Return to .org Reassignment Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: The Org Foundation
Date/Time: Mon, August 5, 2002 at 11:55 PM GMT (Mon, August 5, 2002 at 4:55 PM PDT)
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: Response to Finance questions posed by Shelton Johnson

Message:
 

Question a) I'd like each bidder to identify the funds that they are relying on for the transition. Do you have money in the bank set aside or are you relying on the third party partners or money from capital markets for the transition?

Response a) We will not be seeking funds except from the ICANN endowment and inkind contributions from major software and hardware companies. With eNOM already possessing significant capacity the amount of inkind contributions we are seeking is very reasonable from the companies we are in negotiations with. Plus our Foundation mandate to support technology and education initiatives is a very compelling reason for these companies to support our bid.

Question b) To what extent does your financing for the transition depend on timely receipt of all or part of the Verisign endowment? What are your plans for alternative financing if a dispute or a delay arises in the transfer of those funds?

Response b)  We are confident that Verisign will provide the endowment to ICANN. And that ICANN will release the funds per the original dates in the ICANN RFP.  Due to the responses we have had so far with the negotiations with a major software company and several major hardware providers will result in these companies providing the necessary software and hardware at no or very low cost. So our reliance on the endowment to meet the January 1, 2003 conversion date in not significant.

Question c. Are you financially prepared to deal with unforeseen costs that might arise in the transition, particularly those related to the technical operation of the registry?

Response c) Yes. As the technical operation is being handled by eNOM this is not a concern.

Question d) Are you financially prepared to deal with lower than expected numbers of new names being purchased/registrants renewing. What tolerances do you have in your cash projections before being forced to seek further funding?

Response d) Yes. Due to our very lean organization and eNOM's low service cost we would not have to seek additional funding unless registrations were below 25% of the expected numbers.

Question e)I'm also concerned about the stability of the .org registry if it goes to a bidder that is relying in substantial part on the Verisign endowment for funding. How solid is the commitment from Verisign to turn over the money? I understand that there is a signed agreement between Verisign and ICANN with respect to the endowment, but what are the remedies if Verisign delays or receives a waiver on the agreement?  And most important, do the bidders relying on the endowment have the resources to function in the meantime as well as to engage in a legal dispute and perhaps protracted litigation?

Response e) The contract question about ICANN and Versign can only be addressed by ICANN. However, we are confident that Verisign will provide the endowment to ICANN. And that ICANN will release the funds per the original dates in the ICANN RFP.  Due to the responses we have had so far with the negotiations with a major software company and several major hardware providers will result in these companies providing the necessary software and hardware at no or very low cost. So our reliance on the endowment to meet the January 1, 2003 conversion date in not significant.
       
     

The .Org Foundation
www.theorgfoundation.org
admin@theorgfoundation.org


Message Thread:


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy