[registrars] ICANN budget.

[Rick Wesson]

Ross,

ICANN has already drawn lines between large and small registrars ( and
often we do too) in that they will forgive 2/3 of the accreditation fee if
a registrar meets some criteria to be set at some later date.

I have several issues with the budget which are:

   o Each budget changes fees. Fees must be set at a separate process; not
     during a budget process.

   o Statements of Cash-Flow, Profit/Loss and Balance sheet are missing in
     all budget discussions, just what ICANN costs and
     how well it fulfills its mission are never discussed. No one has even
     looked at past budgets to determine ICANN's "success"

   o The $19K accreditation fee is a regressive tax, the more you earn
     the lower your tax rate.

   o The per domain fees are a neither progressive or regressive but are
     considered a "flat" tax as everyone pays the same rate
     regardless of revenue generated or business model.

   o The $19K accreditation fee is a penalty for a business
     model, the penalty, judgement and forgives have no objective
     criteria defined to measure who gets forgiveness and who does not;
     nor is an appeals processes outlined.

Large registrars are against progressive taxes as they will bare more of
the cost though -- no progressive taxes are proposed! However, large
registrars would benefit from small registrars evaporating with the
regressive 19K accreditation fees -- and may benefit from better success
in drop-pools, but this is just conjecture.

ICANN is not performing a budgeting process as most would be led to
believe this process is just a fee adjustment process.

There is lots of literature on what happens to markets and the poor with
regressive taxes, "flat taxes" have the allure of fairness which is why the
rich rarely support them.

ross, I hope these facts do help you understand the economic division
between large and small registrars and how the current budget proposal
favors large registrars through regressive taxes and fees.


-rick


On Tue, 25 May 2004, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:

> On 5/25/2004 2:37 AM Robert F. Connelly noted that:
>
> > 3. More of ICANN's resources are expended upon the larger registrars.
> >
> > 4. Most especially, large registrars with many resellers probably cause
> > many more vexing problems for ICANN, they are certainly a problem for
> > *all* registrars.
>
> Bob - this isn't the first time that I bring this up. Drawing lines
> between large registrars and small registrars causes us to have less of
> a voice within ICANN. The real issue here lies with the overall size of
> the budget and the economic demands of non-contributing parties. Let's
> try and keep this discussion based on fact and focused on where the
> heart of the matter lies.
> --
>
>                         -rwr
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>                  "Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions.
>                                             All life is an experiment.
>                              The more experiments you make the better."
>                          - Ralph Waldo Emerson
>
> Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
> My Blogware: http://www.byte.org
>
>
>