Tweet

By: James Koole on April 28th, 2008
Posted in: Industry News
Tags: CIRA
Comments: 1

After much deliberation and consultation (in other words, in true Canadian fashion), the Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) has announced that WHOIS Privacy will go into effect on .ca domain names beginning June 10th, 2008.

The CIRA approach to WHOIS privacy is quite interesting and demonstrates a clear desire to protect the privacy of Registrants. There is full information on the new policies at the CIRA website.

In his Law Bytes column in today’s Toronto Star, Michael Geist calls the new policy “a model for domain name registries around the world.”

Geist goes on to suggest that CIRA is now in a global leadership position on the issue of registrant privacy. Geist writes, “With more than a million Canadian domain name registrations, the resolution of the whois issue ensures that the Canadian domain name space is set for continued growth as it now features a “privacy advantage” over other domains struggling to strike a similar compromise.”

What makes the CIRA policy different is that WHOIS privacy is enabled by default for individual domain owners. Registrants have to specifically opt-out with CIRA to have their information displayed. In contrast, the registration information for corporate domain holders is shown by default, however, they can opt-out and hide the information in what CIRA calls special circumstances.

As you would expect, we’ll be fully complying with the new policies. We’ll have more on how things will work from both a Registrar and from the Reseller perspective soon.

Tweet

By: James Koole on April 23rd, 2008
Posted in: Reseller Resources
Tags:
Comments: 2

Starbucks has a new deal where if you pay for purchases with a registered Starbucks card, you can take advantage of a bunch of different rewards. The perks range from free flavour shots in espresso drinks to unlimited refills of coffee as long as you stay in the store.

At first blush, it would seem that the net result of this reward program would be a decrease in sales, and a decrease in revenue. So why would Starbucks do it?

I realized exactly why today as I bought my morning coffee.

One of the nicest perks is the free drink with the purchase of one pound of ground coffee. We needed coffee at home, so I decided to buy a pound of coffee and score a free drink. I don’t often buy coffee from the Starbucks store because we can buy it at the local grocery store instead. So today, Starbucks took in $14 in revenue from me instead of $3.50. That’s a nice increase and all they had to do was give me a free coffee.

The unlimited refills deal works the same way. If I sit in Starbucks for a half an hour and drink a cup of coffee, I’ll have left $1.55 behind. But if they refill that coffee twice, chances are I’ll probably buy one of their new (and very yummy) donuts to go with that coffee. Net result, I’ll leave behind $3.50 instead and they take in double the revenue for the meagre expense of refilling my cup twice.

Coffee is a commodity product. Starbucks used to be able to charge more for that cup because it offered a premium coffee, and a unique experience. But now a good cup of coffee can be found in a multitude of places (including McDonald’s) and the experience is no longer unique. Starbucks has to think different to win in a crowded and competitive marketplace.

On the Internet, the story is similar. Hosting, email and online services are regularly offered for free, or nearly free. The quality of the experience is similar regardless of the price the consumer pays and so the consumer quickly looks to low price as a determining factor when choosing a service provider.

Like Starbucks, providers of Internet services have to explore new and different ways to stand out and offer alternatives that will act as a catalyst to increase revenues.

Offer free web services and users will look at your revenue generating ads. Offer a free domain name and users will pay for hosting. Offer a free blog and users will pay for a Personal Names domain that points to it. Offer hosting extras in exchange for a yearly prepayment or a long-term contract. Offer unlimited domains on a single hosting package and users will buy more domains. Offer a starter package for free and users will graduate into a paid plan.

Some creative thinking can easily translate into increased revenues and better, more loyal customers. Think about it next time you order that tall bold.

Tweet

By: James Koole on April 17th, 2008
Posted in: Events
Tags: ISPCON 2008
Comments: 0

ISPCON Spring 2008 is less than a month away. That means there’s only a few days left to take advantage of free exhibits and events passes.

If you are planning to attend ISPCON, head over to their website to sign up today. The free exhibits and events pass offer only lasts through April 18th. Also of note, the price for conference and one-day passes also goes up after April 18th as well.

Tucows will be at ISPCON again this spring. Elliot Noss, Tucows CEO and President will offer up his thoughts in a keynote address on Wednesday, May 14th. Elliot will explain “Why YOU and lowfat lattes are Google’s Worst Nightmare.”

In addition, Rohan Jayasekera, Director, Tucows Email Service, will be participating in a panel discussion. That session, “Who Should Be Running Your Email,” is scheduled for the Wednesday, May 14th, but check the ISPCON conference schedule for the official word on times and for information about the other sessions.

We look forward to seeing you there.

Tweet

By: James Koole on April 10th, 2008
Posted in: Industry News
Tags:
Comments: 0

Seth Godin has an interesting post over at his blog today in which he debates the question, “Drop the dot?” as in, can we get rid of the dot com when talking about websites.

Godin says no, because saying dot com is easy to say – just four letters, two syllables – and pretty much leaves it at that. But let’s weigh the possibilities:

Yes, drop it

On the “Yes, forget the dot com” side, there’s the Google angle. Type the brand into Google, and it will find it for you. There have been a couple of stories floating around the Internet of late that talk about companies in Japan doing just that, and displaying their brand in a search box instead of showing a URL.

No, it’s not that simple

On the “No way, you need the dot com” side, there’s the Google angle as well. Relying on Google keywords puts a lot of power into the hands of Google (or Microsoft or Yahoo, depending on which search engine you choose). What if your brand isn’t number one?

It turns out that Google is pretty much perfect when it comes to brand searches. I tried dozens and the first result was always what I expected it to be.

Next argument: what about all the other domain suffixes? The American Cancer Society uses cancer.org for its website and doesn’t own cancer.com. Whitehouse.gov is another classic example — whitehouse.com is a political news website (and famously, it used to be a porn site).

The American Cancer Society is the number one Google result when you search for cancer. And a search for whitehouse returns whitehouse.gov first.

To some, Google is the Internet

I think the question really comes down to how people are using the Internet. Do people pay attention to domain names at all, or is it assumed that a company can be found at [brandname] plus dot com? Or are users now skipping the address bar and directly typing names into Google?

Recently pizza.com sold at auction for $2.6 million. It was suggested that Pizza Hut, Papa John’s or Dominos should buy the name. But when users want pizza, and they go to the Internet and type pizza into the search bar, what do they see? PizzaHut.com, followed by PapaJohns.com, followed by Dominos.com. Just what is that $2.6 million buying you and do you need it?

Maybe the dot com is superfluous after all. Thoughts?

Tweet

By: James Koole on April 10th, 2008
Posted in: Industry News
Tags:
Comments: 0

Seth Godin has an interesting post over at his blog today in which he debates the question, “Drop the dot?” as in, can we get rid of the dot com when talking about websites.

Godin says no, because saying dot com is easy to say – just four letters, two syllables – and pretty much leaves it at that. But let’s weigh the possibilities:

Yes, drop it

On the “Yes, forget the dot com” side, there’s the Google angle. Type the brand into Google, and it will find it for you. There have been a couple of stories floating around the Internet of late that talk about companies in Japan doing just that, and displaying their brand in a search box instead of showing a URL.

No, it’s not that simple

On the “No way, you need the dot com” side, there’s the Google angle as well. Relying on Google keywords puts a lot of power into the hands of Google (or Microsoft or Yahoo, depending on which search engine you choose). What if your brand isn’t number one?

It turns out that Google is pretty much perfect when it comes to brand searches. I tried dozens and the first result was always what I expected it to be.

Next argument: what about all the other domain suffixes? The American Cancer Society uses cancer.org for its website and doesn’t own cancer.com. Whitehouse.gov is another classic example — whitehouse.com is a political news website (and famously, it used to be a porn site).

The American Cancer Society is the number one Google result when you search for cancer. And a search for whitehouse returns whitehouse.gov first.

To some, Google is the Internet

I think the question really comes down to how people are using the Internet. Do people pay attention to domain names at all, or is it assumed that a company can be found at [brandname] plus dot com? Or are users now skipping the address bar and directly typing names into Google?

Recently pizza.com sold at auction for $2.6 million. It was suggested that Pizza Hut, Papa John’s or Dominos should buy the name. But when users want pizza, and they go to the Internet and type pizza into the search bar, what do they see? PizzaHut.com, followed by PapaJohns.com, followed by Dominos.com. Just what is that $2.6 million buying you and do you need it?

Maybe the dot com is superfluous after all. Thoughts?