Hello Richard,

> 
> I would like to see something like the following system adopted:
> 
> 1. The Registry enforces domain name eligibility and policy 
> compliance in software and alerts the registrant (and/or 
> their nominated intermediary, as appropriate) of upcoming 
> domain expiry.
> All trivial stuff which can be done automatically at 
> practically zero incremental cost.
> 
> 2. Anyone with the technical expertise to interface with the 
> registry system can become a registrar. Being a registrar is 
> now a much simpler process (with the registry applying 
> policy) so the fees can be revised downwards to more 
> reasonable levels. My opinion is that the fee could something 
> like a $2000 accreditation fee plus a pre-payment of a few 
> thousand against registrations/renewals to weed out tiny 
> registrars (but even tiny registrars could exist if they saw 
> a commercial advantage in it).
> 

You are describing the current system - except you want to change the
accreditation criteria for a registrar.  auDA recently carried out a
review of this criteria, and I am sure they will again in future.

The existance of resellers is a matter of market dynamics.  It is purely
up to resellers whether they choose to work through a registrar or
become a registrar.  Just as a registrant can choose to operate through
a reseller, registrar or registry (by becoming a registrar).   The
important part of the new regime, is that resellers are required to
comply with the same policies and code of conduct as registrars.

So as Jon Lawrence has pointed out - exercise your choice and become a
registrar if you wish.  It is a simple business decision.  If a
registrar does not provide any value as you claim then become a
registrar.  Or if a reseller provides no value, then go direct to the
registrar.  

I see no reason to limit the number of choices.  It seems to me that you
are arguing for the removal of resellers from the system, rather than
the reverse.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin