UKNM: RE: Tuvalu

[John Braithwaite]

> John, firstly they aren't the poorest country on the Earth.

>

> Perhaps not.  But they're damned close.


er. not that close really.


>> Secondly they

>> are not getting their GDP increased by that amount, they got a lump sum

>> (again, not a bright move).

>>

>http://www.tv/en-def-8c63c9ab795d/en/about/about_tuvalu.shtml

>http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/tv.html

>

>$4m minimum, every year for ten years.  Or

>over $100 per capita per year.  Forty million

>dollars for a place with a GDP of $7.8m.

>

>"Not a bright move"?  Fool.


It is a lump sum - spread over a period of time. What happens after ten

years? They are fools - did the company who are marketing the '.tv' domain

names expect to make a loss? I don't think they will. If business.tv is

going for $1m on it's own, it may not be too difficult to work out that the

company running this thing is going to make far more than $40m over ten

years.


They are being taken advantage of. If they had received good advice they

could have done all of this themselves - made more money and, more

importantly - controlled the .tv domains and levered their own home-grown

businesses.


>> Thirdly, they have sold out their

>> right to have

>> a country-specific domain name for companies that actually work there,

>> opting out of that part of the digital economy.

>>

>You mean Tuvalan web companies (I'll bet

>there are loads) are forbidden from paying

>$50 to their national registrar and getting

>a domain?

>

>And the government's deal with dotTV is

>in perpituity instead of a 10-year lease?

>

>No, thought not.


Y'see John, there are always two perspectives. I see this as inhibiting the

companies (and government) of Tuvalu to use the added advantage of the .tv

domains. Hey - I paid �9.99 for a .co.uk domain the other day and this won't

incrementally increase over a period of time. Also, although the Tuvalu

government have leased this thing - how on earth are they going to have the

knowledge-base and expertise in ten years' time to run this (see UK National

Lottery farce for details)? They won't. If it is successful then they may

have a case for increasing the fee - but they may not have much choice in

the matter.


Personally, I see it as 'taking advantage of' rather than 'giving value to'.

They have been seduced by the 'zeroes' without being able to see the value.

It's not far away from what we used to do with cotton to the third world and

that is why I think it is a mistake.


[Sam says: thanks Johns, let's come back to this in a few months and see how

they're still doing.]



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 looking for useful books about the new media biz?

 check out the UKNM books page for some suggestions:

 http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing/books.shtml

      Email suggestions to:

helpchinwag [dot] com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  To unsubscribe or change your list settings go to

http://www.chinwag.com/uk-netmarketing or

helpchinwag [dot] com