ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[2gtld-guide]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

New gTLD Applicant Guidebook Version 2 Comments by NIC Mexico

  • To: "2gtld-guide@xxxxxxxxx" <2gtld-guide@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: New gTLD Applicant Guidebook Version 2 Comments by NIC Mexico
  • From: Roger Castillo <rcastillo@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 21:10:37 -0500

New gTLD Applicant Guidebook Version 2 Comments by  NIC Mexico

Dear Paul, Kurt
and all members of ICANN Staff

In response to the ICANN call for comments on the 2nd draft of the New gTLD 
Applicant Guidebook, we submit some observations and recommendations in an 
effort to collaborate on having a fair and successful round for the 
introduction of new gTLDs.

First of all, we would like to acknowledge the effort of all involved in the 
Guidebook development and the new gTLD process. We know it's been a lot of hard 
work.

But again, in this second version of the Guidebook there's something that needs 
more attention:

1.      Openness, Change, Innovation
We're missing the foundations for a really diverse and innovative showcase of 
new gTLD proposals. You need a lot of funding in addition to the start-up 
capital, in order to follow the application process, with the application fees 
and all associated costs. Your business model must not be to far from .COM

2.      Fees
As we said in the first comment period the fee structures must be revised in 
order to allow for small communities not only participate in the process with 
an application, but also have a well balanced and sustainable business without 
excessive or unjustified burdens.

ICANN must be sure to provide the rules for a game everybody can play. Those 
rules should be flexible enough to allow game variations according to the 
strengths of each player.

*        If the gTLD is going to be a success, it is fair and straightforward 
that ICANN would participate of the success, taking its share of the revenue.
*        If the business have some problems, or the proceeds are not as planed, 
or cannot reach a sustainable level, ICANN shouldn't collect its share from the 
benefits, as these could be inexistent.
*        Furthermore, in the case of business failure ICANN must not be the 
cause.

The policy-development-cost-recovery component should be removed from the fee 
(26K) and the risk component (60k) as both are not justified. The first one 
because of the very nature of ICANN: policy development should not be conducted 
in a recovery-based fashion. The risk component should be removed because of 
fairness with the non-contentious applications. We suggest a reduced 
application fee and a pay-as-you-go scheme. Extended evaluation and contention 
costs would be covered by extended and contentious applications.

3.      Timeline
In order to participate in the next round of the new gTLD process it is 
necessary to do a very intense strategic and business planning, resources must 
be committed and alliances and partnerships must be signed. The uncertainty of 
the timeline puts an extra burden to business planning and makes it very risky 
for investors and contracted parties.

Attachment: New gTLD AGB - Version 2, by NIC Mexico.pdf
Description: New gTLD AGB - Version 2, by NIC Mexico.pdf



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy