Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] JAS WG - just a thought...

["Michele Neylon :: Blacknight" <michele@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 3 May 2010, at 16:19, Anthony Harris wrote:

> Richard,
>  
> Thanks for your comments and questions.
>  
> I would refer to the attached public comment that I
> sent to ICANN shortly after DAG 1 was presented
> to the ICANN community.
>  
> You may note that shortly after, the "Annual Registry
> Fee" minimum charge was reduced from U$S 75.000,
> to U$S 25.000.
>  
> I remain unconvinced that the application fee is either
> reasonable or justifiable as it stands today.

Agreed. I'm sure ICANN can justify it, but you can justify most things if you 
put your mind to it ..


>  
> With regards to your two questions, IMHO the answer
> could be a mixture of both. I would suggest the
> following might be one possible approach:
>  
>   Non-profit entities with at least 2 year status of registration
>   in one country at minimum, be awarded a reduction of the
>   application fee, say for example - 30%. If the application
>   during evaluation process becomes entangled, i.e. is
>   contested and results in a conflictive situation, then the
>   discounted amount could be demanded from the applicant,
>   to compensate for the costs that then ensue.

Recognition might be a better word then "registration"

In Ireland at least charities (not for profits) don't actually "register" per 
se. They are recognised by our Tax office and given a charity number. If they 
don't have the charity number then they're not recognised or considered official

>  
> Whereas I support the enthusiasm expressed on the list for
> establishing a "Foundation" to support underprivileged
> applicants, if the funds this entity will have in trust are to
> be provided from "surplus" income resulting from the
> round of applications, then of course implicitly those
> who would have access to these funds, and be thus
> assisted in stepping up to the new gTLD application
> window, would have to wait for the next round. Having
> seen the way the current round was successfully
> "lobbied" into the receding future, and is already
> about two years off original estimated initiation
> dates, this might not be an equitable solution for
> the parties envisaged.

Agreed.

While it wouldn't be a bad thing to have a solution for future applicant rounds 
etc., we need to focus on the current round.



>  
> I am sure other participants of this list must have
> much better ideas, and remain expectant to
> support them as they emerge.
>  
> Tony
>  
>  
>  
>  
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Richard Tindal
> To: Olof Nordling ; soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx ; Anthony Harris
> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 11:14 AM
> Subject: Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] JAS WG - just a thought...
> 
> Tony/  All,
> 
> Let me start by saying how glad I am this WG is now up and running.   I look 
> forward to us finding ways to assist certain applicants in obtaining and 
> operating TLDs.
> 
> Per the referenced 'Cost Considerations' paper (below)  the $185K evaluation 
> fee is a fairly detailed estimate of the costs of setting up and 
> administering the various policies and processes needed to take applications 
> from submission stage to root entry stage.    
> 
> The $185K is an average based on costs divided by 500 applications.  As most 
> costs are fixed,  the real cost per application will go down if there are 
> substantially more than 500 applications and will go up if there are 
> substantially less than 500 applications.     As the paper states, when the 
> first round is complete, ICANN will assess actual costs and,  if there is a 
> surplus from the $185K:   "ICANN will engage the community in how that excess 
> is to be used".       A subsidization/ refund for certain applicants is one 
> possible use of any surplus.
> 
> Tony - From your comments on the first call I can't tell if you're proposing 
> that:
> 
> A.    the $185K is inaccurate (much too high) and should be reduced for all 
> applicants;  or
> 
> B.    we should try to pre-determine which applications will be cheaper to 
> process and charge them less than $185K at the time of application submission.
> 
> Can you clarify?
> 
> Many thanks
> 
> Richard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On May 3, 2010, at 6:54 AM, Olof Nordling wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Tony and all,
>> Indeed, those interested can find it here: 
>> http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtlds/cost-considerations-23oct08-en.pdf 
>> All the best
>> Olof 
>> 
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Anthony Harris [anthonyrharris@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 10:02 PM
>> To: Olof Nordling
>> Cc: soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] JAS WG - just a thought...
>> 
>> Dear Olof,
>> 
>> For our next call, it might be useful for many, if you could
>> point the WG to a document from the days of DAG 1,
>> wherein ICANN staff explained the rationale that went
>> into setting the application fee. Perhaps some WG
>> participants may not have read it, or indeed if they
>> have it's been a long time...This would be useful
>> material to add to our discussions.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Tony
>> 
>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Olof Nordling <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx> 
>> wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> Pondering how I could assist at this point, I started to look for
>>> potentially informative background information – see a sample below. Yes, it
>>> was inspired by Tony’s mentioning of GKP – I just had to look that up for a
>>> start.
>>> 
>>> Do you find it useful to put such links (without trying to catch all –that
>>> would become unwieldy) in the Wiki?
>>> 
>>> All the best
>>> 
>>> Olof
>>> 
>>> ------------------------
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Support organizations/programs
>>> 
>>> Special Programs and Funds for LDCs at http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/178/
>>> 
>>> UN and civil society/NGOs cooperation regarding LDC at
>>> http://www.unohrlls.org/en/partnerships/related/53/
>>> 
>>> GKP, Global Knowledge Partnership at
>>> http://www.globalknowledgepartnership.org/index.cfm
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Which applicants may need support?
>>> 
>>> Based on country origin?
>>> 
>>> LDC (Least Developed Countries) at
>>> http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/related/62/
>>> 
>>> LDC criteria at http://www.unohrlls.org/en/ldc/related/59/
>>> 
>>> LLDC (Landlocked Developing Countries) at
>>> http://www.unohrlls.org/en/lldc/39/
>>> 
>>> LLDC description at http://www.unohrlls.org/en/lldc/31/
>>> 
>>> SIDS (Small Island Developing States) at http://www.unohrlls.org/en/sids/44/
>>> 
>>> SIDS description at http://www.unohrlls.org/en/sids/43/
>>> 
>>> Based on legal form?
>>> 
>>> Non-profit organizations - structure overview at
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_organizations
>>> 
>>> Non-governmental organizations - structure overview at
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO
>>> 
>>> Based on orientation, goals?
>>> 
>>> Philanthropy, public interest......
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> <AAA-DOT.LAT-COMMENTS I.doc>

Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting & Colocation, Brand Protection
ICANN Accredited Registrar
http://www.blacknight.com/
http://blog.blacknight.com/
http://mneylon.tel
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
US: 213-233-1612 
UK: 0844 484 9361
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Fax. +353 (0) 1 4811 763
-------------------------------
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845