RE: Re[4]: Return expired domain to the available pool

[Bob's Lists]

> > I believe Alex was asking specifically about the case where NetSol has
> > failed to release an _expired_ domain back into the pool.  I'm
> not so sure
> > that they account for that by reflecting additional payment of
> the registry
> > fee.
>
> Why wouldn't they?  They are merely paying themselves.  Any "loss" is
> on paper only.  The Registry and NSI-Registrar are both parts of
> Verisign.

Sorry, but I have to disagree very strongly. Someone else pointed out that
the shareholders needn't concern themselves because the 'loss' is only on
paper between two divisions of the same company.

This is, of course, nonsense. By tying up the domain and rendering it
unregisterable, they are preventing it from being paid for - thus depriving
themselves (were it to be registered through them) of $35.

Regards

Bob