We need to understand the dynamic of new gTLDs. Like here in Brazil ( and certainly in several countries) banks registered their name for their own security reasons, not to sell; other names has no reason to exist because has no meaning. But some of them are quite good and are selling well. Of course IDNs generic names are quite relevant for people around the world to keep in touch with their culture. I believe this round of TLDs was a learning experience not only for ICANN but also for all applicants to think better about the potential market before they decide to apply to own a new gTLD, since the general cost to launch it properly is around 1 million US$ if you are not yet a registry. I am not in favor to have another round of gTLDs. It is a long process and users need to understand better the advantages, risks etc. My 2 cents Great holidays to you all!! Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. On 12/20/15, 10:32 PM, "at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of John R. Levine" <at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
I like George and continue so to do. But the case he made against applicant support - and a major reason for his no vote - is internally inconsistent in logic and is absolved in outcome.
Considering that most of the new public TLDs look like failures by any reasonable metric, so much that ICANN's had to revise their budget to reflect the lack of income from registrants who didn't register, ICANN did the developing countries a favor by not encouraging them to waste their money.
There are a lot of good ways to spend development money, but yet another TLD isn't one of them.
R's, John _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org