CircleID

Your unclear and vague 'solution' already exists. There are at least two sites that provide an appraisal and auction service:
sedo.com
afternic.com

They also provide an escrow service to mediate the change of ownership process.

Yes - but current auction models only work for those registrants that keep their registration from expiring into the "drop market". i.e. they keep paying the renewal fees until someone decides to purchase the name.

In short what your saying is that the markets are evolving.  Businesses that service them are evolving and innovation is alive and well. I fail to see your reasoning that this is somehow "bad" and must be changed.

"As an underlying principle, this document assumes that the market itself is in a far better position to make judgments of this nature."

I agree and you should have quit right there.

"Monthly fees paid for use of an accreditation or "cred" peaked earlier in 2004 in the range of $20,000/month."

Try in the $30,000 range.

"Third, and most importantly, the market exists because registrants are being kept in the dark. This can be demonstrated conclusively with one simple question; "Would any current registrant with perfect knowledge that the value of their expiring domain name was in excess of $50 let the name expire for nothing? At $30?"

Yes they would.  I and others do it all the time.  fact is at that price they are not substainable and don't derive sufficient revenue to continue.  Drop it and someone else may be able to make a more efficient use of it.  I can also tell you of circumstances where I have offered $800 on a 8k asking price only to have it refused and the domain DROPPED a few months later.  You also presume the previous registrant has some devine right to continue "ownership" forever.  Fact is we lease domains and mistakes happen.  You forget to renew, you die, bankruptcies etc etc.  Reasonable safeguards exist to cover these but once those are extinguished the market is free for anyone and open to anyone.  And should be.

"In sum, both ICANN and Verisign registry are currently forced to spend significant, unsustainable resources in terms of people, time and money"

What money does ICANN spend on this market??  In fact it's revenue is driven by the # of registrars and that has increased exponentially.  If anything this has contributed hugely to Icann and it's wasteful "tour the world" ways.

Verisign renewed its last contract with all this demand in mind.  Obviously it was priced into their contract and by their own admission didn't impact them hugely.  What you suggest would in fact relieve them only of "costs" associated with their contract that they already agreed to.  Increasing their profit.

Mr.Rader,

Aren't you just rewording "WLS" differently?

So then what you are suggesting is that people use Tucows' brand new auction service:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040907/nytu194_1.html

Nice PR work. =)

Gordon -

"I fail to see your reasoning that this is somehow "bad" and must be changed."

Hmmm. Not sure that this was the point that I was trying to get across. Let me try again - there are imperfections in the market that we should recognize and move past. Lack of disclosure is just the most obvious - flat rate pricing, first-come first-served allocation and equivalent access are also an issue. What's "bad" isn't the competitive activity in the market place, but the drivers that fuel the market place.

You also presume the previous registrant has some devine right to continue "ownership" forever. Fact is we lease domains and mistakes happen. You forget to renew, you die, bankruptcies etc etc. Reasonable safeguards exist to cover these but once those are extinguished the market is free for anyone and open to anyone. And should be.

Nope - not making that presumption at all. In fact, all that the Perfect Information proposal states is that a registrant should have line of sight to the value of their domain name were they to let it out for auction. Once possessed of that information they can choose to keep it, auction it or let it expire.

What money does ICANN spend on this market?? In fact it's revenue is driven by the # of registrars and that has increased exponentially.

ICANN is forced to accredit registrars that are being created solely for the purpose of competing in the batch pool cred race. This has a huge cost associated that would be avoided in a more rational market. Cred players don't contribute much of anything along the way net of accreditation fee's - which if you are familiar with the current budget, trend to $0 if the current arms race continues.

Verisign renewed its last contract with all this demand in mind. Obviously it was priced into their contract and by their own admission didn't impact them hugely. What you suggest would in fact relieve them only of "costs" associated with their contract that they already agreed to. Increasing their profit.

So because its good for Verisign, it should be avoided? I'd also remind you that its good for registrars, registrants, ESPs and ICANN. Should we forgo a more efficient arrangement because Verisign might see increased margins? I'm not sure this makes sense on any level.

Roger -

So then what you are suggesting is that people use Tucows' brand new auction service:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040907/nytu194_1.html

Nice PR work. =)

No, not at all. In fact, the opposite. I address this in more detail on my weblog (the entire post is here) but to summarize, the Perfect Information proposal (PIP) is a global view of the way things ought to be. The Tucows specific auction service that we announced today is just a localized version with quite a few shortcomings. In fact, we see anything that comes out of PIP as competitive to our own localized implementation…

Now of course, I say that knowing full well that the timing of these two documents was completely coordinated - but please don't mistake them for being "the same thing"…

Gamergoal -

Aren't you just rewording "WLS" differently?

Not at all. WLS is a second generation view of how things ought to have been done two or three years ago - and it deals exclusively with domain names that have already expired. The Perfect Information proposal exclusively talks about the opportunity as it relates to domain names that will likely, but haven't yet, expired. Entirely different from WLS and much more synchronous with the way the market operates today.