I don't share Ron Stark's generalised views about new 2LDs (see below).

Let me explain why.

Associations (industry/trade/commerce/employer) were interested in establishing
new 2LDs, e.g. retail.au and pharmacy.au.  Many have thousands of small business
members, including third generation members.  Members have belonged to their
associations for decades.  Collectively, members of individual associations
turnover $billions and employ thousands.

Associations have well established networks within and across industries.  They
have long established channels of communication to help members with their
businesses, providing them with valued, regular information services covering,
for example, taxation, industrial relations, superannuation, occupational health
and safety, insurance, government regulation, supply chain management
development, telecommunications, e-commerce, and business, consumer and
environmental protection, e.g. auDA consumer alerts on domain name scams.

Associations run businesses that deliver a diverse range of services on a
national basis to their thousands of members, e.g. superannuation funds,
industry-wide auctions, and vocational education and training.

Associations are trusted organisations (trusted by their members and consumers),
with massive resources under their management and long established national and
international reputations.

Associations have, over many years, successfully used their networks and
resources to manage and market many goods and services to their members.  They
has established business relationships with their members.  They have created
demand.

Associations are potentially well placed to market industry-based 2LDs to their
thousands of members.  They are capable of creating trusted 2LDs in .au.  They
can create demand for .au domain names.

auDA and the "domain name industry" (if they choose) can engage associations to
further their respective objectives.

The "domain name industry" is well placed to use the existing networks of
industry associations to promote greater awareness and uptake of .au domain
names.  There are few, if any, organisations in Australia that could do this as
cost effectively as associations.  See
<www.setel.com.au/smeforum2002/fp/FP09.htm>.


Ian Johnston


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Stark [mailto:ronstark&#167;snapsite.com.au]
> Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 4:35 AM
> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> Subject: RE: [DNS] Nomination for auDA board.
>
>
> Once again reinforcing my point that coming up with new 2tld's is not
> going to motivate the market for new registrants.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mark Hughes [mailto:effectivebusiness&#167;applications.com.au]
> > Sent: Friday, 26 September 2003 10:02 PM
> > To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> > Subject: RE: [DNS] Nomination for auDA board.
> >
> >
> > > There are around 320 000 .com.au's registered, out of some
> > > 3.5M ABNs registered, ergo 10% penetration of the available
> > > market.
> >
> > The potential market is far, far greater than 3.5M.  Under
> > the existing rules, the market could be as large as, say, 100
> > million com.au domain names.
> >
> >
> > Under the existing rules you can register:
> >
> > a) one or more domain names for a commercial entity
> > b) one or more domain names for any brand / product / service
> > that a commercial entity provides
> >
> >
> >
> > The existing policy specifically allows domain names for
> > products / services, etc, and also says 'there is no
> > restriction on the number of domain names that may be
> > licensed by a registrant'.  For more details see:
> >
> > * http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-2002-07.txt
> > * http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-2003-07.txt
> >
> >
> > Regards, Mark
> >
> > Mark Hughes
> > Effective Business Applications Pty Ltd
> > +61 4 1374 3959
> > www.pplications.com.au
> > effectivebusiness&#167;applications.com.au

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Stark [mailto:ronstark&#167;snapsite.com.au]
Sent: 26 September 2003 4:01 PM
To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
Subject: RE: [DNS] Nomination for auDA board.

There are around 320 000 .com.au's registered, out of some 3.5M ABNs
registered, ergo 10% penetration of the available market.

TLDs are saturated - there are so many .COMs that it's near impossible
to come up with a new name.  They therefore have no option but to add
new TLDs.  Here in Australia we have such a low penetration that it's
folly (imho) to come up with more 2LDs - particularly in the expectation
that it will somehow increase demand.

My point, though, is purely a business one - why expend effort to create
a tiny closed market when there's already a huge open one already
waiting to be developed.

Ron


-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Stark [mailto:ronstark&#167;snapsite.com.au]
Sent: 26 September 2003 3:28 PM
To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
Subject: RE: [DNS] Nomination for auDA board.


... to which the obvious question is what proportion of the available
market do they represent?  It's simply not good business to invest in
developing a market for .005% when there is 90% to be had.

Ron

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Deus Ex Machina [mailto:vicc&#167;cia.com.au]
> Sent: Friday, 26 September 2003 3:20 PM
> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Nomination for auDA board.
>
>
> what about business whose prefered domains are taken?
>



-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Stark [mailto:ronstark&#167;snapsite.com.au]
Sent: 26 September 2003 3:11 PM
To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
Subject: RE: [DNS] Nomination for auDA board.

My mantra - there are perhaps 10% of businesses entities that are
eligible to have a .com.au domain name, who actually have one.  Coming
up with a new variant on 2LD's is tantamount to suggesting that devising
a new business type (say CC as well as Pty Ltd) is suddenly going to
increase the number of businesses registered.

It's a nonsense, of course.

Equally, there wasn't exactly a rush to register .id.au's either.

The core issue is the need to give potential registrants a (valid)
reason to have a domain name in the first place.  Introducing new name
types does nothing except degrade the whole domain name business.

Ron Stark