Re: An observation

[Simon Higgs <simon@higgs.com>]

At 10:03 AM +0300 12/31/96, Kevin Brown wrote:

That's the second reason - distribution. Having the consumer have easy
access to your product makes a lot of difference in terms of receipts.
But you must assign a value to that product or service to get those
receipts.

> Speculation aside, I suspect the real reason that .com is valuable is that
> it works better than most registries out there ( i.e. ISO TLD registries)
> and anyon can get in there with multiple DNS names. They are the fast food
> registry of the Internet ( like MacDonalds) Anyone in the world ( nearly)
> can eat a Big Mac and anyone in the world ( totally) can register in .com.
>
> That is why it is so popular. From where some of you sit NSI policies and
> process and customer service suck. But from here I sit, they are not that
> bad. A matter of perspective. .com is the biggest dns place now because it
> is easy to get in.
>
> The market made it a brand name, and they sit and chuckle and rack up the
> numbers.
>
> Kevin
>
> At 4:24 +0300 31/12/96, Simon Higgs wrote:
> >At 4:26 PM -0800 12/30/96, Bryant Durrell wrote:
> >
> >> Simon Higgs writes:
> >> > The first, and most important thing NSI did to develop .COM as a brand
> >> > was to place a higher perceived value on each domain than it's annual
> >> > fee. They did this by charging $100 for registration. They could have
> >> > charged $50.00, and just had each domain renewed every year, but they
> >> > didn't. They made the cost of entry a higher value than the per year
> >> > cost for each SLD. Anything that costs something has to be worth
> >> > something in the eyes of the consumer, or they will never buy into it
> >> > in the first place. Since that time the .COM space has been plagued by
> >> > name horders and speculators.
> >>
> >> Huh?
> >>
> >
> >Duh? ;)
> >
> >> Speaking as someone who used to handle half the new domain
> >> registrations at Netcom, I'd say that the horders and speculators were
> >> out in force well before NSI started charging.  Clearly the number has
> >> increased, but then again, so has the number of spammers and that
> >> didn't have anything to do with the .COM fees.  Further, there
> >> hasn't been any notable increase in the number of people speculating
> >> in .ORG, and that costs too.
> >>
> >> I think, with all due respect, that your analysis is a bit off.
> >>
> >
> >The growth curve supports this. It's not the only factor, but it is the
> >significant one. If the registrations were still free, there wouldn't
> >be venture funds being assigned to name speculation, and there would
> >not be a need to compete with NSI for registration services, etc. The
> >list goes on, but this is the pivotal point in recent domain name
> >history.
> >
> >Why aren't .US and .EDU domains being speculated in the same way?
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Simon
> >
> >--
> >If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.
>
>
> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>      Kevin Brown            | N \  We operate in Ireland
>        NetComm              | e /  and the Middle East
> Unix Training, Consultancy  | t \  --IRELAND--
>      Networking             | C /  Voice: 353-1-282-7342
>                             | o \  Fax: 353-1-282-7342
>     Sun Microsystems        | m /  --DUBAI--
>    Internet Associate       | m \  Voice: 971-4-491476
>                             |   /  Fax: 971-4-492957
>                             |   \  email: kevinbr@netcomm.ie
>                             |   /           (Internet)
>                             |   \
>
> \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
>
> Coming soon.......our UK office in Wokingham will open!


Regards,

Simon

--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.