Nominet Registrars

[keepaneyeonthat]

Are you all ready to lose the tag holder name from tomorrow as we all become registrars as the new Nominet registrar agreement will come into affect.

 

[Whois-Search]

It does feel a bit like ICANN.......However let's hope we don't see accreditation style fees next:

http://www.icann.org/registrars/accreditation-financials.htm

- especially if the Nominet board takes control of fees:

http://www.nic.uk/governance/consultation/fees/

At the moment though I'd be more worried about the new registrar agreement:

http://www.nic.uk/registrars/ra/

i.e. spending money to update your support systems and website

I do agree with the "Good Practice Terms" though and lets hope some big registrars have read them

 

[seb]

Sorry for digging out an older thread

It does feel a bit like ICANN.......However let's hope we don't see accreditation style fees

It's about making sure tagholders (urgh.. "registrars") know what they're doing.. I'm sure no one wants clueless registrars to be ruining the industry reputation. There's never been any talk of high accreditation fees.

i.e. spending money to update your support systems and website

I do agree with the "Good Practice Terms" though and lets hope some big registrars have read them

Heh :-D I hope so too.

seb

 

[Whois-Search]

There's never been any talk of high accreditation fees.

6.1. We do not currently charge for entering into this Contract.
http://www.nominet.org.uk/registrars/ra/racontract/


No, just that they want control of them http://www.nominet.org.uk/governance/consultation/fees/

 

[seb]

No, just that they want control of them http://www.nominet.org.uk/governance/consultation/fees/

I agree with them to the extent a board of directors needs to be able to respond to the market conditions.

As a director of another member owned company, I know that if you put barriers in front of a good board, you will just stifle their ability to do the best for the company.

I do share some of your concerns.. and I think any major changes should be consulted on.. as per my response to the above mentioned consultation

seb

 

[Whois-Search]

I agree with them to the extent a board of directors needs to be able to respond to the market conditions.

As a director of another member owned company, I know that if you put barriers in front of a good board, you will just stifle their ability to do the best for the company.

I do share some of your concerns.. and I think any major changes should be consulted on.. as per my response to the above mentioned consultation

seb

What Market conditions? Who are Nominet's competitors? Do members have any choice?

When Nominet has 2800 members and only 6 reply to the consultation:
http://www.nic.uk/governance/consultation/respond/

I'd prefer to leave it in the articles of association:

http://www.nic.uk/digitalAssets/16768_Articles_-_Final_Version_Signed.pdf

19A. Except as required by law, before making any change to the level of membership subscriptions or registration fees, the Council of Management must consult with the Steering Committee by conducting a ballot. The ballot, which may be carried out by electronic communication or in writing must seek votes for and against each proposed change; and the Council of Management shall only implement the proposed change if at least seventy-five percent of the votes cast in the ballot are in favour of the proposed change.

Also I agree with what Clive said at EGM1: http://www.davros.org/temp/nominet-egm.html#arts

So perhaps the Board just don't want to let the membership keep this control. Why not? Are they afraid that the membership will misuse it? Perhaps the membership are afraid that the board will misuse it.

 

[seb]

What Market conditions? Who are Nominet's competitors? Do members have any choice?

Nominet isn't immune from market impact from other TLDs.

When Nominet has 2800 members and only 6 reply to the consultation

I'd prefer to leave it in the articles of association:

Don't get me wrong.. I wouldn't want the board to go and suddenly decide to raise the prices from £5 to £50 without talking to members.. but putting in place restrictions that mean delays in implementing decisions is /generally/ a bad thing.


seb

 

[gordon]

6.1. We do not currently charge for entering into this Contract.
http://www.nominet.org.uk/registrars/ra/racontract/


No, just that they want control of them http://www.nominet.org.uk/governance/consultation/fees/

Andrew,
You appear to be glossing over the fact the Board already have control of registrar contract fees.

There are only two pricing elements that the board does not have control over:
1. Membership subscriptions and;
2. Registration fees.

Other pricing has always been in the control of the board.

Nominet is not immune to market conditions and if there is a sudden drop in people choosing ".uk" to register domains, perhaps because another TLD has cut their price then Nominet has no means to react and offer any special offers, etc to encourage growth in ".uk". I would consider that a bad thing for Nominet, for the majority of Nominet's members and for your own part of this industry.

Gordon

 

[Whois-Search]

Gordon,

I was replying to two seperate issues. I understand Nominet already has control of registrar contract fees.

However since Nominet has said they "intend to provide online courses for Registrars":

http://www.nominet.org.uk/registrars/ra/gpt/

And the PAB is to review "Review of raising industry standards":

http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/17117_070228_PAB_work_programme.pdf

What happens when registrars don't come up to scratch? Make the online courses compulsory? Registrar accreditation?

Also I don't buy the 'market impact from other TLDs' sorry.

.uk is already the cheapest at £5 for 2 years for members.

In my enom reseller account I get .com .net .org .biz .info .us all for $6.95 a year (£7.08 for 2 years).

Therefore the only way to go with registration fees is up!

At the end of the day this is about TRUST and Clive said it perfectly back at EGM1:

So perhaps the Board just don't want to let the membership keep this control. Why not? Are they afraid that the membership will misuse it? Perhaps the membership are afraid that the board will misuse it.

Andrew

 

[seb]

Nominet has said they "intend to provide online courses for Registrars": And the PAB is to review "Review of raising industry standards": What happens when registrars don't come up to scratch? Make the online courses compulsory? Registrar accreditation?

If a registrar doesn't come up to scratch they should probably be prevented from registering domains..

Does Tucows still operate something like this? I know they did something basic years ago when I set up my company's OpenSRS account..

Also I don't buy the 'market impact from other TLDs' sorry. .uk is already the cheapest at £5 for 2 years for members. In my enom reseller account I get .com .net .org .biz .info .us all for $6.95 a year (£7.08 for 2 years).

..and ENOM have just done a .info promotion for $1.99/yr for April for BulkRegister customers.

I'm not saying I want Nominet to do promotions like this.. and I agree with you I can't see any situations right now which would demand urgent action.. mainly because of Nominet's reserves and its very stable financial position. But let's not remember 10 year registrations are possibly coming up.. that will change the landscape and much longer term planning may be needed for overall costs etc.

At the end of the day this is about TRUST and Clive said it perfectly back at EGM1

I agree 100% - It's absolutely a question of trust. I have had my own reservations about the way Nominet went about EGM1 (Gordon's had my earful on that on several occasions ).. I also know to what extent the board went to, to listen, after that EGM.. Maybe they were going on a path blindly and were brought back into the real world by the members

seb

 

[gordon]

I was replying to two seperate issues. I understand Nominet already has control of registrar contract fees.

Apologies if I misunderstood you. I'm not sure I understand what you were replying to then?

What happens when registrars don't come up to scratch? Make the online courses compulsory? Registrar accreditation?

Very good questions - what would you like to see done?

Also I don't buy the 'market impact from other TLDs' sorry.

Can I ask then what factors you consider in the registration of your domains? What TLDs do you have domains registered in?

.uk is already the cheapest at £5 for 2 years for members.

In my enom reseller account I get .com .net .org .biz .info .us all for $6.95 a year (£7.08 for 2 years).

Therefore the only way to go with registration fees is up!

This one really does puzzle me, I've seen sections of the community argue the only possible reason for the Board to want pricing control could be to put the prices up and other sections of the community argue the only possible reason could be to put the prices down. Both those sections appear to consider their only reason to be a negative and they are opposite extremes. I'm not sure why each section has got to where they are on their thinking, perhaps you can enlighten me?

Gordon

 

[Whois-Search]

Very good questions - what would you like to see done?

enforce 8.3 on http://www.nic.uk/registrars/ra/racontract/

Can I ask then what factors you consider in the registration of your domains? What TLDs do you have domains registered in?

I have allsorts of TLDs from .mobi to .cc. However none of them are country codes for the UK.

This one really does puzzle me, I've seen sections of the community argue the only possible reason for the Board to want pricing control could be to put the prices up and other sections of the community argue the only possible reason could be to put the prices down. Both those sections appear to consider their only reason to be a negative and they are opposite extremes. I'm not sure why each section has got to where they are on their thinking, perhaps you can enlighten me?

At the end of the day I have two issues with the Governance Consultation:

1. Nominet taking control of the registration fees & membership subscriptions.

2. Nominet cutting the number of elected board members to 3 (out of 9) when it is a member led company.

Everything else I agree with even the 3 year terms.

However in both cases you are taking the TRUST away from the membership and each EGM takes more control away from the membership.

If 75% of members at a ballot want registration fees to go up then so be it - but let the membership decide.

 

[gordon]

enforce 8.3 on http://www.nic.uk/registrars/ra/racontract/

If you have any evidence of people breaching the contract then do let me know in a private email.

I have allsorts of TLDs from .mobi to .cc. However none of them are country codes for the UK.

So do you use your ".cc" domains to target people in the Cocos Islands?
Who do you target with your ".mobi" domains?

However in both cases you are taking the TRUST away from the membership and each EGM takes more control away from the membership.

Nobody can take anything away from the members. They will always have ultimate control. Any changes will always be the members to make. I have never had a problem trusting the members. This is not an issue of trust it is an issue of at what point in the structure is it best to make that decision and how bureaucratic you want it to be. Ultimately the members always have the power to over rule the Board.

If 75% of members at a ballot want registration fees to go up then so be it - but let the membership decide.

Andrew, what is wrong with asking the members if they want to retain that system or if they would like to see it change? I'm happy to let the members decide that too.

Gordon

 

[sneezycheese]

Question for Gordon...

Gordon - we listened into the ICANN meeting today - very interesting - it seems there's questions being asked by some of the global registries about: the "monopolies" they hold and "should there be competition in their respective Countries?"

So why the likes of you and Nominet try to play down what’s quite clearly the bleeding obvious to the rest of the TLD community???

By the way – Emilly Taylor was there – maybe you should have a chat with her about it.

Regards,

Sneezy.

 

[Whois-Search]

So do you use your ".cc" domains to target people in the Cocos Islands? Who do you target with your ".mobi" domains?

I will agree those domains can be used in any country in the world along with TLDs like .tv.

However .co.uk remains British and you wouldn't advertise it in America? It would be like trying to spend pound coins in America.

Nobody can take anything away from the members. They will always have ultimate control. Any changes will always be the members to make. I have never had a problem trusting the members. This is not an issue of trust it is an issue of at what point in the structure is it best to make that decision and how bureaucratic you want it to be. Ultimately the members always have the power to over rule the Board.

If your going to have a board with 9 members then at least 5 of those board members (majority) should be elected from the membership.

Andrew, what is wrong with asking the members if they want to retain that system or if they would like to see it change? I'm happy to let the members decide that too.

As usual that change is bundled in with a load of other changes and members will be asked to vote in favor of everthing rather than two seperate important issues of board composition and fees.

 

[seb]

Gordon - we listened into the ICANN meeting today - very interesting - it seems there's questions being asked by some of the global registries about: the "monopolies" they hold and "should there be competition in their respective Countries?"

I think this competition thing "at registry level" is a total diversion from the issue. ICANN hasn't introduced any competition "within" .com than existed before.. The only thing it has done is split up registries operating .com from .org etc.. Nominet only runs .uk.

Further when you split the registry/registrar level ICANN style.. what you end up with is large domain providers/isps becoming accredited registrars.. having a direct relationship with the registry.. and all the small players having to buy from them.. It doesn't introduce any more competition..

The price drop on .com from $100 to $70 and then into single year registrations is not related to competition "within" .com .. it's just lower wholesale price through OTHER market conditions (other TLDs) and the way ICANN changed things.

I hear people put the word Nominet and monopoly into the same sentence too often.. They proclaim competition in .com.. but don't realise actually with Nominet, all tagholders ARE registrars.. the competition is at a higher level within the chain..


seb

 

[gordon]

Gordon - we listened into the ICANN meeting today - very interesting - it seems there's questions being asked by some of the global registries about: the "monopolies" they hold and "should there be competition in their respective Countries?"

How any national domain is set up and run is ultimately a decision for the government and local internet community in that country and not a choice for me or any individual or company.

So why the likes of you and Nominet try to play down what’s quite clearly the bleeding obvious to the rest of the TLD community???

Andrew highlighted that UK domains are among the cheapest domains available, so presumably it isn't an entirely negative experience having Nominet the sole provider of “.uk”.

I have never denied that Nominet is the sole source of a “.uk” domain, but then Afilias is the sole source of “.info”, Verisign the sole source of “.com”. So really every TLD is the sole source of their domain. If you want to register a ".com" you can go to one of a few hundred registrars worldwide that are ICANN accredited, if you want to register a ".uk" you can go to one of approx 2800 registrars.

Can you clarify how you would configure things to ensure there was more competition within all TLDs? I'm always keen to hear suggestions.

Gordon

 

[gordon]

However .co.uk remains British and you wouldn't advertise it in America? It would be like trying to spend pound coins in America.

That depends on how you are trying to portray your company. Over the years I've been involved with web sites that very specifically were ".uk" but aimed at the American market and it was a deliberate choice to use the ".uk" domain. Equally there are plenty aimed at the UK using a ".com" or ".tv" or other domain. My point is that the market is more complex than you first portrayed.

If your going to have a board with 9 members then at least 5 of those board members (majority) should be elected from the membership.

That's a decision for the members. I'm curious to know why you believe it needs to be majority elected rather than, for example, elected members having double votes or other form of special status?

As usual that change is bundled in with a load of other changes and members will be asked to vote in favor of everthing rather than two seperate important issues of board composition and fees.

erm, what is voted on will depend on the consultation responses and as they are still on going I have no idea what format the vote will take, so I'm not sure why you are so confident?

Gordon

 

[seb]

I'm curious to know why you believe it needs to be majority elected rather than, for example, elected members having double votes or other form of special status?

That's an interesting workaround to the problem that some people have expressed. It would balance it with the need for more outside perspectives well. Not seen it before.. but possible.

seb

 

[Whois-Search]

Gordon,

I'm curious to know why you believe it needs to be majority elected rather than, for example, elected members having double votes or other form of special status?

Just look at other large not-for-profit member led organisations:


"The Society's Directors are elected by you, our members, by postal ballot
before the AGM."
http://www.nationwide.co.uk/about_nationwide/membership_matters/Membership.asp#6

"The Council is made up of 52 members: 26 elected by the members of the
National Trust and 26 appointed".
http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-trust/w-thecharity/w-how_we_are_run/w-governance_overview.htm

"a Council of 12 elected and six co-opted members governs it".
http://www.which.co.uk/about_us/A/who_we_are/structure/Our_structure_481_58533.jsp

Also at the moment 4 out of 6 are elected and we can vote them out if they don't perform

erm, what is voted on will depend on the consultation responses and as they are still on going I have no idea what format the vote will take, so I'm not sure why you are so confident?

Yes it will and I have thought about making another template like I did for the DRS consultation but not sure whether it will do any good or not.

Andrew