To be clear, I don't think anyone on the call suggested we build up the reserve to a 12 or 24 month level of current budget. Xavier said that 1 year was a typical norm for non-profits, but in my opinion, there is no need for that, as in the case of emergency, costs could be ramped down quickly.

I vaguely recall that the level that we were targeting (before the drain from the CCWG-Acct expenses) was something like $80m. So even if we contributed enough to get back to that level, it would be perhaps $40m.

But the issue in my mind is not how much, but if.

Alan

At 10/08/2017 03:28 PM, Dietmar Stefitz wrote:

Hi Erika and all,

I have been very astonished to hear the proposal to use the Auction Money in filling up the reserve account of ICANN.
Filling up for 12 month reserve or 24 month reserve, if we have to take 24 month, there will not be much left to disburse to other projects.

I thought that the call from Xavier has been to explain specially the Investment of the fund at this moment, for which I can only congratulate.
A 1% return on a super save investment is not bad, and it should be made like this in the future.

I would absolutely be against a filling up of the reserve fund from the auction proceeds, at least as a decision from this group.
Or did I misunderstand something?

Dietmar Stefitz

Thursday, August 10, 2017, 8:05:56 PM, you wrote:

MK> Hi Kavouss,

MK> Am I missing something - or are you suggesting that the CCWG should
MK> only determine whether or not money be fed into ICANN's reserve
MK> account, without also indicating what proportion should be used to
MK> that effect?

MK> If so - I don't see how the CCWG could consider anything beyond that
MK> simple yes/no question, as we'd have no indication how much money we
MK> would have leftover to work with, once the reserve is replenished.
MK> Decisions about allocation priorities can't really be made unless we
MK> also look at how the pie should be portioned out, right?

MK> Michael Karanicolas

MK> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Kavouss Arasteh
MK> < kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Dear Erika, Dear All,

>> Today during the last 15 mints of the call I tried to draw your attention to
>> allow me to intervene on the views expressed by Alan reading the Reserve
>> account.

>> If I have well understood his statement he wanted that CCWG discuss the
>> level of ICANN reserve account which was announced by Xavier to be
>> equivalent to one year budget as objective. As Xavier mentioned this level
>> has not been reached.

>> Alanâ€™s view that CCWG discuss the level of ICANN reserve account is outside
>> the mandate of CCWG. We may just decide whether or not that account be fed
>> by using Auction money but decision on the appropriate level of the reserve
>> account is totally outside or mandate as it is a decision to be made by the
>> Board and not by this group

>> Regards

>> Kavouss

>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org >
>> wrote:

>>> Dear All,

>>> Please find below the notes and action items from todayâ€™s CCWG-AP meeting.

>>> Best regards,

>>> Joke Braeken

>>> Notes CCWG – AP Meeting 10 August 2017:

>>> These high-level notes are designed to help the CCWG navigate through the
>>> content of the call and are not meant as a substitute for the transcript
>>> and/or recording. The MP3, transcript, and chat are provided separately and
>>> are posted on the wiki at: https://community.icann.org/x/DLHDAw.

>>> Roll Call

>>> Please state your name for transcription purposes and keep microphones on
>>> mute when not speaking.
>>> Attendance will be taken from the AdobeConnect room.

>>> Welcome – DOI

>>> Overview from Xavier Calvez on investment management

>>> The intention of this presentation is

>>> to allow the group to think on the issue of investment,
>>> to understand ICANN's practice, and to answer any questions that might be
>>> raised.

>>> It helps to inform the discussion on the ROI of the fund; It includes an
>>> overview of how the auction proceeds are currently managed, which might lead
>>> to how they might be managed in the future.

>>> Important to note:

>>> only conservative investment policies are being used
>>> the investment strategy will be designed in support of the objectives

>>> An overview of some illustrative investment scenarios was provided,
>>> followed by Q&A.

>>> Parameters that need to be considered:

>>> amount of money
>>> horizon
>>> level of risk (which is not correlated to the horizon)

>>> Financial information is regularly provided during the quarterly
>>> stakeholder calls.

>>> (amount from latest update - Q3 data of FY17.
>>> https://www.icann.org/quarterlyreports)

>>> Reserve Fund: 64 million
>>> New gTLD unspent application fees: 128 million
>>> Auction proceeds: 233 million
>>> Annual budget of ICANN. FY18 budget expenses 142 million USD.

>>> Regarding replenishing the reserve fund: appropriate procedures need to be
>>> taken, appropriate approvals and decisions need to be in place for it to be
>>> legal.

>>> This is however a moral question as well. The charter does include this
>>> question: â€œTo what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or
>>> a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction fundsâ€

>>> The group needs to discuss this at a later stage.

>>> Next meeting

>>> next CCWG-AP meeting is scheduled for Thursday 24 August at 14.00 UTC

>>> = = = =

>>> Action item #1:

>>> CCWG to review the slides presented by Xavier (published on
>>> https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/2017-08-10+CCWG+New+gTLD+Auction+Proceeds+call )
>>> and to share any further questions for Xavier on the groupâ€™s mailing list.

>>> Action item #2:

>>> Per the discussion during the CCWG-AP meeting on 27 July 2017, the
>>> attached mind map was developed, which aims to regroup the objectives based
>>> on the survey results as well as the subsequent discussions. The CCWG is
>>> encouraged to continue to provide feedback on the proposed regrouping of
>>> objectives/priorities, as well as the clustering of examples ahead of the
>>> next meeting, scheduled for 24 August at 14 UTC.

>>> Action item #3:

>>> CCWG to review responses to charter question #4 and to continue the
>>> discussion on the mailing list.

>>> (see https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-6GNDQHJ6/ )

>>> = = = =

>>> Joke Braeken

>>> ccNSO Policy Advisor

>>> joke.braeken@icann.org

>>> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO

>>> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/

>>> http://ccnso.icann.org

>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds

>> _______________________________________________
>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
MK> _______________________________________________
MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
MK> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds

--
Saludos,
Dietmar

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
         1;MWHPR03MB2718;27:YWDqnEPXx/CS7utzz6td9Qa3koj9je2Sjv9LFnursD0J2VA30AdYQS9BENOC1oqUgmoT+mzlFx7ydYsubIRVesT4Y1jhb3iYxs4FdjVwmhiKOJ9o59lZBh7cDwAsDaB/
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery:
         ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(400001000128)(400125000095)(20160514016)(750103)(520002050)(400001001223)(400125100095)(61617095)(400001002128)(400125200095);

_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds