[ga] SnapNames "partners" tied up in long-term deals, need WLS to escape

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@yahoo.com>]

Hello,

I found the following interview of Ron Wiener very interesting:

http://www.sao.org/newsletter/companies/woody01-02.htm

in particular:

"We have one- to five-year exclusive relationships with most of our
partners. It was almost accidental when we went to these companies
initially and wanted to partner with them; they couldn't picture how
big this was going to be. Most said, "Sure, you want an exclusive
relationship for back ordering? Yeah, whatever." And now back ordering
has become everything, and we're locked in."

I've always wondered why there were always a couple of supporters of
WLS, despite all the logical reasons against it (anti-competitive,
anti-trust, anti-consumer, higher costs, etc.). Now it begins to make
sense. Those "partners" of SnapNames are trapped in long-term deals
that they can't get out of, making below-market rates for their
valuable registry connections.

It would seem that the only way those registrars can get out of those
relationships, if indeed they are looking with envy at the success of
other competitive registrars who are innovating and winning new
consumers with their competitive offerings is to vote for WLS, despite
the bad taste it would leave in their mouths.

I think this is a factor that should be considered in this debate. If
Verisign, for instance, is one of the trapped parties, it has a great
interest in doing whatever it takes to escape from a bad deal. If WLS
goes through, though, consumers and other market participants will have
no way to escape from the bad deal, as there's no way to put the genie
back in the bottle once it's out.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html