Re: [ga] ICANN Board postponing further sTLDs
Jefsey and all former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,
J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
> At 02:20 04/11/03, Don Brown wrote:
> >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> >Your logic escapes me, and I suspect most of us. Shed those rose colored
> >glasses (break them). Take a look at reality, because reality is the way
> >it is.
> >
> >Almost everything is based upon revenue - I'm sorry to break the that news
> >to you, but that is really the way it is.
>
> Agreed. And if you believe there are revenues in bare names, try to get a
> VC believe that. Wake-up! you made a long way from the 60's, still a few
> steps ahead to understand where money really is.
The large sums in Domain Names at this time is over, this is true.
Yet I made a very good sum in Domain Names. With new sTLD's
and gTLD's the desire and demand could return or show good
financial returns again...
>
>
> Try this: what does NSI do wrong to lose 80% of its potential sales? Go to
> their site and look!
>
> Again, there is no money in names, but in what people make or are made to
> make with them.
This is also very true as well, NOW...
>
>
> >I grew up in the 60's; the flower power era. However, I figured it out
> >all by myself. Think about it. There are motives that don't match the
> >way you think it should be . . .
>
> Yeap. You misread me. I said there is no money in the way ICANN is leading
> the nets. Because they focus on their own task as a registry and they want
> to have affiliates (registrars, resellers, etc.). They even never
> considered QA and user support. Look, if you want peole to make money with
> you, you do not take a product sold $ 50 by a single one and make it sold $
> 10 by 100. This means that the new commers will get 0.2% of what the single
> one made.... Unless the single one keeps its internal rate of $ 6 and
> makes the new commers its own customers, forgetting about the end
> registrants. This way the fostered competition is not in selling cheaper to
> the users, but in buying more to itself.
Well not exactly here Jefsey. Selling in volume cheep or at least
competitive nearly always pays better than not doing so... With
a depressed market in Domain Names because of an arbitrarily
restricted name space suggests strongly a pent up demand...
Hence making that demand worth more even if sold cheep...
>
>
> Real money is - and IMHO there is a plenty - in promoting new usages on the
> nets which will call for new names - IDNA was a good idea by i-DNs. But NSI
> and ICANN plaid it so poorly that it will be a net loss for long for many.
The IDNA was like ICANN, a captured quasi organization that had no
seed money and was unable to garner any money from it's members...
>
>
> Plenty of people should make money with the new usages: Registries will get
> some part of it. Forget about Registrars: they take on Registries share.
> Use Registrars as registrant consultants. You will not pay them, and they
> will get paid more by the registrants as an help to fight the Registry for
> quality. Tell me when last you saw "service quality" listed among ICANN
> priorities? Caring about consumers? They keep them @large. They plaid well
> the democracy ringmarole to make everyone forget about good service.
Good democratic principals have always done well for profits in the
US for over 200 years. Unfortunately France's brand of democracy
have lessened it's financial position over the past 30 or so years..
>
>
> What is too bad is that we could have money, service quality, development,
> new services, end user satisfaction, happy manufacturers with new products,
> etc. With just 2 cents of imagination and understanding about what a human
> network is and expect from an eletronic network : services and no spam. You
> know what they say: if bankers and lawyers known about the market they
> would not be lawyers and bankers, they would be rich.
Many bankers and some lawyers I know are rich... Very rich!
>
>
> I explained they will make IPv6 a complex system calling for a complex
> registry system. They will be happy to sell that registry in a complex way.
> Wasting money and opportunities. When they could make a simple registry and
> promote IPv6 usages which would call for more addresses to sell.
>
> IMHO we are in agreement, Don. Don't invest in ICANN's affiliates.
> jfc
>
> >Thanks,
> >
> >
> >Tuesday, October 28, 2003, 9:42:09 AM, J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin
> ><jefsey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >JFCJM> On 15:25 28/10/03, Don Brown said:
> > >>Who benefits economically from not launching additional TLDs. Follow the
> > >>money . .
> >
> >JFCJM> Yes?
> >JFCJM> the actual point is that there is _NO_money in names.
> >JFCJM> The money is in what people will accept you do with them.
> >
> >JFCJM> The absudity is that ICANN wants to make believe shadows have a
> >value (a
> >JFCJM> name is an IP address shadow).
> >
> >JFCJM> But never mind, the way IPv6.001 numbering scheme is designed ...
> >it will
> >JFCJM> need a UMS (unique machine system) copied on the DNS in order to
> >know that
> >JFCJM> 00100100010001000111000100101000100010001111000000000000001
> >JFCJM> is right now the same machine as:
> >JFCJM> 00110010111011001001000100010011111001110101011100111001000
> >JFCJM> just because they do not want to allocate one host sub-number by
> >JFCJM> registrant. As if you had one different mobile ttelephone number per
> >JFCJM> carrier you may use....
> >
> >JFCJM> And wait for the application of IDNA and "internationalized" mail
> >names.
> >
> >JFCJM> Dont' be afraid the ICANN system is not ready to die. Plenty of
> >occasions
> >JFCJM> to make money with the wind.
> >JFCJM> jfc
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >----
> >Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc.
> >donbrown_l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.inetconcepts.net
> >PGP Key ID: 04C99A55 (972) 788-2364 Fax: (972) 788-5049
> >Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
> >----
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
Pierre Abelard
===============================================================
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801