On Wednesday 23 Aug 2006 12:36, JB wrote:
> 
>
> Or holding an auction for a popular name to find it's market price.

I think he meant differential pricing to existing customers, rather than 
auctioning the domain.

It is more a "microsoft.com" (if .com was covered) get a lot of look-ups, we 
ought to charge them more for their domain name. (Hey I could make a good 
argument for traffic based pricing I'm sure, and good arguments against....).

Of course it would be foolish of a company with such an agreement not to 
reserve the option to do such a thing, whether it is six months or 10 years 
into the future. Certainly if the option exists, they should claim the right 
to exercise it, as not doing so is not in their share holders interest. Even 
if they decide differential pricing would hurt sales, not having the option 
must be worse for the organisation concerned. Probably less of an issue for 
PIR, than others.

I'd class TLDs as natural monopolies, and the contracts should be regulated as 
such. ICANN clearly doesn't feel that way, but still restricts the flow of 
perfectly sensible TLD applications (no one mention .XXX), both by price and 
procedure, and edict.

I'm also with the school of thought that providing such services is getting 
cheaper to do, so why are prices going up?

  Simon
_______________________________________________
domains-gen mailing list
[email protected]
http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-gen

Reply via email to