Not as happy though, Right? Seems to be a slow decline. I was told I would be included in a referral program but have not seen a single sale from this. Seems we have not ever been referred for defunct sites ;o(
-- Mike Allen, 4CheapDomains.Net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.4CheapDomains.Net Need Advertising? Try DeerSearch.Com http://www.DeerSearch.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walter Landman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ryan Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Peter Kiem" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "OpenSRS Discuss List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 8:36 AM Subject: Re: Future of Tucows/OpenSRS > I see your point, but we have had a very similir case with Covad. > > Short Story Like this: > First we were part of their partner page > Then they removed us leaving only the big boys. > Thenthey told us "Sorry we dont wnat to partner with you directly, you > have to go partner with our other partners". This was after we had bought > $20,000+ equipment and had new backbone connections with them ordered. > > How long will it take OpenSRS to push us back? It's not bieng as "open" > as it once was. > > That bieng said we are still happy using OpenSRS. > > -- > Walter L > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Ryan Thompson wrote: > > > > > I don't mean to pick on you specifically, Peter, but to raise and echo > > some important points about our experience as an OpenSRS reseller, > > since early 2000. > > > > Let my reply ring true... or at least honest. :-) > > > > . > > . > > . > > > > Peter Kiem wrote to [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > > > > I read Chuck's statements in that OpenSRS used to be about providing > > > a fair and equal basis for resellers to make a business, or augment > > > their business, with domain name registrations. > > > > Yes, and I think, OpenSRS still provides this. > > > > "Fair" has implications that are extremely relative in nature. "Fair" > > to you may not be "fair" to me, to OpenSRS, or some of the large > > resellers that seem to be dominating the referral list. This is why > > "they" say "life" isn't fair. "Their" interests conflict. > > > > That being said, OpenSRS is "augment[ing]" my business to the tune of > > nearly 25% of gross revenue... and domain registration has never been > > anywhere near the front lines of our marketing or retention > > strategies. The really *good* part is the majority of domain customers > > also host with us, and we've had excellent luck when converting > > "domain-only" customers to domain and hosting customers. > > > > "Customers" is the word of the day. Be "fair" to *them*, and you will > > really go places. I've travelled more in the past twelve months on > > business than I did in the last twelve years. I could have farmed out > > the work, but I needed to get out more, anyway. :-) > > > > > Dubious practices by other registrars were not followed by OpenSRS > > > even though that could have increased revenue. "Right" was given > > > more priority than "$$$". > > > > And still is, in my opinion. OpenSRS has consistently demonstrated > > their dedication to their customers, regardless of statistics. > > Software is updated constantly. Reseller updates are timely. Downtime > > is minimized. Wholesale prices remain profitable (for "us" *and* > > "them". If OpenSRS couldn't turn a profit, there's no way we would > > have been a reseller for nearly three years!). Read below. > > > > > Nowadays, OpenSRS seems to be favouring the resellers that bring in > > > more "$$$" than the smaller ones and providing an equal playing > > > field for all the resellers. > > > > Aha! Now we've reached the sticking point. You seem to point to > > *undue* favoritism of the major breadwinners. Isn't it really a > > question of relativity, though? If I register 400 domain years/month, > > and another reseller registers 4,000, would I expect to receive, in > > absolute terms, as much support/recognition/profit as they? I don't > > think so. At least, not if you've been in business, and wish to stay > > in business, for a significant length of time. Many business models > > are (rightly) built around the premise of mutual reward. It simply > > isn't profitable to devote 90% of your support/marketing efforts to > > 10% of your sales. > > > > HOWEVER.. I think the real question is one of privacy and ethics. > > Nobody wants to admit that they aren't selling as much as <Reseller > > X>, which is the reason they aren't on the list, or aren't as highly > > ranked. When this whole debate started months ago, I hit Tucows' > > server with a few hundred requests to determine who was on the list, > > and what percentage of the time their listing was ranked first. It was > > really quite easy. The list was quite small (we weren't on it); > > certainly not the "thousands" that Elliot mentions, or even "dozens". > > I wouldn't want to have to explain to a client or potential client > > that we didn't make the list because we can't compete in volume with > > <another local reseller>. > > > > So, I think that the referral list, in its current form, is not > > unfair, because it reflects service levels established with the > > clients who best reward Tucows. HOWEVER, I *do* think that it is > > unethical. I certainly did not join Tucows to be placed into a ranking > > system that *publically* exerts the sales impact of one reseller over > > another. At least, it wasn't in the agreement that *I* signed. > > > > > In the technical arena OpenSRS has grown considerably > > > > Agreed. > > > > > but their management is seeming more and more distant > > > from us each month. > > > > I don't know about *that*. I have always been able to get reasonably > > quick resolution to any problem that has come up. For a time, SaskNow > > essentially had a dedicated support rep, who helped us through the > > *many* policy headaches with CIRA (for all you .ca folks out there), > > and personally saved us the *thousands* of dollars we would have spent > > in development, staffing, and communication with CIRA to become an > > independent registrar. > > > > To more directly address your point, why do you think you *should* be > > close to management? I will agree that I greatly admire Tucows' > > management for their willingness to roll up sleeves and interact > > directly with resellers. I also understand, from my own experience, > > that management can't (and shouldn't) do everything. That's what > > qualified employees are for. > > > > Elliot is bang on the mark when he says that if he acted alone, it > > would be very difficult to keep employees. Been there, done that, > > signed the layoff notices (in my dark and fettered past :-). Retaining > > the services of an army of well-qualified employees, and then ignoring > > them, makes for gross abuse of payroll expense. What I couldn't do > > with 10% of that. :-) Management might be outwardly great for PR, but > > don't forget their most imporant purpose. They are there, in large > > part, to ensure that the "little guys" on the support lines are able > > to help *you* get *your* job done every day. > > > > > > in the near future. Until then, PLEASE feel free to keep raising > > > > it, complaining about it and jumping on our heads in general just > > > > please don't feel we are ignoring your comments. Again, we may not > > > > always agree but the comments are never ignored. > > > > > > In the referrals list you DO have resellers telling you outright, WE > > > DONT LIKE THE WAY YOU DO THIS. What do we hear back? Silence.... > > > > Hardly. Why don't you email Verisign and ask them for a higher ranking > > on *their* referral list? ;-) Sorry, don't mean to be flippant, but > > the fact is, Tucows has looked after my company better than nearly any > > supplier we've had, including pivotal, but much smaller suppliers, > > local to our region. > > > > In my experience, when Tucows says they're working on something, > > THEY'RE WORKING ON SOMETHING. Priorities don't always line up with > > what you *think* should happen (and when), but the bottom line is, > > Tucows has enough smart people in their employ to know how to run a > > profitable enterprise. And, given the fact that their profitable > > enterprise is based largely on the reseller model, reseller profits = > > Tucows profits = reseller profits, which implies that Tucows' best > > interest is looking after their resellers. Tucows knows this. > > > > If they don't hold to that mandate, then I suspect it won't be long > > before there are a lot of OpenSRS employees sending us resumes, and a > > lot of OpenSRS resellers "focusing on other areas" of their > > businesses. > > > > > > Today is the 3rd birthday of OpenSRS (born January 12, 2000) so to > > > > all of you I raise a glass tonight. > > > > Elliot, I'm with you on that, though it's now the 13th here. :-) > > > > > > Thanks to all of you for allowing us to do what we do. We hope, I > > > > hope, that you always care enough about this and about us to raise > > > > these issues. > > > > > > Please consider our pleas about the referrals list and SHOW us you > > > care about the reseller base that has allowed you to do what you do. > > > > Agreed. > > > > I think Tucows does care about its reseller base. I also think that > > their treatment of the referral list could be better handled. Given my > > comments about "fairness", above, I think there is only one "fair" > > solution. Trash the referral list, and replace it with a randomly > > ordered Certified Reseller list. Or trash that, and stick with the > > button program for recognition. > > > > Whatever the case, it would take a *lot* of flak for us to even > > *think* about moving our registration services to another reseller > > model. Tucows has brough profit to our business. Our lack of placement > > on the reseller list has cost us nothing. Thus, I've said > > comparatively little about it. > > > > Look at the bottom line, though, people. Are you willing to pay > > another $1 per domain year for a "fair" referral system (or did you > > expect Tucows to do everything for free)? I'd personally rather spend > > $1,000/month on a good marketing campaign that I know will turn a > > profit in 5-6 months. Random referrals? Not worth very much to us. > > > > Everyone: (Tucows and resellers): Stick to basics. What is your core > > competency? If you don't know, think fast! I would submit that any > > reseller whose survivial depends on links from a supplier's web site > > should give serious thought to their business model. > > > > - Ryan > > > > -- > > Ryan Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > SaskNow Technologies - http://www.sasknow.com > > 901-1st Avenue North - Saskatoon, SK - S7K 1Y4 > > > > Tel: 306-664-3600 Fax: 306-244-7037 Saskatoon > > Toll-Free: 877-727-5669 (877-SASKNOW) North America > > > > > > > > >
