TMCH Data Analysis Questions

Now that you have essentially completed the work: what new metrics do you think should be employed to gauge the effectiveness of Sunrise, Claims and the current definition of exact match?

What do you think of the idea of the TMCH as an institution to protect rights?

In the Claims section of the report,

you find that: 93.7 percent of all claims service downloads were associated with an "abandoned registration." You seem to say that this is not an accurate measure (i.e., it is ridiculously high) of how many registrations are discouraged by the claims notice and that there are other reasons for the downloads besides Claims notices. Is that a correct characterization? What data must be made available and by whom to determine the percentage of registrations that are actually dropped due to the Claims notice?
The apparent inaccuracy of the 93.7% finding also puts in doubt the veracity of the statement, "6.3% of registration attempts that trigger a Claims Service notification complete the registration process." Is that correct?
Only 0.3% of registered names that received a Claims notice and were registered were later disputed through the URS or UDRP. What data is required to affirmatively state whether this is an unexpectedly low number and determine why.

What data is required (and from whom) to determine why Sunrise registrations are relatively few in number?

Is it a valid conclusion that the study seems to say "no" to each of the GAC questions, i.e., whether to:

extend the period of the Clearinghouse notifications beyond 90 days
extend the operation of the Clearinghouse notifications to potential registrants for the life of each new registry; and
expand the TMCH matching criteria to include key terms associated with the goods or services identified by the mark, and typographical variations identified by the rights holder.

What other data should be collected and from whom (TMCH database, TMCH validator, registrars, registries, other)s?