[registrars] Resellers a burden upon ICANN

[Thomas Keller]

Dear Bob,

I guess the point Paul was trying to make was that the complains to ICANN 
are not related to the amount of registrations a registrar has. In other
words in reality the registrars with more domain names to not cost ICANN
more money than smaller registrars with less registrations. Since there
seems to be no interrelation to the amount of domains in this regard and on
the other hand certainly is no relation to domains on the policy cost site
I would like to raise the question why the fees should be domain related
at all. This might not be a very popular viewpoint but shouldn't it ,as a matter 
of fairness and equal opportunity, be the same fee for all of us if we all 
receive the same service? In theory I do not really see why someone with a 
successful (or different) business model should be punished by having
to pay more for the same service than anyone else. The way almost every tax 
system is build to take up this analogy again is that the ones with more 
contribute more to the public good than the others but it is always
predictable and there is always a cap. The system I would like to see
only relies on caped fixed fees which might even be calculated by the
amount of registrations held but has no additional variable or
transaction fees. Such a system could look like a ordinary tax table:

These figures are just examples. I randomly picked numbers .-)

0       -    10000 $10000 (Basic fee to be able to play the game)
10000   -    50000 $15000
50000   -   100000 $20000
100000  -   500000 $50000
500000  -  1000000 $80000
1000000 -  2000000 $100000
2000000 -  3000000 $1200000
3000000 -  4000000 $1400000
...

In the case the money collected in such a way should not sum up to the
amount demanded by ICANN I would suggest that ICANN is looking for
alternative sources of funding .-)

Best,

tom

Am 08.06.2004 schrieb Robert F. Connelly:
> Dear Registrars:
> 
> In attempting to justify the large fixed fee for *all* registrars, Paul 
> Twomey stated that much of the large load handled by ICANN staff is created 
> by irate registrants;  and he implied that smaller registrars cause a 
> disproportionate number of grievances*.
> 
> It appeared to me from the continuing discussion that many of these 
> complaints result from the burgeoning number of resellers.
> 
> The discussion turned to whether resellers give registrants adequate notice 
> of who their registrar actually is.  It *is* a contractual requirement upon 
> registrars -- but do resellers give sufficient notice?
> 
> I can tell you that we have many cases of frustrated attempts to transfer 
> from a registrar which uses resellers.  We have hard copies of 
> authorizations from registrants, including registered corporate seals, 
> before we ever queue a transfer request.  Often, the registrar of record 
> tells us we must clear that transfer through their reseller:-(
> 
> Perhaps we should load our complaints upon ICANN;-}
> 
> Regards, BobC, for PSI-Japan, Inc.
> 
> * Footnote:  I advised Paul that I would classify his statement as 
> anecdotal unless he could quantify it.  It would be interesting to see 
> whose "names are on the blotter";-}
> 
> Just as long as the quantification does not become a new line item in the 
> budget;-{
> 
> 
> 
> 

Gruss,

tom

(__)        
(OO)_____  
(oo)    /|\	A cow is not entirely full of
  | |--/ | *    milk some of it is hamburger!
  w w w  w