Return to .org Reassignment Forum - Message Thread - FAQ
||The Org Foundation
||Mon, August 5, 2002 at 11:55 PM GMT (Mon, August 5, 2002 at 4:55 PM PDT)
||Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
||Response to Finance questions posed by Shelton Johnson
The .Org Foundation
|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?|
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
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.