From: Rod Keys
Sent: Tuesday, 1 July 2008 2:18 PM
To: info@auda.org.au
Subject: comments on the competition paper from Rod Keys

6.22
The Panel notes that these new registrar business models have
started to appear in the Australian market; of the total 27 auDA
accredited registrars, four entities hold more than one registrar 
accreditation, including one entity which  owns four registrars.

Most registrars who have more then one accreditation have set up legal
company structures to operate the registrar businesses. I put it to the
panel that having more connections to the registry is only one
consideration in our case it was to set up a different business model
and automate more business processes the number of connections to the
registry was not even a consideration in our case.
Building up a business asset is also a consideration as to why a
registrar would have multiple accreditations and if they are run like
separate businesses why should there be any restrictions.

6.21 Currently, there is no restriction on a foreign company (ie. one
that is not located or registered in Australia) becoming an accredited 
registrar.  Concerns have been raised that foreign registrars may be 
unfamiliar with Australian laws and market practices, and their lack 
of local presence and time zone differences may pose customer service 
problems. The Panel also notes that non-Australian registrars do
not have to charge their customers GST, which creates the perception
that they are cheaper than Australian registrars.3 It has been argued 
that only Australian entities should be allowed to apply for registrar 
accreditation, which would be consistent with policy rules that allow 
only Australian entities to register .au domain names.

We think this should be restricted to Australian entities because of GST
and compliance issues. Australian entities understand the Australian
market.


6.25 Panel members have raised the following arguments in relation to
registrar  fees:
* Many other types of fees are indexed, why shouldn't registrar fees be
treated  the same way? On the other hand, the registry and auDA domain
name fees  have been steadily decreasing over time, so why should
registrar fees be  different?
* A significant increase in registrar fees may discourage the practice
of holding  multiple accreditations to maximise connections to the
registry, but it may also act as a barrier to natural market consolidation.
* Reducing registrar fees may lead to a large increase in the number of
applications, causing resourcing and regulatory problems for auDA.



We think the registrar fees are priced at the right level and allows for
the more serious competitors to remain in the market and for new players
to enter the market. It should be noted that ICANN have NOT lowered or
increased the registrars fee during the same period we are not 100%
about this but they still have the $2500 application fee and the yearly
fee of $4000 USD which we think is what the panel is referring.