Two things here. The blogware point you make is well understood here.
Some of the scalability and usability issues are in front of what you
are talking about. Also, some of the bits are easier to fix than others.
As you can appreciate it is never as simple as "add more developers".
That can introduce many other problems. Sometimes these things need be
serial.
There is no question in our minds as to whose customer the end user is.
It is yours. In blogware, especially compared with ANY other
alternative, there is a ton of branding and customization inside the
service for the reseller to do. It is beyond that where I think the
efforts should be made in any event. It is tools and a level of service
that greatly assists users in using blogware that is where the branding
opportunities lie.
When talking about expired names I did very purposefully use the term
"end user" not "customer" so there would be no confusion. The point I
was making relates to the end user. The service provider is our customer
and the end user is their customer. AND the end user is part of the
market and the transaction and Tucows cannot be blind to them.
The substance of the issue is the role of the service provider. We
believe, and the vast majority of our customers believe (and I know from
our interactions that you believe), that the role of the service
provider is to help end users, both businesses and individuals, use the
Internet. They provide them with important services and they assist them
in using those services.
With respect to an expiring domain name there are a few truths that have
clearly emerged. Two are important here. First, expiring names have
value. It is only a small percentage of the total names that expire, but
there is material value involved. Second, for a service provider who
supplies domain names to their customers there are three ways they could
deal with this truth as follows:
i) they could ignore it and take the position that they have sent out
numerous renewal notices that have been ignored thus they have fulfilled
their obligation;
ii) they could profit from it by taking the position that they have sent
out numerous renewal notices that have been ignored thus they are
entitled to any benefits that flow from the name;
iii) even though they have sent out numerous renewal notices that have
been ignored, they could take steps to realize the latent value on
behalf of their customer and charge a reasonable fee for that service.
Let's look at each of the three. Let me be clear, my comments are not in
any way legal in nature. They are my opinion as to what is right to do
to best serve your customer. Again, your customer.
The first, which is where most of the market is right now, is
understandable. It would be difficult today to capture value efficiently
for your customer. If it were easy to do then the analysis may be different.
The second is, in my opinion, just not right. Registrars and resellers
who convert their whole expiring base to their own benefit are not
serving their customers' best interests and will not do as well in the
long term as those that look after their customers interests. In fact,
they have positioned their interests at odds with those of their
customers ("oops. sorry you didn't get that renewal notice. so what if
we use the term "viagra" in it!").
When you read the options in order it is plain to see that the third
will be the de facto standard for customer-focused service providers.
The Internet is brutal in its speed and efficiency in disciplining
markets. Tucows needs to create a marketplace (and I use that term only
in connection with expired names) that makes it easy for its customers,
service providers, to best serve their customers. We are aware of the
fact that effecting this service in this way has a value judgement
implicit in it.
We are valuing service providers interested in providing the best
service to their customers. This really pushes us to provide this
service in this way. We have always built services with this in mind.
We can have a lively discussion about what transaction size is efficient
to convert on behalf of the end user. I know a name "worth" $12 is
probably not worth the transaction cost of running an auction. I also
know a name "worth" $100 clearly is. None of that changes the underlying
premises.
There are thousands of things that suppliers do every day for customers
without the customers explicit consent. The nature of the
customer/supplier relationship regularly contains implied consent to any
number of steps taken on the customer's behalf. In my view, end users
rely on service providers to "look after them" or to "take care of them"
with domain names and with many other Internet services. Again, I do not
have any doubt as to the way this will be viewed in the market twelve
months from now.
Quick note on gdnx. We will be looking to provide our customers with any
opportunities that make sense in terms of what they offer to their
customers. We will be looking to expose our customers inventory to
anyplace that would treat it appropriately. That is all about efficiency
and liquidity. If gdnx can do that then we will be happy to work with them.
The easiest thing to do, especially as a public company, would be to put
the money in our pockets or to do that with the resellers. In my view I
would be setting you guys up. Someone will deal with the market in a
customer-centric way. This is the Internet. There are no secrets.
Someone will. When they do they will make you look like an ass. What you
would be doing is benefiting yourself to the detriment of your
customers. Ignorance is not a business model in anything but the very
short term.
Coming to Toronto soon? I can buy you a beer and you can tell me how
wrong I am :-).
Regards
Austin wrote:
Elliott,
In your statement you use the word 'customer' instead of 'end user'. I must
assume that this was just a slip. Who is your customer? The end user is my
customer, not yours.That would make me, the Reseller, your customer.
The biggest issue we are having with BW (other than stability - which Tucows
is working on), is that the system is setup so that Tucows keeps getting in
between me and my customer, the end user. This happens with signups, login,
logout, subscribers, usernames, reader accounts, etc. Please get this fixed
so that your customers can make money for themselves and Tucows.
With regard to expiring domains, I would just say again that you need ask
who your customer is. It appears that you are trying to police the market
instead of creating a product that your customers can use to make more money
for Tucows and themselves.
Not to go off topic, but in my opinion, you should consider working with
GDNX.org so that you can give your customers an avenue to make money for
themselves and Tucows in the domain resale market.
My theme should be apparent, but please concentrate on doing things that
give your customers more opportunities to make more money for themselves and
Tucows.
Austin
"elliot noss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Robert, I need to dig a bit deeper on something you said:
"This is a choice between acting ethically or taking money I
wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole"?
I would like to understand this a bit better, and let me be clear up
front. I do not agree.
First, I would like to park the email marketing service discussion here.
It will be responded to separately, which is more appropriate.
When I read the above statement there are two possible threads that come
to mind for me, the "opt-in vs. opt-out" discussion related to expiring
names and our offering of blogware and website building tools (the "tucows
is getting into hosting" discussion). Are their others? If so, please
identify. If it is those two then I would like to further examine both.
I will start the ball rolling with a statement. To me, in twelve months
there will be no question that registrars who are "opt-out" with respect
to expiring names will be clearly seen as making the ethical decision, the
one that takes the customers best interests into account and that "opt-in"
will be seen for what it is. Acting in the interests of the registrar or
reseller NOT the customer.
Regards
Elliot Noss
Abel Wisman wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L Mathews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 5:48 PM
Subject: Re: [domains-gen] Tucows Email Marketing Service
(Why is it that many of my postings to this list in the last year boil
down to "This is a choice between acting ethically or taking money I
wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole"? That can't be a good sign.)
Make that the last 2+ years and we're getting closer.
You were here at the start, like some of us, with totally different ideas
as
to what it now has turned into, I guess this is another cleansing of
those
that think that way.
abel
_______________________________________________
domains-gen mailing list
[email protected]
http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-gen
_______________________________________________
domains-gen mailing list
[email protected]
http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-gen
--
Elliot Noss
Tucows Inc.
416-538-5494
_______________________________________________
domains-gen mailing list
[email protected]
http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-gen
