[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [wg-c] capital idea
That's a very poor mix of metaphores. For one thing, as others have
pointed out, FCC licenses are not presumed to be recinded at
renewal-time. That is not at all what is being proposed, under mandatory
re-bid. If this were the case, the PCS licensees would not have bid each
other up the way that they have.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Crocker [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 1999 11:44 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Cc: Kent Crispin; email@example.com
> Subject: RE: [wg-c] capital idea
> You are presuming that the only place to perform registry
> services is at
> the top-level.
> I also like the idea that someone with a television license can "go
> elsewhere" to use the capital equipment.
> At 11:03 AM 8/22/99 , Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> >There is a substantial difference between applying a sunk-cost
> >investment vs. requiring a new investment. In all those out-sourcing
> >engagements the common thread is that the customer (ie LLNL)
> isn't the
> >only possible customer, thereby mitigating the risk. The out-source
> >vendor has other customers, or potential customers. This is
> a monopoly
> >case (ICANN) where there is only one customer and a registry can lose
> >100% of their investment if they lose the bid.
> >This is elementary business, why are we arguing this?
> Dave Crocker Tel: +1
> 408 246 8253
> Brandenburg Consulting Fax: +1
> 408 273 6464
> 675 Spruce Drive
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA