[Gnso-newgtld-wg] Notes and Action Items - New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP WG - 22 January 2019

Julie Hedlund julie.hedlund at icann.org
Tue Jan 22 16:23:06 UTC 2019


Dear Working Group members,

 

Please see below the notes from the meeting today, 22 January 2019. These high-level notes are designed to help WG members navigate through the content of the call and are not a substitute for the recording, transcript, or the chat, which will be posted at: https://community.icann.org/display/NGSPP/2019-01-22+New+gTLD+Subsequent+Procedures+PDP. 

 

Please also see the referenced document at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sl4V7OkGldX-RlGZZO108ln5sUG-H-VOhz3Od2gfcRM/edit.  

 

Kind regards,

Julie

Julie Hedlund, Policy Director

 

Notes and Action Items:

 

1.  Updates to Statements of Interest (SOIs): No updates provided.

 

2.  Working Group Updates (e.g., Sub Groups, Work Track 5):

 

Sub Group A:

-- Making good progress. 

-- Don't think we will need more than a couple of additional meetings.

 

Sub Group B:

-- Call later today, 20:00 UTC.

 

Sub Group C:

-- Next meeting is 31 January -- moving to last two topics.: TLD rollout questions. 

-- Making good progress.  Nothing controversial so far.

-- May finish in one more meeting.

 

Work Track 5:

-- Supplemental Initial Report public comment closing today, 22 January: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/geo-names-wt5-initial-2018-12-05-en.

-- Full WT5 WG will begin to review the comments.

-- Meeting on 13 February.

 

3.  Auctions (discussion with Monte Cahn, President of Right of the Dot):

 

-- Different types of auctions, but primary are: 1) English/ascending clock auction; 2) Vickrey auction/first place sealed bid auction or second place sealed bid auction.  Protected from overbidding since the market is considered the second higher bid price.

-- Technical difficulties in public and private auctions last year.  Need to learn a lot of strategy for an English/ascending clock auction.

-- Are no Internet issues with the Vickrey auction -- don't need to be online, no technical training needed, no bidding experience needed.  Don't need to stay until the auction is over so less participation time.  Risk sharing is more equal/fair.  Less overpaying.  Can be submitted in a specific time frame.

-- Are there people gaming the system by losing?  In a sealed bid environment there is less tendency for gaming.

 

Discussion:

-- Two options for a sealed bid: 1) at the outset at submission; 2) after all applications evaluated and objections considered.  In the second option you  would know who is the competition.

-- There is a risk in taking bids at application since if an applications is not approved then the bid is void.  A lot of the applicants in the last round got their financing based on becoming approved.  

-- You would know who the participants are in the second scenario but you don't know what they have bid.

-- Question: With the Vickrey model you have only one opportunity to place your bid?  Answer: That is correct.  You are bidding based on what you think is the true value of the asset.

-- Question: The value of TLDs is to some extent subjective, so it's the value of whatever the applicant puts on it?  Answer: It is really hard for an applicant to determine the value other than the value they place on it.

-- The sealed bid auction is still the most fair option, but not sure how you would level the playing field for less-funded applicants.

-- Put in dollars and cents to make it less likely that there would be exact bids.  If there are, then they would submit against the two or three people who tied.  So, do another round with just the two or three who tied.

-- Question: What is your recommendation for a situation of an applicant that might have applied for 5 TLDs and rate them differently -- pay more for preferred option.  Then if they have lost their first 4 auction, so the 5th is much more valuable.  How one deals with changing business ties over the course of a round?  Answer: Everyone bids at the same time for all contension set, so it doesn't happen over time.  If the process is staggered then you might have changing values.

 -- Question re: submitting all the bids at the same time -- the risk profile is discouraging to small applicants: who is capable of having 20 bids out there for large amounts of money?  Answer: That is a valuable concern -- so you can decide to stagger rounds or have everything at once.  Another process is to do it by domain category.  Also could have a staggered auction resolution process between different entities/market segments.

-- Question: Have you ever been part of an auction where there’s a multiplier given to certain category of bidder to help them compete more effectively in the auction ?  For example if there is an applicant support program for applicants from the global south for as an example… there has been some discussion about providing them with a multiplier to help them compete – any experience or thoughts there? Answer: No.  You would have to determine how you qualify and how to determine if the multiplier is fair.

-- Question: There is the suggestion that the bids should be submitted at the time of applicantion, others suggest only after the contention set is known -- Any thoughts on which would be fairer?  Answer: In the last round people got funded based on being approved; if you submit a bid at the point that you apply you could have problems with funding if approval takes a year.  If you wait until the end then people can pull out.  The closest to the actual date of resolution is better.

 

>From the Chat:

lexander.berlin backup: Sealed bid could be submitted online as well; for those who have used a browser before.....

Jeff Neuman (Overall Co-chair): @Alexander - I think Monte was referring to the fact that with ascending auctions, you have to be continually online as opposed to submitting a sealed bid on one occassions

Jeff Neuman (Overall Co-chair): occassion (sorry)

Alexander.berlin backup: I know :D     But I do not like "paper" - and sending something via snail mail half around the world seems a bit insecure I would rather like to do it online (and obviuosly had AMPLE time). And the bidders could chose which method they like.

Phil Buckingham:  3rd option - after the contention set list of applicants has been issued , but before evaluation start . Option to withdrawn - because you know your competition  is say Google ( with lots more money )  

Collin Kurre: What if community applicants or otherwise under-represented groups were given some sort of augmentation from the beginning to allow them to be competitive in these scenarios?

Anne Aikman-Scalese: QUESTION:  What happens if two or three highest bids are the same in the silent bid?  QUESTION

Alexander.berlin backup: Anne: Nobody bids 500,00 - your bid 500,199 or 501,000 etc. Otherwise I assume: Lottery!

Alexander.berlin backup: Anne: Nobody bids 500,000 - your bid 500,199 or 501,000 etc. Otherwise I assume: Lottery!

Alexander.berlin backup: Refund is a good point: We should SCRAP "refunds". No refund anymore. 

Collin Kurre: Interesting idea, the 

Katrin Ohlmer: In terms of a balanced debate about solving contention - have the co-chairs planned to have another debate about other contention resolution means in future calls?  

Alexander.berlin backup: + Katrin

Vanda scartezini: tia Monte for these ideias

Collin Kurre: "apples to apples" auction set. For non-profits, though, a funder (like google, US gov, etc) could theoretically swoop in for support. Could end up replicating the same power differential, as those funders will donate to orgs representing their values or interests. 

Alexander.berlin backup: 1:100

Phil Buckingham: Yes Jeff , one aspect of it . ie  when/ if  you withdraw to get a refund  .  2.  Q  Under Vickrey  sorry I am confused - are you submiiting your sealed bid before or after you know who your competition is . If you do it after knowing then the likelyhood the bids will be much lower( because you cant compete with  very weathly )  . 

Christopher Wilkinson: No hance of that big bang with phased rounds.

sarah l (verisign): Phil monte is suggesting all bids are submitted at point of application and if there is a contention set only then is the sealed bid opened

Kristine F Dorrain: @Monte, I won't raise my hand again, but in an art auction, if I lose the bidding on three pieces, I can decide that the fourth piece is worth more to me than originally.  Tha's why I'm saying this is different and can be disadventagous in some situations.

Katrin Ohlmer: Thanks for the clarification, Jeff!

Jim Prendergast: On Kristines concerns - flip the scenario - what if an entity applies for only 1?  Are they treated differently than as those applying  for 5 or ten or 200.  Should not be preferrential treatment for those with the $$ to apply for multiples

Vanda scartezini: agre forte about third world no that

sarah l (verisign): Please can someone ask Monte as I have lost audio- Have you ever been part of an auction where there’s a multiplier given to certain category of bidder to help them compete more effectively in the auction ?  For example if there is an applicant support program for applicants from the global south for as an example… there has been some discussion about providing them with a multiplier to help them compete – any experience or thoughts there?

 

4.  Supplemental Initial Report – Next Steps:

 

-- Staff is putting comments into the public comment tool.

-- WG will start to analyzing the comments on the next call.

-- Sub Group summaries will be provided to the full WG in February.

 

5. AOB: Update on revised timeline:  Will provide by the next full WG meeting.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20190122/6aebb110/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4630 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg/attachments/20190122/6aebb110/smime-0001.p7s>


More information about the Gnso-newgtld-wg mailing list