Monday, Monday, January 07, 2002, 8:59:06 PM, Harold Whiting wrote: >>> 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?
> Are you implying that it is more advantageous to create a "new" > registrant rather than retain the current one?� Is this a mindset > you REALLY want Registrars to have?� Encourage "Domain > Abandonment" over Renewals? That truly is one of the most bothersome factors in any of these deleted domain proposals, that they create a situation where the Registry and Registry both benefit financially from getting a customer to NOT renew their domain, and this is also one of the strongest arguments against any scheme where the Registry and/or Registrars benefit with a financial premium of any kind for marketing domains that have been left to expire. -- Best regards, William X Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --
