[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
Arasteh
kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Fri Aug 11 16:13:45 UTC 2017
Jonathan
Thank you for your thought.
I fully agree with the way you have describe the process provided that CCWG is not involved whether or not ICANN should or should not have reserve account NOR we interfere to argue or determine or fixe any level /ceiling for such reserve account . In other words we just could discussed as you have summarised at the end of your message.
Regards
Kavouss
Sent from my iPhone
> On 11 Aug 2017, at 16:18, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>
> A very useful summary, thank you Jonathan. Once again, apologies for getting us slightly off topic, but I do think this question should be resolved.
>
> Stephanie
>
>> On 2017-08-11 05:10, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> A couple of thoughts on this topic.
>>
>> On the subject of whether or not ICANN should have a 12 month operating expense reserve in place.
>> Agreed that it seems to be common practice in the not for profit sector.
>> Whether or not it should be the case for ICANN is an interesting question, but agreed, not one for this CWG.
>>
>> In any event, Xavier has clarified that the current policy is that the level of operating reserve should be 12 months.
>> My understanding of the question for this group is not whether or not we would sanction the (auction fund) money being used to top up the reserves.
>> But rather, whether or not we would like to see rules in place that sanction ICANN (the organisation) applying for auction funds.
>>
>> In evaluating that question of ICANN the organisation as a prospective applicant, a use or test case for that consideration is ICANN applying (under the same rules as anyone else) for auction funds to top up the ICANN reserve funds.
>>
>> My personal view is that ICANN should be demonstrating a commitment to fulfilling its current policy (to have in place a 12 month reserve) by budgeting an operating surplus to build that reserve.
>> In addition (independently of this CWG), ICANN should review its current policy on reserve funds.
>> If these two criteria were met, it would make me personaly much more sympathetic to potentially topping up reserve funds (to some extent) with auction funds.
>>
>> At the risk of being repetitive, it seems to me that the question for this CWG remains:
>> - Whether or not ICANN the Organisation should be permitted to apply for funds?
>> and
>> - If so, what constraints should be place on this (use of funds, quantum etc)?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 7:18 AM
>> To: Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez at icann.org>
>> Cc: ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Xavier is right about reserve that covers operational expenses for minimum is say 12 month being normal practice. Some even do it for more; some RIRs have way above 1 year already while others are working towards same. However ofcourse none can match the fat figures of ICANN budget. ;-)
>>
>> However I don't think auction proceeds in this context can be referred to as surplus that can get ploughed back to achieve reserve target set by ICANN management NOR do I think it is a target/goal that this group should try to achieve.
>>
>> I for will suggest that we should consider mechanisms that allow some community projects that ICANN normally fund in their budget to be eligible, which if approved (based on the process) may then result to more surpluses to ICANN and they(Board) can decide to put that to reserve.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Sent from my mobile
>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>>
>> On Aug 10, 2017 10:26 PM, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez at icann.org> wrote:
>> All,
>> I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum 12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment Policy, see at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en, see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below).
>>
>> “The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected expenditures.“
>>
>> I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used in non-profit organizations.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Xavier
>>
>> Xavier Calvez
>> ICANN – SVP & CFO
>> 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
>> Los Angeles, CA 90094
>> Phone: 310-301-5838
>> Mobile: 805-312-0052
>> Fax: 310-957-2348
>>
>>
>> From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
>> Date: Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM
>> To: Dietmar Stefitz <djs at bemarnet.es>, Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas at gmail.com>, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
>> Cc: "ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
>>
>> To be clear, I don't think anyone on the call suggested we build up the reserve to a 12 or 24 month level of current budget. Xavier said that 1 year was a typical norm for non-profits, but in my opinion, there is no need for that, as in the case of emergency, costs could be ramped down quickly.
>>
>> I vaguely recall that the level that we were targeting (before the drain from the CCWG-Acct expenses) was something like $80m. So even if we contributed enough to get back to that level, it would be perhaps $40m.
>>
>> But the issue in my mind is not how much, but if.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> At 10/08/2017 03:28 PM, Dietmar Stefitz 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[community.icann.org].
>>
>>
>>
>> >>> 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[icann.org])
>>
>> >>> 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 fundsâ€
>>
>> >>> 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[community.icann.org] )
>> >>> 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/[surveymonkey.com] )
>>
>>
>>
>> >>> = = = =
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >>> Joke Braeken
>>
>> >>> ccNSO Policy Advisor
>>
>> >>> joke.braeken at icann.org
>>
>>
>>
>> >>> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO[twitter.com]
>>
>> >>> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/[facebook.com]
>>
>> >>> http://ccnso.icann.org[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
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> Content-Disposition: inline
>> X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
>> 1;MWHPR03MB2718;27:YWDqnEPXx/CS7utzz6td9Qa3koj9je2Sjv9LFnursD0J2VA30AdYQS9BENOC1oqUgmoT+mzlFx7ydYsubIRVesT4Y1jhb3iYxs4FdjVwmhiKOJ9o59lZBh7cDwAsDaB/
>> X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery:
>> ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(400001000128)(400125000095)(20160514016)(750103)(520002050)(400001001223)(400125100095)(61617095)(400001002128)(400125200095);
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170811/2f7275fc/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Ccwg-auctionproceeds
mailing list