Charles, Your comments on monopolies[1] can be applied to the Registry Industry which is currently going through its early development years. Of special interest is the notion of *implosion*. I am not sure I agree that implosion comes from size and bloat. Instead, it can come from consumer rejection of a system that taxes them to a point where they walk away or "route around the damage" using one of the Internet slogans. It appears that the Registry Industry is about to go through a serious period of implosion. The U.S. Government has spent a considerable amount of time and energy studying the Registry Industry and they are now poised to start getting it under control. Unfortunately, it appears that their solutions for controlling the industry will NOT result in expanding competition but instead will focus on bringing the small group of insiders into a small common structure that will allow the U.S. Government to watch them with a large spot-light. This will likely make the structure implode because these insiders have not been used to any scrutiny and have moved freely from one place on the planet to another with little or no government supervision. As people try to escape this government scrutiny, the small circle of insiders will get smaller and consumers will have a clearer picture of what is happening under the hot lights of that big spot-light. The combination of consumer exodus and participant exodus makes the structure implode. At several points in this process it appeared that the U.S. Government was going to support helping to make the Registry Industry an *explosive" situation. It should not be surprising that the industry insiders recommended against this because this would have pulled their small power structure apart as the big bang expansion occurred and companies moved away from the small circle of friends that control all of the resources. It should not be surprising that given a choice between an implosive solution and an explosive plan the U.S. Government would opt for the implosive approach. There are several reasons for this: 1. The U.S. Government can control the implosive plan. 2. The implosive approach does not frighten people. 3. The explosive approach could be unpredictable. 4. The explosive approach allows people off the hook. 5. The implosive approach requires far less understanding of the industry on the part of the U.S. Government. 6. The implosive approach does NOT preclude the explosive approach to happen at the edges. The last 2 points are probably the most compelling reasons why the U.S. Government will opt to control the Registry Industry to a point where it implodes as opposed to becoming involved in explosive strategies. They do not have the time and energy to really understand the Registry Industry and while they "help" the insiders implode other people can work to facilitate the expansion of a new Registry Industry at the edges and the U.S. Government can stand back and watch with little or no effort or knowledge required. In summary, you and others might be mistaking the apparent support of the U.S. Government for monopolies with the U.S. Government's two pronged approach to the problem. One, round up the monopolists into smaller and smaller cliques and watch them carefully while, two, taking a hands-off approach to the people and companies that offer explosive solutions that may catch on if the clique is not allowed to expand. Unfortunately, this does not look good because it gives the appearance that the U.S. Government is devoting all of its resources to the monopolists. This is no different than what happens on school yards all around the world. The teachers spend their time rounding up the small number of children that misbehave to watch them carefully, while the other children are left unsupervised to grow and prosper. It is unfortunate that all of these systems favor the approach where resources are spent on the small minority of monopolists that cause the majority of society to suffer by denying them more explosive opportunities. The key to moving forward is for society to understand what the U.S. Government is doing to provide them freedom to provide something better. If that happens then the majority of resources will be shifted to the explosive solutions which is the way it should be. Jim Fleming ====== [1] On Saturday, May 16, 1998 3:29 PM, charles mueller[SMTP:cmueller@metrolink.net] wrote: @ A century after a gang of Robber Barons successfully monopolized the @U.S. economy under the slogan, 'Monopoly Is Efficient,' we're seeing a @reenactment under precisely the same banner. We never learn. Over 200 @years ago, Adam Smith was quite clear that, far from being a fount of @efficiency, monopoly is the mother of bloat: "Monopoly, besides, is a great @enemy of good management, which can never be universally established but in @consequence of that free and universal competition which forces everybody to @have recourse to it for the sake of self-defence." @ @ Bloated costs are an inevitable effect of economic monopoly and, @with those inflated costs, monopolies have no choice but to charge @higher-than-competitive prices, thus imposing on the public what Smith aptly @characterizes as a 'private tax,' one levied precisely in the interest of @economic INefficiency: "It is for the most worthless of all purposes too @that they [consumers] are taxed in this manner. It is merely to enable the @[monopoly] to support the negligence, profusion, and malversation of their @own servants [managers and employees], whose disorderly conduct seldom @allows the dividend of the company to exceed the ordinary rate of profit in @trades which are altogether free, and very frequently makes it fall even a @good deal short of that rate." In time, monopolies implode, becoming so @bloated that--even with their inflated prices--they can't earn even a @normal, competitive profit. U.S. Steel, IBM, GM, Xerox, Sears, the list @goes on. @ - Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.net IPv8 - Designed for the Rest of the Human Race AM Radio Stations ---> http://www.DOT.AM