Re: [DNS] Enetica

Re: [DNS] Enetica

From: Deus Ex Machina <vicc§cia.com.au>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:16:11 +1000
Richard Keeves [richard&#167;ibc.com.au] wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Deus Ex Machina" <vicc&#167;cia.com.au>
> > being a serious about being a registrar is not cheap. Enetica has spent
> > over $.25m on its software alone. the $3000 dollar/year is only a barrier
> to
> > entry to small players who will only register a few dozen domains a month.
> >
> 
> Here's the rub...  if Enetica (or any of the other registrars) would come
> out and say that they will not go direct to end-user registrants, this
> time-consuming debate and drama would not need to proceed...  and that
> registrar would pick up heaps of business from a lot of pissed-off resellers
> looking for someone they can trust.  But this has not happened.
> 
> Instead Enetica have been quiet all thru this raging debate - and we have
> people like Jon suggesting that resellers should be cut out.  If that is a
> common attitude, then such registrars do not deserve to have a channel
> through whom they sell.
> 
> As far as I know, so far, only one registrar has stated they will not deal
> direct and by-pass their channel. That is Explorer, but they do not to
> gTLDs.
> 
> So all you registrars, either you have a channel or you don't.  If you
> don't, then so be it.  See you in the market.
> But, if you do have a channel, then for f**** sake, support  your channel -
> don't cut it out. By-passing the channel is a very short-term game.
> Building the channel and getting the leverage from wholesaling to hundreds
> of resellers is a long-term game.  I would have thought that is was not only
> a more honourable approach, but a bigger and better and more profitable game
> too.

Enetica will not contact a resellers customer unless required by AUDA. our systems
flags internal and external customers and handles them differently.

AUda contractually requires a registrar to have a direct contract with a registrant,
its not the registrars choice. some can pretend they dont have a contract with the end
registrant and that they will never contact a registrant but the reality is different.

Explorer try and pretend the only business they are in is domains but perhaps you should ask
them what other businesses are they actually in, you might be in for a shock. also ask
them how many domains they register each month and factor in the $3000 AUDA annual fee
and do the sums. is it possible to be stand alone business on that margin/turnover?

I dont necessarily agree with some AUda policy, but that is completely irrelavent, I have
to abide by them. Our energies are best served by working within the system and trying to
change the system through the appropriate mechanisms.

Under the current system, a reseller ideally must provide some value for there part of the
chain. and because of the structure imposed by AUda that value can not be solely choosing
the registrar.  more to the point it can not be based on hiding the relationship to the
registrar.

Every reseller must be able to answer the following question. what value do I provide my customers
such that I can justify charging what I do compared to what the registrars charge the public.
if you can answer that then you probably have a business model that will have legs. if you cant
answer that given the transparency enforced by auda then you really need to rethink
your business model.

and this issue isnt just in domains, cisco sell direct and have a big channel. numerous large
business are grapling with the notion of chanels and direct sales. tupperware of all businesses
went through a lot of soul searching trying our various things to work out how to marry direct
sales with a large channel. the global trend is clear, resellers shouldnt be shielded from 
competition by a lack of transparency. resellers need to justify what value they brng to the table
just as any business does.

having said all that fell free contact me offlist if you want to discuss what we think resellers
should be doing to boost business and profitability.

Vic
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Apr 27 2015 - 00:00:13 UTC