On 19/05/2013 22:40, Alan Greenberg wrote:

There are a number of reports (which I cannot judge the accuracy of) that indicate the market for parked domains may be going down and this apparently constitutes a significant part of the revenue going to ICANN. There are also reports that more accurate Whois requirements may impact sales and thus revenue.

How will ICANN's budget process handle such possibly radical revenue decrease?

I specifically point out the possible inadequacy of the funding model in my recent WCIT report: sustaining a multi-stakeholder process is costly - in the arena of the wider Internet Governance (and not only Domain Names) is it fair that only proceeds from Domain Name sales are the sole source of investment? Whose job is it to look at future funding models? How about funding based on IP addresses, which every single computer needs to have to access the Internet? Would this work or would this be a hindrance to Internet development? Best regards, Olivier ps. I admit the questions I ask above probably stretch further than the ATRT2 mandate.

Dear Olivier, I know a lot of changes are being done at the moment. When analysing finances you have to take into account the changes that have been implemented but also evaluate the methods that are planned to be used, so I am not afraid of the timing. Actually the focus from external consultants could help ICANN staff evaluate the new processes as they go along, which might be helpful. Best, Lise Fra: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond [mailto:ocl@gih.com] Sendt: 20. maj 2013 11:05 Til: Lise Fuhr Cc: atrt2@icann.org Emne: Re: [atrt2] One pager ICANN finances Dear Lise, I can see a challenge with this study - which is that we are dealing with moving goalposts at the moment. The next round of ICANN Operating Plan & Budget feedback has just started and this year, the process is quite different from prior years due to the new management & introduction of a cross-matrix of cost centres thus breaking down silos but introducing complexity at the budget making level as well as bottom-up interaction with the community. Last week I took part in a Budget call with the presentation of this year's budget. Whilst I think that a lot of work has gone into the communication and engagement aspect of the process, a vital question was asked by participants: how much of this draft budget is frozen already? The answer was that 80-90% of it was already frozen, exceptionally this year, due to the late start. This shortness of time was explained because last year's plans for budget and strategic planning and framework cycles have been replaced by this new system. In short, I am worried that we're taking a snapshot of a process which is actually undergoing a change and that snapshot will not be a good reflection of the process at it will be by the time our report will be drafted and released. As in any work in progress, perhaps would it be important to wait for the finished article to be more ready? Open question to all. Kind regards, Olivier On 19/05/2013 18:39, Lise Fuhr wrote: Dear all, A proposal for a study. Have a nice Sunday. Best, Lise _______________________________________________ atrt2 mailing list atrt2@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2 -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html