RE: [wg-c] Possible solution to lock in?

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 08:41 AM 11/20/1999 , Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> > You are amazon.com.  Your domain name is bookmarked in a hundred
> > million browsers, search engines, linked in a million pages around
> > the world.  NSI says, hmm, amazon, we are changing to a usage based
>
>First off, there is not even ONE instance proof of this scenario, even
>historically. Therefore it is sheer theoretical speculation. Generally, the

Is it theory that Amazon is widely bookmarked?  No.

Is it theory that changing Amazon's domain name would render those 
bookmarks invalid?   No.

Is it theory that this inconvenience would affect consumer behavior?  No.

On this last point, before answering yes, one needs to pay attention to 
what is known about marketing and sales situations in which customers are 
forced into making a change.  Marketing folks hate this situation because 
it creates an opportunity for the customer to choose a different vendor.

The basis for the concern is simply that changing from an established 
situation to a different one incurs the same effort to the user if the 
change is to the established vendor as it is to a new vendor.  Hence it 
invites the customer to re-evaluate the relationship.

The other point to attend to is the likelihood that the average customer is 
skilled at changing bookmarks... and, yes, that IS a legitimately user 
support concern.

>Internet does flat-rate billing. At the higher access speeds, it is mostly
>flat-rate. Only the telcos are even equiped to do volume-based billing. How

This assertion demonstrates an extremely limited awareness of Internet 
services around the globe.  In fact most users outside the U.S. are subject 
to usage sensitive billing.  So are many users INSIDE the U.S.  (Both for 
dial-up and web server activity.)

>As regards marketing required to inform public of the new name, it is done
>all the time. Even for some famous brands. Current instance proof is TCI
>cable, where they are changing their name to AT&T cable. It's all a matter

It is done, yes.

All the time?  No.  Casually?  No.  Easily?  No.  Cheaply?  No.

Is it guaranteed to have no detrimental effect upon the company's 
business?  No.

Some years ago Datsun switched its name to Nissan and has never recovered 
from the damage (even in Japan) to their revenue stream.

>of proper handeling. Yes, it does cost money. However, note that this was
>done voluntarily by AT&T, they decided that the effort was worth the cost.

Voluntarily is different from having an expensive, difficult, risky 
STRATEGIC change forced onto a company by one of its vendors.

>Actual fact is, registration costs are going down over time, not up.

That's out of NSI's unfettered interest in lowering costs, right?  They 
haven't for, example, had a bit of pressure applied to them have they?

And, by the way, those lowered costs are still a significant multiple 
higher than they should be, never mind continuing serious difficulties with 
service quality.

>We've had this discussion before. Market forces alone will force commodity
>pricing, which is bad enough, but it is at least fair to the operators. You

That force only applies where there is true competition.  Initial purchase 
probably qualities.  Renewal definitely does not.

d/

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker                                       Brandenburg Consulting
Tel: +1.408.246.8253          675 Spruce Drive       Fax: +1.408.273.6464
dcrocker@brandenburg.com   Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA    www.brandenburg.com