Verisign and ICANN have proposed extending the .com registry agreement by 6 years, until 2024:
https://www.icann.org/public-comments/com-amendment-2016-06-30-en
We oppose this proposed contract extension. The .com registry agreement, like all other registry agreements, should be instead put out to a competitive public tender to ensure that registrants are obtaining the lowest possible price for a fixed set of registry services (with accompanying SLA) for a fixed term (no more than 5 years, after which it would be again subject to a new public tender process). If there was going to be an amendment, that competitive public tender term should be the amendment that the community should be considering.
If the .com contract was put out to a competitive public tender, it is likely that the registry fees would fall by at least 75% to below $2/yr per domain. It's even possible that fees would fall by 90% or more (especially if Google and/or Amazon put in bids, given the scale of those 2 organizations in cloud services and DNS). It's even possible that Verisign would win the public tender, albeit with a much lower registry fee than today. While it's clear that Verisign benefits by locking in its current anti-competitive and monopoly contract at pricing that is far above that which would exist in a competitive market, registrants, the community and the public do not benefit.
We urge the NTIA/DOC to reject this attempt by ICANN and Verisign to "lock in" the current bad deal for consumers for yet another 6 years
Indeed, Neustar is facing the loss of their telephone number management contract to Telcordia, due to the pro-competition and pro-consumer policies of the FCC:
http://www.reuters.com/article/usa-neustar-fcc-idUSL2N0WR10320150326
It is telling that ICANN protects monopolists from competition, while the FCC does not. ICANN does not deserve to be "set free" of US control, when it acts against the public interest with these anti-competitive "sweetheart deals" with registries that have long harmed registrants (through above-market costs for registry services, which are passed along by registrars). These sweetheart deals are "negotiated" by executives at ICANN who themselves are paid exorbitant salaries (far above comparable "non-profits"), who have an interest in maintaining the "status quo" of a system that is out of whack with competitive markets.
While it's true that a "presumptive renewal" clause currently exists, there is no need to invoke it more than 2 years in advance. Circumstances might arise in the future (e.g. anti-trust charges, bad behaviour by Verisign like Sitefinder in the past, political change in the USA, or other events) which may lead to non-renewal. Of course, these potential circumstances frighten Verisign shareholders, and keep their executives awake at night, so they seek to get out ahead of them by attempting to extend the contract very early.
With more than 2 years to go in the current agreement (which doesn't expire until November 30, 2018), there is absolutely no pressing need to extend this contract now (not counting the "pressing need" of Verisign shareholders to protect their anti-competitive monopoly). We need only look at the example of how the NTIA extends its contracts with ICANN (for the IANA agreement) when nearing expiration -- it typically does so only a few months in advance, and not 2+ years in advance.
Sincerely, George Kirikos
http://www.leap.com
What are your strengths as an investor?
How do you think a potential buyer first checks if your domain is for sale?
How to avoid domain Addiction
Tld count for 12000 names, what are my best options ?
Outbound Is a Mirror, Not a Strategy
How do you spot domain trends BEFORE they explode? (like claw keyword did)
