Bacon Farmer
Top Contributor
Huawei and ZTE employees would be welcome to join auDA and given the Chair's current stance on new members, he wouldn't have an issue with that or would he?
Really? You do realise a lot of the recommendations in the Govt report come from feedback of members?At the heart of the controversy
I support a constitutional change in line with the Government recommendations.You support these scumbags and their branch stacking of the demand class membership right?
My commercial entity has always financially benefitted from .au domain names. We're a business, we sell domain names, I think it's pretty clear-cut.Your commercial entity will financially benefit from the largesse distributed via auDA's proxy Afilias right?
Did you support members of this forum and others in this industry controlling multiple votes at prior meetings, through the proxy of family and friends being faux auDA members, in order to stack the votes in demand to ensure your preferred candidates were placed on the board? The answer is yes.Nah you support the admittance of 955 foreigners who will hold sway at the next General Meeting.
It means less money going to the registry operator and more money going back to offering promotions for .au domain names. If you don't see this as a win for consumers then you're dead wrong. This will encourage competition amongst registrars and due to the rules give smaller registrars more money to compete with the bigger players.The co-marketing slush fund never amounted to $12 million dollars. The increase in size will certainly buy votes. Well we've probably seen that already.
Did you support members of this forum and others in this industry controlling multiple votes at prior meetings, through the proxy of family and friends being faux auDA members, in order to stack the votes in demand to ensure your preferred candidates were placed on the board? The answer is yes.
It means less money going to the registry operator and more money going back to offering promotions for .au domain names. If you don't see this as a win for consumers then you're dead wrong. This will encourage competition amongst registrars and due to the rules give smaller registrars more money to compete with the bigger players.
Did you support members of this forum and others in this industry controlling multiple votes at prior meetings, through the proxy of family and friends being faux auDA members, in order to stack the votes in demand to ensure your preferred candidates were placed on the board?
Did you support members of this forum and others in this industry controlling multiple votes at prior meetings, through the proxy of family and friends being faux auDA members, in order to stack the votes in demand to ensure your preferred candidates were placed on the board? The answer is yes.
It means less money going to the registry operator and more money going back to offering promotions for .au domain names. If you don't see this as a win for consumers then you're dead wrong. This will encourage competition amongst registrars and due to the rules give smaller registrars more money to compete with the bigger players.
I did what? Thanks for the smear - playing the man when it suits you eh?
I'm pretty naive when it comes to branch stacking but it appears the independent Chair and supply side director Vice Chair have family members in demand class. You might want to cast aspersions in that direction?
I don't follow your logic or lack thereof. If auDA passed on the savings of $3 per domain you wouldn't need to piss $12 million dollars into the wind on ineffectual promotions.
The $3 sucked up by auDA if passed as a price cut would create a greater level of demand than any promotions. Economics 101.
It wouldn't help curry favour amongst supply side entities though or ultimately control of auDA.
LOL. If you don't support what they did to get Ned and Nicole on the board then go on record saying so. But until you do you will be painted by the same brush, much like you continually do to me.I did what? Thanks for the smear - playing the man when it suits you eh?
Economics 101, eh? I find it interesting because there was a permanent price reduction that came in to effect on July 1, in conjunction with a month-long promotion in July, but it hasn't done a great deal to boost sales.I don't follow your logic or lack thereof. If auDA passed on the savings of $3 per domain you wouldn't need to piss $12 million dollars into the wind on ineffectual promotions.
The $3 sucked up by auDA if passed as a price cut would create a greater level of demand than any promotions. Economics 101.
You mean like:
yeah, I get your point. Remember it was the responsibility of the Board to approve the application.
- Alex Leptos
- Helen Leptos
- Lillian Leptos
- Luci Leptos
- Julia Trafford
It's not always on a new registration. You saw just a couple of months ago there was a renewal campaign that happened but it wasn't very effective due to the convoluted process involved to check eligibility, and that also didn't assist any companies or their brands.How much of that money is coupled to the promotion of the companies brand whilst promoting a small price reduction for NEW registration?
It's not always on a new registration. You saw just a couple of months ago there was a renewal campaign that happened but it wasn't very effective due to the convoluted process involved to check eligibility, and that also didn't assist any companies or their brands.
Like I said, these campaigns are done all over the world and have a lot of positive effect on growth in the namespace.
LOL. If you don't support what they did to get Ned and Nicole on the board then go on record saying so. But until you do you will be painted by the same brush, much like you continually do to me.
Economics 101, eh? I find it interesting because there was a permanent price reduction that came in to effect on July 1, in conjunction with a month-long promotion in July, but it hasn't done a great deal to boost sales.
auDA have done the right thing by making the process transparent and accountable, something that is not done by any other registry that we deal with.
As it has become clear in recent weeks, based on the existing constitution there are quite a few resellers and domainers who should not hold demand memberships, in addition to many of those who currently hold both.Oh you think Ned and Nicole were branch stacked onto the board? And yet here we are less than a term later with no elected demand directors and you think the demand side holds power.
Price alone does not drive growth in any industry, especially one as niche as domain names. You need to be able to market the product and the price to consumers in conjunction with your service offering (aka the 'differentiator').Very small price reductions get very small increases in demand?
It sounds like you don't want them to be any of those things, otherwise, you wouldn't mock them when they actually are.Transparent, accountable and auDA - thanks for the laugh.
As it has become clear in recent weeks, based on the existing constitution there are quite a few resellers and domainers who should not hold demand memberships, in addition to many of those who currently hold both.
As it has become clear in recent weeks, based on the existing constitution there are quite a few resellers and domainers who should not hold demand memberships, in addition to many of those who currently hold both.
Price alone does not drive growth in any industry, especially one as niche as domain names. You need to be able to market the product and the price to consumers in conjunction with your service offering (aka the 'differentiator').
It sounds like you don't want them to be any of those things, otherwise, you wouldn't mock them when they actually are.
I completely agree, but when it's a single class model it will be irrelevant.It needs a full audit of the entire membership base.
Because, per the constitution, that is where they are to be members. If they had applied as supply members they would have been knocked back by the board and changed to demand.Says the supply side employer who encouraged his employees to join the demand side. Do they vote for themselves or do you have a meeting at work first to decide?
Yes we did, at both a wholesale and retail level.Thanks for the info but you didn't even pass on the small price reduction did you?
Because, per the constitution, that is where they are to be members. If they had applied as supply members they would have been knocked back by the board and changed to demand.