I think William is on the money when he outlines the bad ethic in regards to domains being up for sale as soon as they expire. It is a matter of precedent and expectation levels.
In the past to the present, had domains been truly gone the day they expired with a clear understanding that it is now out there in the great wide open where anyone can pick it up, then this 45 day window would not be at issue. I'm guessing Team Tucows is testing the waters with resellers. Don't fuck this up. I can handle being stepped on, but I can see a number of resellers here have more at steak and would walk. And I can handle being stepped on why would I bother commenting? Because I own 10,000 shares of stock I bought at the wrong f'n time and want it to go back up. :) No hard feelings. There is a saying in sales, "it takes less to keep a customer than it does to find a new one". The same logic should be considered and applied to your resellers. Bless your little hearts that you know where new profit centers lie, just don't piss on your partners. I always argue points with William, but he represents a large consensus of your best producers I'm sure. Peace and love incorporated, Lars Hindsley SpyProductions Achieve Web Success http://www.spyproductions.com vox: 302.369.3060 fax: 302.369.6040 ----------------------------------- From: William X Walsh <snip> This is the kind of thing that makes Enom start looking like a viable alternative. I've been toying with offering users a choice of registration services through the registrar system of their choice, but something like this really makes it something I'm more seriously considering. I don't like the fact that Tucows is going to offer my domains for resale directly to others if I let them drop. I don't think my customers will like knowing that either. It's different if it goes through the drop cycle, the people have to take a gamble on it then, and they don't get the kind of "inside data" that Tucows is now collecting on all our names that expire. Like I said, the existence of this kind of service is one of those deal breaker issues. It also seems to be to be a breach of the trust between the registrant and the registrar, and I believe that ICANN would find it violates the Registrar agreements. </snip>
