On 25 Sep 2005 at 17:11, Anand Kumria wrote in reply to Ron Stark:

> > On the other hand a small Australian business with a solely Australian
> > market has no use for anything other than a .au name, and to try to sell
> > them a .com in those circumstances is, I think, predatory.
> 
> That's the strangest, argument I've ever heard. Convincing an
> organisation that a cheaper, easier to obtain domain is predatory.
> 
> As a few people have already stated; I think you'll find the 'market' no
> longer attaches as much importance to whether an organisation has a
> '.au' at the end of the name.

And it would be unbelievably stupid as well. Imagine that one didn't offer an equivilent gTLD 
domain to a client who signed up for a .com.au and some time later they found that the gTLD 
was being used by their competitors or even more likely they wanted to sell stuff or services 
overseas. They'd be really thrilled to learn that they could have protected their brand for 
peanuts.

But such stupidity is rife. Had the providers to our clients referred to in the Ches T. thread 
been doing their jobs, the current difficulties our clients are having in relation to their brands 
would have been avoided.

cb