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

elliot noss enoss at tucows.com
Thu Aug 10 19:35:27 UTC 2017


based on previous surveys there was not a lot of support for this. of course it can be discussed again, but I fear people are thinking it more likely than it is.

EN

> On Aug 10, 2017, at 3:28 PM, Dietmar Stefitz <djs at bemarnet.es> wrote:
> 
> Hi Erika and all,
> 
> I have been very astonished to hear the proposal to use the Auction Money in filling up the reserve account of ICANN.
> Filling up for 12 month reserve or 24 month reserve, if we have to take 24 month, there will not be much left to disburse to other projects.
> 
> I thought that the call from Xavier has been to explain specially the Investment of the fund at this moment, for which I can only congratulate.
> A 1% return on a super save investment is not bad, and it should be made like this in the future.
> 
> I would absolutely be against a filling up of the reserve fund from the auction proceeds, at least as a decision from this group.
> Or did I misunderstand something?
> 
> Dietmar Stefitz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thursday, August 10, 2017, 8:05:56 PM, you wrote:
> 
> MK> Hi Kavouss,
> 
> MK> Am I missing something - or are you suggesting that the CCWG should
> MK> only determine whether or not money be fed into ICANN's reserve
> MK> account, without also indicating what proportion should be used to
> MK> that effect?
> 
> MK> If so - I don't see how the CCWG could consider anything beyond that
> MK> simple yes/no question, as we'd have no indication how much money we
> MK> would have leftover to work with, once the reserve is replenished.
> MK> Decisions about allocation priorities can't really be made unless we
> MK> also look at how the pie should be portioned out, right?
> 
> MK> Michael Karanicolas
> 
> MK> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Kavouss Arasteh
> MK> <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
> MK> _______________________________________________
> MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> MK> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Saludos,
> Dietmar  
>                         _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds



More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list