RE: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Action points - JAS WG call 8 June

["Tijani BEN JEMAA" <tijani.benjemaa@xxxxxxxx>]

Dear Elaine,

 

In the FY2011 budget, I see that there are still strings that don’t pay
fixed fee, and that pay less than $ 0.25 per transaction (0.23 for .biz and
.info, and 0.20 for .name, .org and .travel).

 

Some of those strings are really prosper, and we are looking for support to
“poor” applicants. Can’t we request for the reduction of registry-level
transaction fee of $ 0.25 ???

 

See you in Brussels 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Executive Director 

Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations

Phone : + 216 70 825 231

Mobile : + 216 98 330 114

Fax     : + 216 70 825 231

------------------------------------------------------------------

 

  _____  

De : Elaine Pruis [mailto:elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Envoyé : lundi 14 juin 2010 15:10
À : Tijani BEN JEMAA
Cc : soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Objet : Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Action points - JAS WG call 8 June

 

Thanks Tijani for your comments. 



Proposal 1: how can we say that the number of supported applicants will not
exceed 7 or any other figure? What are the tools that we used to estimate
this number?

I changed "seven" to "several".  I thought it was peculiar that the net
profit was easily dividable by 26k.





I propose to say simply that the net profit of 184,600 can be used to fully
or partially compensate the loss of waiving the programme development cost.

I added the "fully or partially" language.





 

Proposal 2: I propose to replace “$185K” by “application fees” because we
are asking for fees reduction, so if we manage to get reduction, the fees
wouldn’t be $185k. and the progressive payment will be one of our
recommendation even with a reduced fee.

 

Removed $180 and replaced with Fee



 

Proposal 3: As it was said during the discussion, auction incomes are really
uncertain. And if they can be of any use, it will be for the next rounds. It
was also said in the discussion that our mandate is for the current round,
not for the next ones. So I propose to remove Proposal 3.

 

The proposal is that auction fees could be allocated to disadvantaged
applicants so they may repay loans (for the current round).  I've left this
as is.





 

Proposal 4: I propose to replace “by 50%” by “to the minimum amount used
today by ICANN” since there are some that almost don’t pay it now.

 

A quick review (http://www.icann.org/en/registries/agreements.htm, look
under 7.2 fees to ICANN) of the most recent gTLD contracts shows that "the
minimum required by ICANN" in other contracts"  is more than $.25/ name or
$12,500 / year. 

 

.Tel pays at least US$12,500 per quarter- $50k annual

.post $6,250- $25k annual

.Asia just sent a request for lowering their fees from $.75 per transaction
per quarter to $.50/name. January reports show 18,00 transactions for that
month... so extrapolating that we get $90,600/year  at the reduced rate of
$.50/name.

.cat Fixed Registry-Level Fee US$2,500 for each quarter + $1.00/transaction
fee per quarter. $10k/year + roughly $45k/year 

 

Some ccTLDs (most likely those that do not participate in the ccNSO or the
ICANN community) don't pay any fees to ICANN-but they don't have contracts
nor use escrow etc.  As Richard pointed out, The current DAG pricing of "
$25K per year (more if the registry has >50K names) is to cover the cost of
ICANN operationally managing the TLD,  as well as administratively managing
the relationship with the registry operator."  

 

I'm on the fence here, does anyone else have input on this proposal 4? 

 

Elaine

 

 

 

For proposal 1 and proposal 5, since the resolution 20 speaks about the
“application and on-going costs” only, we can easily ask for waiving the
programme development and the risk costs.    

 





 

------------------------------------------------------------------

Tijani BEN JEMAA

Executive Director

Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations

Phone : + 216 70 825 231

Mobile : + 216 98 330 114

Fax     : + 216 70 825 231

------------------------------------------------------------------

 

  _____  

De : owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx] De la part de Elaine Pruis
Envoyé : vendredi 11 juin 2010 17:00
À : Olof Nordling
Cc : soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Objet : Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Action points - JAS WG call 8 June

 

Thank you Olof.

 

Attached is a document with the first version of the WT1 snapshot.  Working
Group, please submit any edits/additions/suggestions so we have a mostly
complete document in time for our call Tuesday, and posting on Wednesday. 

 

Olof, would you please upload this to the WIKI?

Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 9.0.829 / Base de données virale: 271.1.1/2929 - Date: 06/11/10
07:35:00

 

 

Elaine Pruis

VP Client Services

elaine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

+1 509 899 3161

 

Ce message entrant est certifié sans virus connu.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 9.0.829 / Base de données virale: 271.1.1/2934 - Date: 06/13/10
20:45:00