<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Thank you Alan, <br>
</p>
<p>We mainly agree and I understand that the grant decision process
will be "outside of ICANN" in the sense that in either A or C
there will be no scope for interventions by any element of the
ICANN community. I have suggested (just now in response to
comments by Marilyn Cade) that a timeline be set for a review of
lessons learned, and in the mean time if there are any subsequent
auction proceeds, they be held back until after that review.</p>
<p>My one differing view is the hope that under Option C ICANN look
to the existing not-for-profit granting organizations and seek a
contractual collaboration for going forward, and that it not try
to set up a brand new entity. The ICANN community has already
worries about challenges of ramping up, then ramping down, a unit
within ICANN. The challenges of recruiting proper expertise for a
completely new entity with a finite life are equally challenging.
Start up costs, in money and time, would be considerable, and
recruiting proper personnel would be a challenge. <br>
</p>
<p>One strength we have within ICANN is that, even taking the
private interests of some stakeholder groups into account, we tend
to reach consensus and try to make the best of the policy
decisions we decide on. <span class="moz-smiley-s1"><span>:-)</span></span>
<i>Maybe ICANN has a future, with a new line of business,
consulting with national governments to help them move beyond
confrontation and stalemate to consensus and some degree of
actually policy making.</i> <span class="moz-smiley-s1"><span>:-)</span></span><br>
</p>
<p>Sam <br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/29/2019 11:10 PM, Alan Greenberg
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:YQBPR0101MB07547E3995CA19C020BD1DD293DC0@YQBPR0101MB0754.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
Sam, a few corrections.<br>
<br>
You say: <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" class="cite" cite="">Lastly, in addition
to the issue of required independence and Option A, there is the
challenge of amassing the appropriate expertise to properly and
efficiently administer the granting process within a unit of
ICANN itself. One has to weigh those costs against Option C,
where for a management fee the administrative process is
transferred to a competent entity.
</blockquote>
<br>
The difference between A and C is that in A, the entity
administering the entire project is within ICANN (subject to what
it might choose to outsource) and in C, it is in a brand new
entity that we will create - no existing expertise.<br>
<br>
In both A and B, the actual application analysis and grant
decision will be outside of ICANN.
<br>
<br>
Although in theory there might be future auction proceeds, one of
the premises of our entire work is that this is a one-time bonanza
that will not be rrepeated and we should expect the funds to be
used up in some (finite) time.<br>
<br>
Alan<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>