I do not believe Netsol could place such restrictions on the info... they do
not in fact own the info.

I'm guessing that we should do a two-stage consortium -- basically, one fee
gets you access to the data, and another fee gets you into the mass-mailing.
That way, RSPs that don't want to participate in the mailing don't have to.

Let's continue discussing this on the list, but if you're SERIOUS (as in,
you're able to write a check) then email me off-list and tell me whether
you'd want to participate in both stages or just the db part. If there are
enough replies, I will then circulate the list and we can discuss what the
real costs would be and how to implement it.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Javaheri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 8:58 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Re[2]: Whoa!! NetSol gets REAL slimy
>
>
> Hello,
>
> This is a very good idea and I would be interested.  One thing though,
> does anyone know what format the WHOIS database is given to us in?
> Is it in a flat file or DB? There also has to be some restriction from
> NSI for the sharing of this DB amongst different companies, any know
> what that mught be?
>
> Let's do it!
>
> Best,
>
> Kevin
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 4:00 PM
> To: William X. Walsh
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Re[2]: Whoa!! NetSol gets REAL slimy
>
>
>
> I'm assuming that we could sell the renewals at $35 per year (same as
> netsol) and that the real, fully-accounted-for cost of domain registration
> processing by an RSP is $10 (including OpenSRS' fee, amortized costs of
> bandwidth, netops, customer service, etc.)
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: William X. Walsh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 6:52 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re[2]: Whoa!! NetSol gets REAL slimy
> >
> >
> > Where do you get a $25 profit margin from?
> >
> > Monday, February 12, 2001, 2:55:32 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The way to do this is to get enough RSPs to pony up $1,000 each
> > (we'd need
> > > around 100) and pay the $10,000 fee, plus do a generic direct mailing
> > > postcard that would go to some general domain... say
> > www.renewdomain.com or
> > > something like that. Using a simple DNS round-robin, that could
> > then send a
> > > customer randomly to one of the RSPs that had paid the $1,000
> > -- that way,
> > > we'd all get the collective benefit of the mass mailing, but
> > only have to
> > > put up a fraction of the total cost (of course, we'd each get just a
> > > fraction of the business, but that's more than any of us would
> > get on our
> > > own.)
> >
> > > Assuming we raised the $100,000, that means that at 35 cents
> a postcard,
> > > we'd net around 215,000 mailings, and at 1.5% response rate,
> > we'd get 3,200
> > > responses. Further assuming a wholesale cost of $10 a domain,
> > and $25 profit
> > > margin, then the net revenue would be $112,500, or $1,125 per RSP that
> > > tossed in their $1,000 (12.5% return on your money -- not
> > great, but not bad
> > > either, since you can sell them other services too -- not to
> > mention, you'll
> > > keep a large percentage of renewals). If some portion of the potential
> > > customers go for more than one-year renewals, the profits are higher.
> >
> > > Anyone interested? I'd be willing to organize it, if there was
> > sufficient
> > > response.
> >
> >
> >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of dnsadmin
> > >> Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 5:01 PM
> > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> Subject: RE: Whoa!! NetSol gets REAL slimy
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I think it is appropriate of all of us OpenSRS RSP's to come
> > together, buy
> > >> the Network Solutions WHOIS database, and direct-mail all of
> > >> their customers
> > >> too.
> > >>
> > >> It's the only way we can fairly compete, by using similar
> > >> marketing tactics.
> > >>
> > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Tony
> > >> > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 1:25 PM
> > >> > To: Discuss-List@Opensrs. Org
> > >> > Subject: Whoa!! NetSol gets REAL slimy
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Snail Mail SPAM received today:
> > >> >
> > >> > Dear Prospective Customer,
> > >> >
> > >> > It pays to renew your domain name before it expires..........
> > >> >
> > >> > Switching to Network Solutions automatically renews your Web
> > >> > indentity..................
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Attached to the bottom of the letter is a response form:
> > "It's simple to
> > >> > switch right new...Just complete, sign and return this form...."
> > >> >
> > >> > Listed with a 'check here to renew all domain names' is a
> > list of EIGHT
> > >> > domains that I registered exclusivley through OpenSRS...they
> > were never
> > >> > with Netsol. The renew offer is for $50 for 2 years.
> > >> >
> > >> > This is bad. We've already established how weak-minded and
> > >> > confused some of
> > >> > our OpenSRS customers get when dealing with transfer issues
> > now NetSol
> > >> > is going to try to STEAL registrations that never touched their
> > >> system???
> > >> > They even throw in a Postage Paid return envelope. (Which I will
> > >> > stuff with
> > >> > invalid deactivation notices and a few lead bars and maybe a cat
> > >> > hairball or
> > >> > two and mail back to them)
> > >> >
> > >> > Questions:
> > >> >
> > >> > 1. Did they legally purchase the OpenSRS whois database?
> > >> > 2. How else could they have gotten my OpenSRS hostmaster
> > postal address?
> > >> > 3. Anyone else get one of these?
> > >> >
> > >> > Letter is 'signed' by Linh DePledge, Senior Manager, Network
> > Solutions
> > >> >
> > >> > Tony
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >  William                            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to