> 1. If opensrs offers the new services why would the super bulk
> resellers leave? You are telling me they would leave to another
> registrar who does not offer the services but charges the same
> as opensrs? That would not make any business
> sense, or does it?
It makes plenty of business sense -- but you can't see it from your
perspective, because you are not a super bulk reseller.
The problem is that things like URL Forwarding, Outsourced Web Hosting, and
other misc. DNS and email services are key services that Super Bulk
resellers have already developed inhouse and are providing.
OpenSRS, by offering these services would simply be creating more
competitors against the current "super bulk resellers" who already offer
this service.
As a result, the super-bulk resellers could not "support" the growth of
OpenSRS by bringing the business.
So yes, they would find another Registrar that charges the same price as
OpenSRS, but does not offer the same "extra" services.
>If opensrs does NOT offer the services and some other registrar does (and
>enom.com does now so this is not hypothetical). Why would any RSP stay with
>OpenSRS
If you think enom.com was doing the right thing -- then why is OpenSRS still
selling domains, and this popular?
Obviously having extra services isn't that big of a deal. Doing what you do
best, having people trust you, and find you reliable is more important.
OpenSRS does a good job of being reliable, here for the long term, etc. This
is why people don't just jump over to enom.com from here..
> Sooo my question is how does OpenSRS differentiate themselves
> from the other registrars? If they only stick to domain name registration
with
> no other "add-on services" they overall they begin to fall behind their
No. The argument, isn't so much no other "add on services" -- but moreso
"WHICH" add-on services.
As long as they want to offer services that are already offered by many
RSPs, then people will be upset about that..
However, if OpenSRS started selling mousepads -- few would complain. If
they started doing other things that no one was currently offering -- few
would complain.
> I have yet so see a convincing argument as to why OpenSRS should
> curb their forward development and provide more cool services for their
RSPs.
The problem is that RSPs who don't currently have the "add-on service"
technology want it.
RSPs who ALREADY have the "add-on service" technology see it as a threat,
and that is very logical and should be understood.
