[ga] Re: Revenue Model

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Eric and all,

 It seems that ICANN's revenue model is based on a fee structure
that is levied on the stakeholders without their consent or even
proper input.  For instance, the new Fee increase the ICANN BoD
and staff are suggesting for Registrars/Registries, or the 50K
entry fee for a "Chance" at getting a registry for new TLD's, non-refundable
by the way if you weren't selected by the ICANN BoD/Staff...

  I had always thought that the White Paper and the MoU directly
and indirectly indicated that the Stakeholders or other "Interested
Parties" were to determine what sort of funding, amongst a host
of other functions, that ICANN is supposed to do?

Eric Dierker wrote:

> Sorry for leaving the long posts still fully attached but the discussion is
> extremely relevant.  WHAT IS ICANN'S REVENUE MODEL?
>
> The following have been denied due to lack of funding;
> Translations,
> Webcasting,
> Outreach & Education,
> GA chair funding,
> continuing work group lists,
> Increased sectretariat staffing
>
> The following are being charged when presumably services to them should be free;
> ccTLDs
> Non-comercial constituency
>
> In most cultures being to broke to pay your bills is a sign of irresponsibility or
> laziness, what is ICANN's excuse?
>
> Do we have a sponsorship staff?  Do we have an outreach and membership drive
> committee?  Do we have grant writers?  Do we have coprorate partnerships for
> advertising?  Have we asked anyone for underwriting?
>
> Somebody needs to get serious here, this is not a teenage fan club.  There are
> millions upon millions out there waiting to be spent on Non-profits.
>
> The GA chair should be fully salaried along with a staff.  We need full time polling
> booths to fulfill our charter.  If I were the Chairman I would be advising my CEO
> get it done or hit the road.  Any non-profit CEO knows the preceding and if ICANN is
> failing without doing the preceding then we need a new CEO real bad and real fast.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> > Kent and all,
> >
> > Kent Crispin wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2001 at 04:22:38PM -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > >For example, I believe that many
> > > > >(perhaps most) of the interactions between ICANN and registrars concern
> > > > >conflicts with registries and with other registrars.  Registrars that
> > > > >register in more TLDs will have more such conflicts,
> > > >
> > > > Hmmm.  Good example.  However I'm suspecting that the impact of a conflict
> > > > is so large a drain on ICANN that such events should, perhaps, be
> > > > separately funded.  HOW to fund them is a different matter.
> > >
> > > I believe that there have been a substantial number of smaller
> > > complaints, mostly about NSI.
> > >
> > > > Hmmm.  Perhaps the earlier suggestion that ICANN present some discussion of
> > > > staff costs would be helpful.  I suggest that it not be a highly detailed
> > > > accounting, but rather one that talks in terms of event categories that
> > > > incur expenses related to registrars, and how much the average cost is for
> > > > each such category.
> > >
> > > No question it would be useful, but there is a resource issue.  Which
> > > would you rather see first: such an accounting, or some new TLDs in the
> > > root?  :-)
> >
> >   It seems that you are suggesting that the ICANN staff resources are either
> > unable, unwilling or inadequate to handle multi-tasking?  I would say
> > that if the situation is that the ICANN BoD and staff is inadequate, than
> > it would seem that there is a leadership problem within the ICANN
> > leadership.  If however the situation indicates that the staff and/or
> > BoD members are unwilling or unable to multi-task, possibly a house
> > cleaning in staff, or even possibly BoD members is in order...
> >
> > >

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html