but to do it.  $35/year for a protectable piece of ineternet real estate is a great deal for the buyer.  Should we burn a lot of brain cells trying to get this to $25 or even $10.  Who cares?  Most serious buyers of domain names would gladly pay $100/year or more.

Personally, I believe ICANN is so conerned with how the public might view ICANN "perpetuating Verisign's monopoly" that it is ignoring the most fundamental element of the Registry function:  it is a scale business providing a critical service to internet users at close to throw away prices.  If it ain't broke, why are we so terribly concerned about fixing it?

We are "fixing it" because letting Verisign continue in its present role without penalty or punishment -- elements of the current proposed deal -- would subject ICANN to abuse by a few, but very loud, interested parties.  So we have the proprosed deal.  Not best for either party.  Not best for internet users.  But acceptable.  The internet world already has enough uncertainty to deal with.  You folks at ICANN are in charge.  Please act like it.

P.S.  Mr. Auerbach sound like the whiney second grader who wants only to be at the head of the lunch line.


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy