On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 05:21:26PM +0800, Kim Davies wrote:
> Quoting magic2147§optushome.com.au on Monday May 17, 2004:
> | 
> | Umm so registrants are paying over the odds so that a proprietory company could
> | develop a system that they could then resell many times over and not pay any
> | dividend back to the people who provided the equity.
> | 
> | Gee I am glad we have all those cool Demand class directors looking after registrants
> | interests.
> 
> What AusRegistry does with their product, or how they develop them, is
> up to them. It is irrelevant to the discussion other than I think for
> the next tender there is much more potential for lower bids because much
> of this work has already been done by the parties likely to tender.
> 
> >From auDA's perpective, it put out a tender, it received bids, and
> picked the best one. In return, the winning bidder has a fixed price
> scheme for the duration of the contract. What bidder would accept a
> system where their price could be lowered at the whim of auDA in the
> middle of the contract?
> 
> auDA can't change alter AusRegistry's price until that contract is up.

But they have already, haven't they? I do recall the prices dropping.

Besides it'd be a very strange commercial contract if there weren't 
any exit clauses both sides could take. The notion that auDA couldn't 
effect change if it so desired is very strange.

> What being a demand-class director has to do with that I have no idea.

Presumably the intention is to call into question whether you really are
representing the people who really buy domains.

Anand

-- 
 `` All actions take place in time by the interweaving of the 
 forces of Nature; but the man lost in selfish delusion thinks 
 that he himself is the actor.'' 
        Lord Krishna to Arjuna in _The Bhagavad Gita_