[NA-Discuss] Fwd: Edits and comments to NARALO/ALAC position statement on GAC scorecard

Antony Van Couvering avc at avc.vc
Sat Apr 2 03:34:41 UTC 2011


I gave asked Lori Anne Wardi for these and similar stats from .co.  At one point she gave these to me in a conversation but I have been hesitant to post them lest I misremember them and confuse the issue. I will forward these to the list when/if she replies. 

Antony

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 1, 2011, at 3:49 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net> wrote:

> Richard,
> 
> Agree that the NeuStar / .CO business plan will not cause the IPC 
> exceptional nosebleeds and hysterics, but that isn't the only metric 
> for lack of proof of a utility and necessity claim.
> 
> Any data on the ppc density among the 900k?
> 
> Given the renewal price point for the secondary market actors acting 
> as pseudo-registrars, on the order 1.5 times the .CO price point for 
> GA names (post landrush(es)) for .COM names with natural traffic, is 
> there any reason to believe that the ad inventories placed in the 
> o(1M) already "tasted" .CO properties aren't as sustaining as the ad 
> inventories placed in the same ppc proven .COM properties?
> 
> It should be clear that finding a "public interest" rational for an 
> increase in the number of sites having no utility other than the 
> function of ad inventory outlets will require some cleverness.
> 
> Eric
> 
> On 4/1/11 3:52 PM, Richard Tindal wrote:
>> John,
>> 
>> I don't think there's any data showing a high degree of defensive registration in CO - which now has>900K domains
>> 
>> The registry has been extremely vigilant about limiting that, and the $20 price point has made it expensive
>> to squat (if the PPC value of the traffic the squatter gets is less than $20 per year it's a money losing proposition
>> for them -  and very few new domains have>$20 in PPC value per year).
>> 
>> The data I've seen, and it's not a complete analysis of the zone,  shows about the same level of squatting in CO as you see in
>> BIZ and INFO - which is minimal
>> 
>> Richard
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 31, 2011, at 7:19 PM, John R. Levine wrote:
>> 
>>>> What about the the 600K registrants in .CO?  Are they all either
>>>> profiteers or deluded by smoke and mirrors?
>>> 
>>> Wow, it just gets better.  We all know that .CO is full of defensive
>>> registrations and typosquats.  If I could get .cmo or .c0m, I bet I could
>>> get 600K registrations, too.  After all, it's less than 1% of the
>>> registrations in .COM.
>>> 
>>> I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader why anyone would pretend that
>>> all wasn't obvious.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> John Levine, johnl at iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
>>> Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
>>> ------
>>> NA-Discuss mailing list
>>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
>>> 
>>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
>>> ------
>> 
>> ------
>> NA-Discuss mailing list
>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
>> 
>> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
>> ------
>> 
>> 
> 
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> 
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------




More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list