[NA-Discuss] 13 January 2009 Board Finance Committee Minutes

[Louis Houle]

Hi all,

How about an inclusive approach. If the staff holds steady to a CAN $ 
200k evaluation fee, many projects wont see dailight. If you take into 
consideration the fact that new organizations (profit or not) might be 
among potential applicants, I agree with Raimundo that ICANN should 
consider flexibility. A global approach has to match with  local actors. 
I suspect that in many countries, groups of interest perfectly capable 
of managing a new domain name will not be able to pay the evaluation fee 
up front.

My two cents for tonight

Louis Houle
ISOC Québec



Danny Younger a écrit :
> http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/minutes-bfc-13jan09.htm 
>
> excerpts:
>
> Reviewed comments from community on financial considerations of the new gTLD applicant guidebook (RFP) and responses 
>
> General theme of financial-related comments was a desire to lower the evaluation fee and annual registry fee 
>
> Proposed staff response is to recognize the complexity of the evaluation process and to take a very conservative approach for the first round of applications, with a review of the fees for the second round.  
>
> Staff recommend to hold steady on the US$185k evaluation fee.  In relation to the annual registry fees, staff suggests that, if a standard contract is agreed, the recurring annual registry fees can be lowered to $25k plus $0.25 per transaction if over 50k transactions per annum.
>  
> Majority of committee in favor of proposed staff approach, but Raimundo Beca disagrees – thinks that the evaluation fee should be reduced to exclude recovery of historical costs, and that the evaluation fees should be collected on a pay as you go basis instead of an up-front with refunds available basis 
>
>
>
>       
>
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------