[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting

Thu Aug 10 18:35:25 UTC 2017

My take on todays discussion was that any decision of allocation to the
reserve fund can only be done once this group has firstly decided how the
funds are going to be used - that is, the types of projects we decide on -
and their time frames.

Once these decisions are made, then we will get an overall picture of how
much money will be needed over the longer term and can make further
decisions on what might be able to be kept in reserve for reinvestment for
future projects, or to top up ICANN's reserves if we all think this is
appropriate.

Maureen

On 10/08/2017 8:07 am, "Michael Karanicolas" <mkaranicolas at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Kavouss,
>
> Am I missing something - or are you suggesting that the CCWG should
> only determine whether or not money be fed into ICANN's reserve
> account, without also indicating what proportion should be used to
> that effect?
>
> If so - I don't see how the CCWG could consider anything beyond that
> simple yes/no question, as we'd have no indication how much money we
> would have leftover to work with, once the reserve is replenished.
> Decisions about allocation priorities can't really be made unless we
> also look at how the pie should be portioned out, right?
>
> Michael Karanicolas
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Kavouss Arasteh
> <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dear Erika, Dear All,
> >
> > Today during the last 15 mints of the call I tried to draw your
> attention to
> > allow me to intervene on the views expressed by Alan reading the Reserve
> > account.
> >
> > If I have well understood his statement he wanted that CCWG discuss the
> > level of ICANN reserve account which was announced by Xavier to be
> > equivalent to one year budget as objective. As Xavier mentioned this
> level
> > has not been reached.
> >
> > Alan’s view that CCWG discuss the level of ICANN reserve account is
> outside
> > the mandate of CCWG. We may just decide whether or not that account be
> fed
> > by using Auction money but decision on the appropriate level of the
> reserve
> > account is totally outside or mandate as it is a decision to be made by
> the
> > Board and not by this group
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Kavouss
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken at icann.org>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear All,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Please find below the notes and action items from today’s CCWG-AP
> meeting.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Joke Braeken
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Notes CCWG – AP Meeting 10 August 2017:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> These high-level notes are designed to help the CCWG navigate through
> the
> >> content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript
> >> and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately
> and
> >> are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Roll Call
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Please state your name for transcription purposes and keep microphones
> on
> >> mute when not speaking.
> >> Attendance will be taken from the AdobeConnect room.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Welcome – DOI
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Overview from Xavier Calvez on investment management
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> The intention of this presentation is
> >>
> >> to allow the group to think on the issue of investment,
> >> to understand ICANN's practice, and to answer any questions that might
> be
> >> raised.
> >>
> >> It helps to inform the discussion on the ROI of the fund; It includes an
> >> overview of how the auction proceeds are currently managed, which might
> lead
> >> to how they might be managed in the future.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Important to note:
> >>
> >> only conservative investment policies are being used
> >> the investment strategy will be designed in support of the objectives
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> An overview of some illustrative investment scenarios was provided,
> >> followed by Q&A.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Parameters that need to be considered:
> >>
> >> amount of money
> >> horizon
> >> level of risk (which is not correlated to the horizon)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Financial information is regularly provided during the quarterly
> >> stakeholder calls.
> >>
> >> (amount from latest update - Q3 data of FY17.
> >> https://www.icann.org/quarterlyreports)
> >>
> >> Reserve Fund: 64 million
> >> New gTLD unspent application fees: 128 million
> >> Auction proceeds: 233 million
> >> Annual budget of ICANN. FY18 budget expenses 142 million USD.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Regarding replenishing the reserve fund: appropriate procedures need to
> be
> >> taken, appropriate approvals and decisions need to be in place for it
> to be
> >> legal.
> >>
> >> This is however a moral question as well. The charter does include this
> >> question: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the
> Organization or
> >> a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction
> funds”
> >>
> >> The group needs to discuss this at a later stage.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Next meeting
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> next CCWG-AP meeting is scheduled for Thursday 24 August at 14.00 UTC
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> = = = =
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Action item #1:
> >>
> >> CCWG to review the slides presented by Xavier (published on
> >> https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/2017-08-10+
> CCWG+New+gTLD+Auction+Proceeds+call)
> >> and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’s mailing
> list.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Action item #2:
> >>
> >> Per the discussion during the CCWG-AP meeting on 27 July 2017, the
> >> attached mind map was developed, which aims to regroup the objectives
> based
> >> on the survey results as well as the subsequent discussions.  The CCWG
> is
> >> encouraged to continue to provide feedback on the proposed regrouping of
> >> objectives/priorities, as well as the clustering of examples ahead of
> the
> >> next meeting, scheduled for 24 August at 14 UTC.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Action item #3:
> >>
> >> CCWG to review responses to charter question #4 and to continue the
> >> discussion on the mailing list.
> >>
> >> (see https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-6GNDQHJ6/ )
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> = = = =
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Joke Braeken
> >>
> >> ccNSO Policy Advisor
> >>
> >> joke.braeken at icann.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO
> >>
> >> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/
> >>
> >> http://ccnso.icann.org
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> > Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20170810/e4e43699/attachment-0001.html>