ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[soac-newgtldapsup-wg]


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

Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Friday's meeting

  • To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Friday's meeting
  • From: Alain Berranger <alain.berranger@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 12:47:20 -0400

1) I submit that annual "profit" is mostly irrelevant or at best secondary
to this evaluation process... Not-for-profits have deficits or surplus not
profits or losses... Int he case of surplus, it is 100% used for increasing
the impact and reach of the organization's social/community work...

2) I think partial of full repayment is a good principle and must be built
in the business model and based on results...

3) a two-step process is sufficient in my view... objective and quality
evaluation require no more... if a third step became necessary, it would
involve some kind of negociations...

Alain

On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>
> I have not seen an announcement of the meeting tomorrow, or a draft agenda,
> but I presume that it is still on.
>
> I have been trying to pull together a document of financial criteria, and
> and there has been some substantive discussion going on on the mailing list.
>
> I would like some time on the agenda to get the sense of the group (and of
> staff!) of several issues:
>
> - Concept of two phase review: 1st on objective criteria, and those that
> pass are subject to a more subjective review. I like the concept, but am
> beginning to feel that the objective criteria will have to be so loose as to
> have little meaning, or so tight as to exclude most everyone. An example is
> the $100k max and $70k minimum annual profit that we previously talked
> about. That would have limited acceptable applicant to those with profit of
> $71k-$99k - a rather small range and one that did not apply to many business
> models. Is this really viable.
>
> - Issue of whether we are advocating a base flat fee reduction or not. If
> so, does this come out of the $2m + matching funds?
>
> - Is the cost of administering this program funded by the same $2m +
> matching funds?
>
> - We have been talking about repayment. Will this be mandatory (that is,
> the business plan must allow for it)?
>
> Alan
>
>


-- 
Alain Berranger, B.Eng, MBA
http://www.jumo.com/ict4dk
Executive-in-residence, Schulich School of Business, www.schulich.yorku.ca
Vice-Chair, GKP Foundation, www.globalknowledgepartnership.org
Vice Chair, Canadian Foundation for the Americas - www.focal.ca
O:+1 514 484 7824; M:+1 514 704 7824
Skype: alain.berranger


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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy