Re: [ICANN-EU] ICANN report on proposed new TLDs

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Alexander and all,

Alexander Svensson wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> the ICANN review of the 44 TLD applications
> (by outside advisors) is now online at
>  http://www.icann.org/tlds/report/
>
> I have prepared a simplified thumbs-up-or-not chart at
>  http://www.icannchannel.org/tlds/
> Click on the symbols to read the relevant passages
> of the report.

  After reading several times the "ICANN Evaluation" on the .WEB
application by IOD and having several of our staff also do a independent

review as well, we have come to the opinion that the influence of Ken
Stubbs and the NC which have several members that are well known
as being anti-IOD and anti-Chris Ambler in particular, have influenced
their "Thumbs-Down" rating that you provide here Alexander.


  Here for those that are paying close attention the ICANN boards
seemingly "Thumbs Down" review:

2.      ICANN’s Evaluation.

"The strengths of this application lie in its general understanding of
the Internet domain name market.  The weaknesses of this application lie
in its less than realistic plans.  First, IOD expects to obtain a 15 to
23 percent market share of all new registrations in the very first
quarter of operation, even with additional competition from other new
top-level domains.  It assumes one third of these applications will be
for prepaid registrations of five to ten year increments at a combined
registry/registrar price of $35 per name per year.  This combination
creates a very large influx of money to finance operations, with IOD’s
cash balance increasing from $450,000 to $37.4 million in three months
at the 50 percent confidence level, which is 83 times larger.  The need
for this influx presumably is the motivation for IOD’s insistence on
being the sole registrar during startup.  Nonetheless, the
business/technical team does not believe these projections are
realistic.  Second, according to the pro-forma financial statements, IOD
will act as the registry and the sole registrar for the entire first
year.  Even by
the end of the fourth year, after other registrants have been permitted
to compete for three years, IOD estimates that it will still obtain a 30
percent registrar market share within the TLD, and that it will do so
with a $20.00 registrar markup.  This is inconsistent with experience in
.com, .net and .org.

            Despite this new competition, IOD anticipates maintaining
its $15 registry price throughout the forecast period.  This is at least
two and a half times the registry prices anticipated by others in this
category.  This higher price is likely to deter registrars and potential
registrants.  In addition, with any new venture, there are always many
unknown factors that will occur.  For this category, becoming a viable
competitor within the existing
structure is key.  Holding only $450,000 is a significantly weaker
capital position than the capital positions of the other applicants.
Based upon its historical experience, IOD has not demonstrated the
ability to grow, even when performing other services, such as web
hosting and design.  Moreover, two of the four employees, the Chief
Executive Officer and the Chief Operating Officer, are performing two
roles. The planned management is working at Toyota San Luis Obispo as
the Chief Executive Officer and Business Manager.  This dual
responsibility could potentially become problematic for the registry
operation.  Overall, the other applications in this group are
significantly more realistic and would result in much more viable
competition for the .com registry."

  Of course, most of these statements are disinformation nonsense.  An
old political ploy, but NO SALE here!


>
>
> A first glance:
> The ICANN report advises against all .tel-style domains
> (mainly because ITU sees them as premature) and .kids
> domains, and also some 'bigger' applicants get bad reviews,
> among them Nokia and the Universal Postal Union (.post).
> It seems that the non-commercial ones (.union, .museum,
> .health) generally get good marks.
>
> There still are a number of applications for .com clones
> (it seems to lead to .biz) and a TLD for personal purposes
> (.nom/.per/.i). The ICANN report is almost enthusiastic
> about the .geo proposal by SRI.

  Well of course the .BIZ TLD being a CORE original choice
for a gTLD some years ago now, would get an ICANN Board
"Thumbs up" rating given that most knowledgeable and informed
folks that have been following the "ICANN Experiment" is
captured by CORE patriots.

>
>
> ICANN has drawn up the following categories:
>
> 1. General-Purpose TLDs
>    a. General (.biz, .web etc.)
>    b. Personal (.nom etc.)
>    c. Restricted Content (.kids, xxx)
>    d. Restricted Commercial Group (.fin, .law, .pro etc.)
> 2. Special-Purpose TLDs (.union, .museum, .air etc.)
> 3. New Services TLDs (.tel, .pid, .geo etc.)
>
> I would hardly be a surprise if one or two TLDs from
> each category would be picked for the initial set.
>
> Best regards,
> /// Alexander
>
> _______________________________________________________
>   ICANN Channel              http://www.icannchannel.de

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208