I agree with Paul, last year I did not agree with the increase with the simple reason: If we agree ICANN will use it as a sign to try it again...which was demonstrated this year. If we agree this year they will do it again next year. This behaviour is one of a monopolist. Respectfully Siegfried Langenbach Computer Service Langenbach GmbH (CSL GmbH) GERMANY On 27 May 2004 at 18:32, Paul Stahura wrote: From: Paul Stahura <stahura@enom.com> To: "'Monte Cahn'" <monte@moniker.com>, "'Tim Ruiz'" <tim@godaddy.com>, ross@tucows.com Copies to: "'Rob Hall'" <rob@momentous.com>, "'Jean-Michel Becar'" <jmbecar@gmo.jp>, "'Registrars Constituency'" <registrars@dnso.org> Subject: [registrars] Cap it Date sent: Thu, 27 May 2004 18:32:11 -0700
I agree with Monte. We need to draw a line in the sand this year, regardless. I said so last year. Last time, I said, "I believe we need to make clear to ICANN now that we will not support any increase in fees to registrars." and "We need to warn ICANN now that while we may or may not support a budget increase, that the increase, if any, not be born by the registrars." (You can read the rest in our archive http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/msg01073.html )
We did not to that, but it is better late than never.
Let's not wait yet another year. I still believe the only way we can stop these year-after-year increases is to have our own cap.
Kurt said in his 5/19 email: "Where the budget ascribed to holding the 25 cent fee constant, it should also be taken as making the same commitment to the per annum fee."
Regardless of the rest, we need to at least get this commitment formalized before any budget-voting happens. So I move we authorize excom to do so.
Paul
-----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Monte Cahn Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 12:56 PM To: 'Tim Ruiz'; ross@tucows.com Cc: 'Rob Hall'; 'Jean-Michel Becar'; 'Registrars Constituency' Subject: RE: [registrars] 66% needed for approval
Well - it appears we are not left in a very good position today. I feel that just laying over and letting this happen without putting forth a firm stance on what our position is on this issue is a big mistake. Look what just happened to us as Registrars this year. What makes you think that this process will not continue next year (or in 3 years) and the year after. Let's not be afraid to make a stance with ICANN, we are being too easy on this issue. Look at the letter that Paul Kane put out. Be the squeaky wheel that needs oil!
Let's draw a definite line in the sand regardless of what happens to us this year so that next year/years we do use our leverage with the registries and other sources to supplement the increase yet to come. Also we are spending way too much time away from our business complaining, disagreeing with each other based on our relative business models and size. Don't you think that ICANN knows that the top 10 Registrars control 80% of the domains today and the reason they were consulted with only them? Although I see that top 10 picture changing over the next 12 months, it is important that we all stay unified and together as a group on the future of our industry. Internet users are predicted to double again in the next 3-5 years and we can all share in the registrations and complementary services if we stay together.
Just my thoughts.
Monte Cahn Founder/CEO
Monte@Moniker.com Monte@DomainSystems.com
O - 954-984-8445 F - 954-969-9155
Moniker.com - ICANN Accredited Corporate Domain Management Services DomainSystems.com - Domain Sales & After-market Services CoolHandle.com - World Class Hosting and Email Solutions
-----Original Message----- From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@godaddy.com] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 3:30 PM To: ross@tucows.com; 'Monte Cahn' Cc: 'Rob Hall'; 'Jean-Michel Becar'; 'Registrars Constituency' Subject: RE: [registrars] 66% needed for approval
Exactly. Also, once they have this worked out where do you think that is going to leave us next year and the year after that as far as having a significant voice in this process?
Tim
-----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-registrars@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Ross Wm. Rader Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 8:58 AM To: Monte Cahn Cc: 'Rob Hall'; 'Jean-Michel Becar'; 'Registrars Constituency' Subject: Re: [registrars] 66% needed for approval
On 5/27/2004 10:41 AM Monte Cahn noted that:
I think we are on to something here.....
Doubtful. It only requires the consent of ICANN to modify this contract. I think it would be pretty easy for the various registries to draw up a quick Christmas list of things they want in exchange for signing a revised contract that lifts these caps. I also expect that this could be done in a couple of weeks, behind closed doors and likely seal our fate permanently.
The problem of the size of the budget doesn't go away no matter how many potential angles we come up with. We can either focus on that or, in my opinion, lose (big). --
-rwr
"Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions. All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org