<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;" class=""><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" class=""><br class="">A super simple solution is a HIGH application fee (1 Million USD) in the next round; then slowly reduce it round by round. That creates manageable short rounds of probably around 6 to 12 month, a lot of predictability, and doesn’t flood the DNS inflationary. I realize however that a high application fee will be attacked – and ICANN would be accused of favoring the “cash rich”. So if we could implement any other “hurdle” that keep application numbers manageable: GREAT!<br class=""></span></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">ICANN would be favoring the cash rich, either cash rich countries or cash rich organizations, and seeing itself as owner of the name space selling it to market value. That would make ICANN the greatest monopolist of the 21st century, and the pushback to such from regulators would be equally great. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Rubens</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>