ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[registrars]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

[registrars] Fw: [nc-org] Price discrimination


FYI


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu>
To: <kstubbs@digitel.net>; <nc-org@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:59 PM
Subject: Re: [nc-org] Price discrimination


 Ken:
 I don't see how a registrar's customer relations would 
 be harmed if all registrars had to do the same thing.
  
 But from the customer standpoint, I agree that such 
 a policy could disrupt their expectations and lead to
 some consternation. Of course, in some ways that's
 exactly what we would want it to do: instead of 
 ASSUMING that they had to treat all TLDs as the same,
 price discrimination would make them think twice.



 
> >>> "Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@digitel.net> 12/18/01 02:55PM >>>
> I dont believe that this proposal makes any real sense. It could easily
> create serious "customer relations" problems with the registrar.
> 
> The best incentive for conforming registrations is a good "branding"
> program. This brings the consumer to the registrar with a more "clearly
> defined" buying decision and avoids confusion and the resultant "customer
> service" issues
> 
> ken stubbs
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Milton Mueller" <Mueller@syr.edu>
> To: <nc-org@dnso.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 2:44 PM
> Subject: [nc-org] Price discrimination
> 
> 
> >
> > One of the more interesting ideas to come out
> > of my consultations within NCDNHC might be
> > a feasible way to help differentiate the org domain.
> >
> > It was proposed to price discriminate between
> > people who hold the same name in .org as they
> > hold in .com, and perhaps also .net.
> >
> > E.g., if you register a .org name and you also hold
> > the identical .com string, the registry charges
> > twice as much for the registration. The registrar
> > would have to pass that on to customers.
> >
> > It would NOT be easy to check, but at least
> > the check would be completely objective,
> > rather than potentially subjective like whether
> > an organization is sufficiently "noncommercial."
> > I.e., either a matching string is registered by
> > the same party in the other domain or it does not.
> >
> > But even this strikes me as a bit fussy.
> > --MM
> >
> >
> 
> 



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>