I may have a class of customers unlike most others, (I doubt it, but it is possible) but I would wager that the vast majority of them, as in over 90%, if given proof than Mr. Wiener actually wrote that he questioned the wisdom of alerting the current registrant of a given name that there may be some intrinsic value in that name, because that may encourage the registrant to renew the name and he would no longer be able to get his grubby little fingers on it, they (my customers) would make an effort to NOT do business with Mr. Wiener in the future.
My customers are mostly under the impression that their registration service provider values their business, and is interested in keeping that business, which would seem to imply that their registration service provider should be helping them keep their names, and not hoping that a chance arises for provider to profit from their hard work and/or mistakes at the customers loss. This of course is the crux of the "conflict of interest" inherent in most all of the proposals I've seen so far. John [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "[ga]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 9:38 PM Subject: Fw: [icann-delete] Proposal: Registry Re-circulation System Ron asked me to pass this on to the Registrars list for the benefit of those that aren't subscribed to the ICANN-Delete list. I've taken the liberty of posting this additionally to GA and discuss-list - apologies to those that receive all four copies. Thanks, -rwr ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Wiener" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Peter Girard'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 9:08 PM Subject: RE: [icann-delete] Proposal: Registry Re-circulation System > Peter, > > I enjoyed reading your proposal, and have admired the way you continue to > carry the flag for a variable-priced auction mechanism. If you please, I > have a couple of questions followed by a few general comments: > > 1. If you are requiring the permission of the former registrant in > order for the auction to "close"... > > > a. ...are you not then in effect alerting him or her to the fact that > their name may have some value, and encouraging them to renew rather than > allow the name to expire? This may be a brilliant scheme for goosing up > renewal rates, but how does it help registrars and registries gain any > upside that they would presumably only enjoy if the name actually changed > hands? > <snip> --- Note from John - This email has been scanned for viruses before it was sent and is certified to be Virus Free to the extent that it can be verified by the virus scanning software used. As always, there are NO guarantees. You should always use extreme caution when opening mail that may contain malicious code and/or attachments. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.312 / Virus Database: 173 - Release Date: 12/31/01
