Re: Transfers: A bit of an explanation

From: sys@zanmai.com
Date: Mon Apr 03 2000 - 03:23:44 EDT


At 04:54 AM 4/3/00 -0400, !Dr. Joe Baptista wrote:
>
>
>On Mon, 3 Apr 2000 sys@zanmai.com wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't it be nice if, in this thread especially, only those
>> businesspersons who have had direct, actual experience with CC chargebacks
>> and theft/fraud loss
>> reply ... and the dreamers and perfect-worlders keep the delusions to a
>> minimum.
>
>The goal is to reduce chargebacks and the "cost of doing
>business".

One way to reduce them is not to take credit cards at all.
Another way is to deliver products and services that are of
quality and satisfy the customer.

Delivering a domain name is rather undisputable from the customer's
position, either they got the name or they didn't. This whole thread is
a non-issue, a figment of someone's imagination. Please source one first hand
domain reseller who has had any consistent and significant occurrences
of actual chargebacks on domain names, and what ration is their actual loss
to net sales?

> Variable costs like chargebacks remain steady with
>volumn.

This make no sense given the common English meaning of
the words you used, in fact it is contradictory.

> The trick is not to account for them - but eliminate them
>altogether.

Sure ...in a perfect world. In the meantime, Visa, MC, AMX and the
rest of the worldwide retail industry would rather concentrate on
matters not so trivial .

>If you do you own credit card sales your at greater risk then if you
>subcontract the credit card sale. I use www.ibill.com. They maintain a
>tracking database of abusive chargebacks which lowers your risk and
>exposure, which i think is the aim here.

No, that's not the purported aim of this plaintive thread. The thread
started off with a straw man argument, the specious request that OpenSRS
should give the resellers ownership/control over the domain names to
prevent/reduce "thieves".

Of course the plaintiffs didn't listen when it was pointed out the even if
they
did have ownership/control of bogus names, it would not put one single $
back into their RSU account, so their argument was rendered moot from the
start ...
but they keep clamoring ... and tilting at mythical windmills.

Cheers,
Eric Ross
QuickNames.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:35:28 EDT