<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000; font-size:10pt;"><div>Steve, Jeff, Bret,</div><div><br></div><div>a BRG member has made this suggestion which I think could be wider than just .brands. Could you agree to add it to the Charter maybe in Section II, Group 1, around the bullet "<i>Different TLD Types</i>? Feel free to turn the text into the style of the Charter.<br></div><div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Philip Sheppard</div><div>Director General</div><div>Brand Registry Group</div><div><a href="http://www.brandregistrygroup.org">www.brandregistrygroup.org</a></div><div> </div>----------------------------<br></div><div><br></div><div><b>Application by a previous applicant</b></div><div>In case a (.brand) RO (from the first round) applies for another
(.brand) gTLD in the subsequent application window, certain requirements
of the application could be shortened, reduced of even omitted (e.g.,
financial, technical, administrative, etc.) in case such RO is duly
fulfilling its current RA and running its (.brand) gTLD. It seems some
time could be saved during the application process if ICANN validates
most of the the RO information.</div></span></body></html>