[registrars] icann budget position (ascio)

[JP]

Bhavin,

It is a question of what is it that we are debating here.

You say the budget is not the best for ICANN or the registrars but on the
other hand you said you much rather pay 49C per transaction, which is more
than what ICANN is asking for and would put a bigger burden on Us.

I would completely understand you if you were requesting ICANN does not
increase the fees, But you are asking for a redistribution of the SAME fees,
something that will favor somebody's business model (e.g.: companies that
are providing turnkey / accreditation services) over somebody else's (e.g.:
mine).

Again, I do not have a problem with debating  the budget, I just will not
accept to pay for the costs of people getting accredited just because its
cool and or cheap.

I has already been established that "REAL REGISTRARS" with VIABLE business
models which have the need, can get relief from the fee.

JP


> From: "Bhavin Turakhia" <bhavin.t at directi.com>
> Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 02:43:22 +0530
> To: "'JP'" <jp at dotregistrar.com>, "'Nikolaj Nyholm'" <nikolajn at ascio.com>,
> <registrars at dnso.org>
> Cc: "'Dan Halloran'" <halloran at icann.org>, <twomey at icann.org>
> Subject: RE: [registrars] icann budget position (ascio)
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
>> the registration business at all. They will became accredited
>> and display "the seal", but actually never become operational.
>> If there is a cost incurred by ICANN to maintain this
>> accreditations I do not think it is fair to ask me to pay for them.
> 
> I agree with what you say. However the truth is that ICANN does not really
> have to bear a huge cost in maintaining THOSE Accreditations who are simply
> in it for the batch pool. From what I see, all these guys have ZERO domains,
> ZERO complaints, and they NEVER call or contact icann or utilise any of
> ICANNs staff resources for any doubt, query etc. in essence those registrars
> who simply use the batch pool are actually NO COST to ICANN. They are silent
> spectators and ICANN is actually making the $5k per year off them for really
> no cost.
> 
> What I do not wish to see JP is ICANN basing its budget structure on short
> term revenue opportunities of a certain set of Registrars. This is a trend
> which seems to me to be very scary, and a precedent here could be really bad
> for Registrars
> 
> Additionally there are many other reasons as to why the current budget is
> not the best for ICANN as well as the Registrars, but I have already covered
> that
> 
> Best Regards
> Bhavin Turakhia
> Founder, CEO and Chairman
> DirectI
> --------------------------------------
> http://www.directi.com
> Direct Line: +91 (22) 5679 7600
> Direct Fax: +91 (22) 5679 7510
> Board Line (USA): +1 (415) 240 4172
> Board Line (India): +91 (22) 5679 7500
> --------------------------------------