Re: [IDNO-DISCUSS] Re: [IFWP] RE: who tells the quill holder what

Roeland M.J. Meyer (rmeyer@mhsc.com)
Sat, 10 Jul 1999 10:50:49 -0700


> From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com]
> Sent: Saturday, July 10, 1999 8:24 AM
>
> At 11:53 PM 7/9/99 -0700, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> >Dave, you suceeded in completely missing the point.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, July 09, 1999 9:05 AM
> > >
> > > At 07:52 AM 7/9/99 -0700, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> > > >According to ICANN, you would have to charge $1US per
> > > domain, as a floor
> > > >price. I don't see provisions for "free" registries. You
>
>
> Roeland, the language of your assertion, quoted above, is simple and
> direct. It makes a claim about registrar minimum pricing.

First off, it's out of context. I was commenting on someone ELSE's
assertion (which I forget at the moment and you've inconveniently
deleted it from the thread) My statement was based on the common-sense
business practice of passing additional costs down to the consumer. I
have myself made many arguments in this area, that costs and market
pricing are largely disjoint. We are arguing past each other there. We
are largely using different words to say the same thing, but only one of
us realizes this. Go back and re-trace the thread, I'm not going to.
IMHO, we already agree, on this one issue, and I see no point in proving
that we agree.

> The claim is
> incorrect, for the reasons I cited in my earlier message,
> namely that cost
> and pricing are not required to be tightly coupled.
>
> A blanket dismissal is, no doubt, comforting to make, but it
> lacks content.
>
> Care to try for that content?

Are you trying to be argumentative or are you just dense?