When Telnic will get a new CEO?

I was thinking about opening a topic for this question many times before, because I have read comments like this at least 5 times:

hulltv wrote:new management will happen this is part of the reason i first got my dot tels just hankg on in there this lot will soon be gone.

Certainly the staff members at Telnic are doing the best they can, and I hesitated to escalate this problem even more.
But it is clear the current crisis of .tel is caused by a bad strategy which is not able to reach customers (or is even scaring them away).
Telnic need a CEO who has the courage to make reasonable marketing for a great product, encourage the employees to build partnerships with phone companies and software developers instead of shutting down all communication and is wisely enough to understand that a product needs to be developed.

Correct: If a company ignores all customer wishes, that's the management responsibility.
The worst idea of the current management was creating Telnames!
.tel didn't need a new company for a better template; Telnic itself need a template like the one at Telnames (including subdomains).

When Telnic will get a new CEO?

Telnic won't - simple as that !

Kash (see http://Kash.tel) is both CEO of Telnic Ltd. and Telnames Ltd., as well as the man behind .tel for so many years - it is inconceviable that he will be replaced UNLESS there is a sale of Telnic Ltd.

If the Telnic registry part of the operation were to be sold off, then I would imagine Kash would stay with the Telnames operation and the new owners would decide how they were going to run and promote the registry side.

Kash used to give a State of .Tel report once a year (from memory I think it was in December) but that seems to have gone by the board, along with the Roadmap, .Telegraph newsletter, and so much else !

So unless the Telnic registry is sold off I would be really surprised to see any significant changes in the management team.

http://MikeSeaton.tel

TelKing wrote:.tel didn't need a new company for a better template; Telnic itself need a template like the one at Telnames (including subdomains).

Not only that!
Can you imagine the potential if Telnic would have provided the new Mobile Website Builder app for iPhone to all registrars?
Telnic could have developed it and let every registrar customize it with their logo and their individual sales price.
That is all it would have needed to provide the app to a large amount of prospects, but Telnic preferred to keep the new app only for themselves!
That is really, really bad!

mikeseaton wrote:Kash (see http://Kash.tel) is both CEO of Telnic Ltd. and Telnames Ltd., as well as the man behind .tel for so many years - it is inconceviable that he will be replaced UNLESS there is a sale of Telnic Ltd.

What if the shareholders will fire him because of the bad performance since 2009?

Sunrise wrote:Telnic could have developed it and let every registrar customize it with their logo and their individual sales price.
That is all it would have needed to provide the app to a large amount of prospects, but Telnic preferred to keep the new app only for themselves!
That is really, really bad!

It's bad and in addition a violation of the ICANN agreement:
http://www.teltalk.org/t559p32-icann-complaint-against-telnames#2853

Sunrise wrote:What if the shareholders will fire him because of the bad performance since 2009?

As a shareholder I would be dissatisfied just as many of us are!

Sunrise wrote:

mikeseaton wrote:Kash (see http://Kash.tel) is both CEO of Telnic Ltd. and Telnames Ltd., as well as the man behind .tel for so many years - it is inconceviable that he will be replaced UNLESS there is a sale of Telnic Ltd.

What if the shareholders will fire him because of the bad performance since 2009?

A dangerous game for shareholders to play with a small company that has a highly technical product !

It would only need 2 or 3 key directors/staff to depart at the same time - maybe to form a competitor to .tel - and Telnic would be in real trouble.

Mind you, some might say they are in "real trouble" now anyway !

http://MikeSeaton.tel

Sunrise wrote:What if the shareholders will fire him because of the bad performance since 2009?

What if the management tried some ways to market .tel, will notice they have failed (as they obviously did) and will decide to chose a more proactive and customer friendly business strategy in the future?
To change a business strategy, you don't necessarily need to exchange the management.

mikeseaton wrote:

Sunrise wrote:

mikeseaton wrote:Kash (see http://Kash.tel) is both CEO of Telnic Ltd. and Telnames Ltd., as well as the man behind .tel for so many years - it is inconceviable that he will be replaced UNLESS there is a sale of Telnic Ltd.

What if the shareholders will fire him because of the bad performance since 2009?

A dangerous game for shareholders to play with a small company that has a highly technical product !

It would only need 2 or 3 key directors/staff to depart at the same time - maybe to form a competitor to .tel - and Telnic would be in real trouble.

How a new CEO with fresh ideas can harm the business of Telnic?
And I'm not worried about only 1 more competitor; with the nTLD we will have 2,000 more competitor next year already!

Sunrise wrote:What if the shareholders will fire him because of the bad performance since 2009?

We don't know what is going on at Telnic; perhaps the shareholders instructed the CEO to keep the budget small and he is not the bad guy in this game!

Telminator wrote:

Sunrise wrote:What if the shareholders will fire him because of the bad performance since 2009?

What if the management tried some ways to market .tel, will notice they have failed (as they obviously did) and will decide to chose a more proactive and customer friendly business strategy in the future?
To change a business strategy, you don't necessarily need to exchange the management.

Agreed - but if you have any Licence Agreement (Telnic's .tel agreement with ICANN runs for 10 years, not sure what is the start date) you have to stick to the terms of the agreement or risk having it cancelled and/or being fined.

Some believe that the licence terms have been broken with the creation of the Telnic Ltd. wholly-owned resale operation Telnames Ltd. - see http://www.teltalk.org/t642-is-telnames-allowed-to-sell-domains

We will soon find out if ICANN agree - and if so what will be the fate of the the Telnic/Telnames operation.

How The **** can Telnic Limited alienate its customers (.tel registrants), wholesalers (Telnic registrars with its Telnames "direct sell" of a more desirable product) and potentially its own supplier (ICANN) all in one go ?

http://MikeSeaton.tel

mikeseaton wrote:

How The **** can Telnic Limited alienate its customers (.tel registrants), wholesalers (Telnic registrars with its Telnames "direct sell" of a more desirable product) and potentially its own supplier (ICANN) all in one go ?

http://MikeSeaton.tel

All I can say is: How The **** can ICANN accredited registrars sign up to sell .tel domains, take all our money for years and do no development? (DM) no1 tel registrar when it first came out, did nothing, charged double what name.com asks.

Telnames does plenty of development (apps), marketing (direct to people who are likely to need a tel and pay for it) and other things and even charges double what name.com asks and still get's picked on as if they're not doing enough. Well they're not seeing eye to eye with you all I get that but what company does?

You know if they marketed it to everyone it would be a waste of money, surgical marketing is highly strategical to building their brand and promoting the best side of dot tel, marketing it to clueless people and companies who think they have everything they need was not the best way to go.

I also don't even think the videos they have now should be considered viral's, they're just great but not in the sense where people get outraged and thrown into a steam over what they don't understand and can't believe they're seeing.

Telnames videos are clear and to the point, easy to understand so please don't mention them as viral's.

fustachio.tel wrote:All I can say is: How The **** can ICANN accredited registrars sign up to sell .tel domains, take all our money for years and do no development?

@fustachio.tel - there's a very simple answer to your question !

A registrars BUSINESS MODEL is to sell the REGISTRATION & RENEWAL of domain names, in huge volumes, for as many extensions as possible that are profitable to them.

NOT Sofware Development, which is why NONE of them accepted Telnic's invitation to develop their own .tel proxy.

It really is as straightforward as that !

http://MikeSeaton.tel

Why we need a new CEO? We need smarter customers with a realistic view instead!