Discussions of Messaging Engine's cobranded email services - Page 6

oysterquartz · 10 Oct 2003, 03:23 AM

Actually, licensing makes sense as does outsourcing or having an ASP model. However, the "client" or co-brander would have much more control over their service.

However, running a competing service doesn't make much sense. Its one thing to pitch your service/model to the corporate world, etc. But the ME model is quasi affiliate in nature and assumes someone setting up a webmail service to compete with fastmail.fm, which always has the power to undercut the cobrander

23 Oct 2003, 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bitequator
This is OT, but incidentally I found it strange that eNom would set their enduser domain prices so much higher than their resellers ($30-50 vs. $9-30)? And yet they still seem to be getting direct subscribers in the millions like GoDaddy while individual resellers would be happy to have a few thousand...

That is pritty crazy! I guess it goes to show why companies will sue for millions for brandname trademark violations - brand names simply sell! (theres no way I would pay $30-50 for a domain, unless it was a really good one!)

reuben · 23 Oct 2003, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oysterquartz
But the ME model is quasi affiliate in nature and assumes someone setting up a webmail service to compete with fastmail.fm, which always has the power to undercut the cobrander

so what!? regardless of the technicalities, they're making money off of the "competition." if j&r didn't make money off of the deal, or they wouldn't do it. it's more like a franchise in nature.

now, i agree that the whole thing sounds like a bad orwellian scheme someone sold them late at a bar after 7 beers one night, and if FM were mine i would never do it, but hey, if it works, it works, and as long as the fm service doesn't suffer i don't have reason to complain. and i must say the rate of improvement to the fastmail service itself has increased dramatically recently.

oysterquartz · 24 Oct 2003, 12:24 AM

You may have misunderstood my point. I other instances, a provider wouldn't (or shouldn't

) compete on the same service, same features basis with a client and potentially undercut them in price.

Conflict of interest no? Yes it may be good for fastmail.fm (which is a co-brander "owned" by ME), but from the standpoint of someone wanting to be an independent co-brander, its not in their best interests to compete with, and be undercut by FM.

unhappysoul · 24 Oct 2003, 09:22 AM

Just to test,

I tried to signup OKMAIL and I entered my fastmail username

onto OKmail singup application and it said

****** user already exist *******

I do have common name but not combination of my first and

last name combination. I mean I signup hundres of free email

and so far no problem.... Here, new service and someone already

have my first/last name? I think OK mail application is comparing

the name against FASTMAIL user name list......

check it out !!!!!!!

s a · 24 Oct 2003, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by unhappysoul
Just to test,

I tried to signup OKMAIL and I entered my fastmail username

onto OKmail singup application and it said

user already exists

Your username currently locks out that name across all domains including cobranders. That's why we are having so many problems with spam thats bounced to ourusernames@ inbox.com.

Similarly mail to your username @okmail will currently reach your fastmail inbox.

24 Oct 2003, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by unhappysoul
I think OK mail application is comparing

the name against FASTMAIL user name list......

check it out !!!!!!!

Its to do with the domain separation issues. At the moment co branders like okmail and inbox.com are connected with all the rest of the fastmail domain names.

reuben · 28 Oct 2003, 05:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by oysterquartz
You may have misunderstood my point. I other instances, a provider wouldn't (or shouldn't ) compete on the same service, same features basis with a client and potentially undercut them in price.

Conflict of interest no? Yes it may be good for fastmail.fm (which is a co-brander "owned" by ME), but from the standpoint of someone wanting to be an independent co-brander, its not in their best interests to compete with, and be undercut by FM.

i would disagree that it's a conflict of interest because they may have their own non-profit-driven motives. but either way, my main concern is that FM lives longer than i do, so if people want to use a mail engine service that pools funds on some level with FM, then so be it. you can't build railroads without steel, and if the people selling the steel want to build their own little privately funded kick-*** railroad on the side, with money directly from the competition, then i'm not complaining.

hadaso · 29 Oct 2003, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Edwin
...

SOON
Once MessagingEngine.com sort out the interface module, cobranders will be able to customize the user interface much more than they can right now. This can lead to additional ways to differentiate their service offerings.

...

Once the user interface can be customized, Non-English interfaces can be offered by co-branders. This market includes billions of people who are not yet online, but will be in the future.

oysterquartz · 30 Oct 2003, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by reuben
i would disagree that it's a conflict of interest because they may have their own non-profit-driven motives. but either way, my main concern is that FM lives longer than i do, so if people want to use a mail engine service that pools funds on some level with FM, then so be it. you can't build railroads without steel, and if the people selling the steel want to build their own little privately funded kick-*** railroad on the side, with money directly from the competition, then i'm not complaining.

How would the competing railway owner feel if the railway line which built and managed his service, then opens a track side by side to his own, and has the ability to undercut his business.

Of course its good for FM. I was indicating that this conflict was not necessarily good for the co-brander.

bitequator · 30 Oct 2003, 05:58 AM

It's interesting, are the relationships of various domain ICANN registrars and their resellers kinda similar? eNom's retail enduser pricing is much higher than reseller pricing (of which there are many levels). But GoDaddy's own pricing I think is just as competitive as their Wild West Domains resellers. Tucows' Domain Direct pricing I guess also in line with their OpenSRS resellers?

oysterquartz · 30 Oct 2003, 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bitequator
It's interesting, are the relationships of various domain ICANN registrars and their resellers kinda similar? eNom's retail enduser pricing is much higher than reseller pricing (of which there are many levels). But GoDaddy's own pricing I think is just as competitive as their Wild West Domains resellers. Tucows' Domain Direct pricing I guess also in line with their OpenSRS resellers?

Well, ultimately its a different business, and very low margin. The all have to pay NSI about $6 USD/yr on average for .com and .net. In eNom's case, they actually do not compete with their resellers, given the fact that they "overprice" their services relative to ANY other eNom reseller (by a factor of 2-4 times!).

You could argue the same for NSI or Register.com. Both, along with eNom emphatically price their services at a premium, and then allow their resellers to compete on price undercutting their "suppliers". That's not the same as the ME model, or anyone thats similar. If it were, then FM would be priced at a premium to any other co-brander.

**JeffK** · 12 Apr 2004, 10:32 AM

I continue to be amazed at the relatively high price of the OKmail cobrander. A huge range of domain names spoilt by outrageous prices. FM's $15 one time, $20 and $40 being $25 pa, $35 and $55 respectively.

The reason I say this is when I showed my wife the list of FM domains for her new account she grunted. When I showed her the OKmail list she got all excited (a rare occurrence!)and picked several straightaway.

Anybody out there with an OKmail alias account?

Jeff

Killer · 12 Apr 2004, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JeffK
The reason I say this is when I showed my wife the list of FM domains for her new account she grunted. When I showed her the OKmail list she got all excited (a rare occurrence!)and picked several straightaway.

The name game or the price game?

bitequator · 12 Apr 2004, 12:19 PM

Jeff I thought you were with Inbox.com but then switched to only using your own domains? Now back to another ME cobrander?

Sorry if I'm wrong, have a really bad memory...

24 Oct 2003, 09:22 AM	#80
unhappysoul Cornerstone of the Community Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 504	funny Just to test, I tried to signup OKMAIL and I entered my fastmail username onto OKmail singup application and it said **** user already exist ***** I do have common name but not combination of my first and last name combination. I mean I signup hundres of free email and so far no problem.... Here, new service and someone already have my first/last name? I think OK mail application is comparing the name against FASTMAIL user name list...... check it out !!!!!!!

10 Oct 2003, 03:23 AM	#76
oysterquartz The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Athens Posts: 2,402	Actually, licensing makes sense as does outsourcing or having an ASP model. However, the "client" or co-brander would have much more control over their service. However, running a competing service doesn't make much sense. Its one thing to pitch your service/model to the corporate world, etc. But the ME model is quasi affiliate in nature and assumes someone setting up a webmail service to compete with fastmail.fm, which always has the power to undercut the cobrander

24 Oct 2003, 12:24 AM	#79
oysterquartz The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Athens Posts: 2,402	You may have misunderstood my point. I other instances, a provider wouldn't (or shouldn't ) compete on the same service, same features basis with a client and potentially undercut them in price. Conflict of interest no? Yes it may be good for fastmail.fm (which is a co-brander "owned" by ME), but from the standpoint of someone wanting to be an independent co-brander, its not in their best interests to compete with, and be undercut by FM.

30 Oct 2003, 05:58 AM	#86
bitequator The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: USA Posts: 2,978	It's interesting, are the relationships of various domain ICANN registrars and their resellers kinda similar? eNom's retail enduser pricing is much higher than reseller pricing (of which there are many levels). But GoDaddy's own pricing I think is just as competitive as their Wild West Domains resellers. Tucows' Domain Direct pricing I guess also in line with their OpenSRS resellers?

12 Apr 2004, 10:32 AM	#88
JeffK Moderator Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Kingaroy, AU Posts: 3,177	I continue to be amazed at the relatively high price of the OKmail cobrander. A huge range of domain names spoilt by outrageous prices. FM's $15 one time, $20 and $40 being $25 pa, $35 and $55 respectively. The reason I say this is when I showed my wife the list of FM domains for her new account she grunted. When I showed her the OKmail list she got all excited (a rare occurrence!)and picked several straightaway. Anybody out there with an OKmail alias account? Jeff

12 Apr 2004, 12:19 PM	#90
bitequator The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: USA Posts: 2,978	Jeff I thought you were with Inbox.com but then switched to only using your own domains? Now back to another ME cobrander? Sorry if I'm wrong, have a really bad memory...