[registrars] RE: ICANN fees

[Jason Hendeles]

Monte & Elana-

I for one see no reason at this time to approve any increase in fees.

I don't see how any of these increases benefit our constituency in any way.
Damaging Verisign's wild card sitefinder service or Verisign's desire to
explore new revenue opportunities does not in any way benefit the registrar
constituency or my bottom line as a registrar, so who cares if sitefinder
has been dismantled?

It's time we send ICANN a clear message that we need new revenue
opportunities in order to justify any increase in fees.  The last time ICANN
did anything positive for our constituency was when they authorized the
creation of new domains for the registrars to market.  That was almost 3
years ago.  Since that time they have aggressively undermined our ability to
succeed.  Between WLS and the increased fees, ICANN has continued to
undermine our constituency.

I think the registrars should take this opportunity to apply pressure to
ICANN to open up the process for releasing new domain names and, or allow
the registrar constituency to negotiate a way to revenue share with
Verisign's wildcard service.

I think that we should regect any increase until something tangible is given
back to our constituency.

Jason Hendeles
A Technology Company, Inc.



-----Original Message-----
From: Monte Cahn [mailto:monte at moniker.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 2:12 PM
To: 'Elana Broitman'; registrars at boardrooms.org
Cc: registrars at dnso.org
Subject: RE: ICANN fees
Importance: High


I would encourage others to speak up NOW about this issue as it is one
of the most important issues on the table!

Monte Cahn
Founder/CEO

Monte at Moniker.com
Monte at DomainSystems.com

O - 954-984-8445
F - 954-969-9155

Moniker.com - ICANN Accredited Corporate Domain Management Services
DomainSystems.com - Domain Sales & After-market Services
CoolHandle.com - World Class Hosting and Email Solutions


-----Original Message-----
From: Monte Cahn [mailto:monte at moniker.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:26 AM
To: 'Elana Broitman'; registrars at boardrooms.org
Cc: registrars at dnso.org; eric at moniker.com
Subject: RE: ICANN fees
Importance: High


Hello Elana,

>From what I understand, there were many against this fee increase and
those concerns were discussed openly at the last meeting.  I think the
most compelling point made was that none of us would accept such a
dramatic expenditure increase in our own businesses, why would we
approve one through ICANN?  This increase dramatically effects the
little margins we have left in domain registrations.

The fact that ICANN FINALLY sent a cease and desist letter to VeriSign
for Sitefinder was not only 2 weeks overdue, it is also their
responsibility to regulate such actions which jeopardize the internet
infrastructure.  This delay allowed VeriSign profit in the tune of $4
Million per day while Sitefinder was live.  Many feel that we may all be
entitled to a portion of these proceeds.  The fee increase is not to be
treated like a reward for good performance - it is their job to perform.
I also find that their handling of WLS is good reason to hold them even
more accountable in the future and restrict increases until they act
responsibly on behalf of all of our organizations.

I feel we can demonstrate support by sending a clear message of concern
for past performance and not approve the full fee increase being
requested.  It is important that we set a precedent not to approve the
full increase.  The question is what increase do we approve or provide
our opinion on and the best way to structure our message.

Regards,

Monte Cahn
Founder/CEO

Monte at Moniker.com
Monte at DomainSystems.com

O - 954-984-8445
F - 954-969-9155

Moniker.com - ICANN Accredited Corporate Domain Management Services
DomainSystems.com - Domain Sales & After-market Services CoolHandle.com
- World Class Hosting and Email Solutions


-----Original Message-----
From: Elana Broitman [mailto:ebroitman at register.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:41 AM
To: registrars at boardrooms.org
Cc: registrars at dnso.org
Subject: ICANN fees


Dear all - as you may recall from our meeting in Marina del Rey and our
conference call several weeks ago, ICANN accredited registrars must vote
to accept payment of the variable accreditation fee for the fiscal year
of July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2004 (Section 3.9.2 of the Registrar
Accreditation Agreement).   Registrars accounting, in the aggregate, for
payment of two-thirds of all registrar-level fees, must approve the fees
in order for ICANN to collect them from registrars.  If we do not do so,
ICANN may, under its contracts with the registries, collect them
directly from the registries.

As per our discussions, many in the constituency believed that we should
send a letter to ICANN setting out our concerns and goals when approving
such fees.  Attached is a draft letter proposed by the Executive
Committee.  As you can see, while it contains a set of concerns and
deliverables, it ultimately provides for approval of the variable fee.
I, for one, believe that ICANN has recently proven its willingness and
ability to effectively monitor agreements and respond to concerns (e.g.,
Site Finder).  This is the time to both demonstrate our support for
ICANN and ensure that we remain a vital part of the organization by
being the ones primarilly responsible for fees.

Please signal to ICANN your approval of the fee collection by sending in
this letter or otherwise contacting Dan Halloran and Diane Schroeder at
halloran at icann.org and schroeder at icann.org.

Regards,

Elana Broitman