Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
Dear All, Please find below the notes and action items from today’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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=4zHolvsBo6lsC2fsFnhbQd0l8fVzyqdj0t9oV6_NWjM&s=-vuUpZTVZXrpFcq3-nA--Ltl_ESCT71X4cBhx3axkEY&e=>. 1. 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. 1. Welcome – DOI 1. 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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds” The group needs to discuss this at a later stage. 1. 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+Auctio...) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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<mailto: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
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. Alan’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 today’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 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=4zHolvsBo6lsC2fsFnhbQd0l8fVzyqdj0t9oV6_NWjM&s=-vuUpZTVZXrpFcq3-nA--Ltl_ESCT71X4cBhx3axkEY&e=>* .
1. *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.
1. *Welcome – DOI*
1. *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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds”
The group needs to discuss this at a later stage.
1. *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 group’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/
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Hi Kavouss, Am I missing something - or are you suggesting that the CCWG should only determine whether or not money be fed into ICANN's reserve account, without also indicating what proportion should be used to that effect? If so - I don't see how the CCWG could consider anything beyond that simple yes/no question, as we'd have no indication how much money we would have leftover to work with, once the reserve is replenished. Decisions about allocation priorities can't really be made unless we also look at how the pie should be portioned out, right? Michael Karanicolas On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <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.
Alan’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 today’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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds”
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+Auctio...) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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/
_______________________________________________ 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
My take on todays discussion was that any decision of allocation to the reserve fund can only be done once this group has firstly decided how the funds are going to be used - that is, the types of projects we decide on - and their time frames. Once these decisions are made, then we will get an overall picture of how much money will be needed over the longer term and can make further decisions on what might be able to be kept in reserve for reinvestment for future projects, or to top up ICANN's reserves if we all think this is appropriate. Maureen On 10/08/2017 8:07 am, "Michael Karanicolas" <mkaranicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Kavouss,
Am I missing something - or are you suggesting that the CCWG should only determine whether or not money be fed into ICANN's reserve account, without also indicating what proportion should be used to that effect?
If so - I don't see how the CCWG could consider anything beyond that simple yes/no question, as we'd have no indication how much money we would have leftover to work with, once the reserve is replenished. Decisions about allocation priorities can't really be made unless we also look at how the pie should be portioned out, right?
Michael Karanicolas
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <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.
Alan’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 today’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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds”
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 group’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/
_______________________________________________ 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
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
I already shared my vision that would be good to separate some reserve for raining days. I am not seeing the DNS industry growing much these next years, and just make a proposal is up to us. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com<mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com>> Organization: Hellerstein & Associates Reply-To: Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com<mailto:judith@jhellerstein.com>> Date: Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 16:40 To: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting Hi All, I agree with Maureen on this issue. I think any discussion of what money if any should be allocated to the reserve fund can only be done after we have decided how the funds will be used and what the time frame will be. I can see the wisdom of putting some money int a reserve fund for future capacity building or other future projects that we have not thought of but less on topping off ICANN's reserves. I agree with Stephanie that I am not sure that is the correct thing to do with the money. It might be legally OK to do but I think perception wise it is a really bad move to make Best, Judith _________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein Mobile/Whats app: +1202-333-6517 E-mail: Judith@jhellerstein.com<mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com> Website: www.jhellerstein.com<http://www.jhellerstein.com> Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/<http://www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/> Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide On 8/10/2017 2:35 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote: My take on todays discussion was that any decision of allocation to the reserve fund can only be done once this group has firstly decided how the funds are going to be used - that is, the types of projects we decide on - and their time frames. Once these decisions are made, then we will get an overall picture of how much money will be needed over the longer term and can make further decisions on what might be able to be kept in reserve for reinvestment for future projects, or to top up ICANN's reserves if we all think this is appropriate. Maureen On 10/08/2017 8:07 am, "Michael Karanicolas" <mkaranicolas@gmail.com<mailto:mkaranicolas@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Kavouss, Am I missing something - or are you suggesting that the CCWG should only determine whether or not money be fed into ICANN's reserve account, without also indicating what proportion should be used to that effect? If so - I don't see how the CCWG could consider anything beyond that simple yes/no question, as we'd have no indication how much money we would have leftover to work with, once the reserve is replenished. Decisions about allocation priorities can't really be made unless we also look at how the pie should be portioned out, right? Michael Karanicolas On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com<mailto: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.
Alan’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<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear All,
Please find below the notes and action items from today’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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds”
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+Auctio...) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>
Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO
Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
based on previous surveys there was not a lot of support for this. of course it can be discussed again, but I fear people are thinking it more likely than it is. EN
On Aug 10, 2017, at 3:28 PM, Dietmar Stefitz <djs@bemarnet.es> 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.
Alan’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 today’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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds”
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+Auctio...) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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.
= = = =
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/
_______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
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> <<mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>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.
Alanâs 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 <<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>joke.braeken@icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
Please find below the notes and action items from todayâs 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>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: âTo 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+Auctio...)
and to share any further questions for Xavier on the groupâs 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/>https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-6GNDQHJ6/ )
= = = =
Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>>>> joke.braeken@icann.org
Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: <https://twitter.com/ccNSO>https://twitter.com/ccNSO
Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: <https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/>https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>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
Discussing whether or not we should put money to the reserve account falls in our terms of référence. Discussing what would be the level of reserve account is outside CCWG auction Regards Kavouss On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
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. >> Alan’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 today’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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or >>> a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds†>>> 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 group’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 <joke.braeken@icann.org>
*>>> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: *https://twitter.com/ccNSO
*>>> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: * https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/
*>>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
*>> _______________________________________________ >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
*MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <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 <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds>*
Dear All - I agree with Alan's description about what Xavier said. Let's continue the discussion to have a clearer understanding between ourselves about what we want in relation to the reserve fund and then let's have a debate at our next call. Erika Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 10, 2017, at 10:40 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
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.
Alan’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 today’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: “To 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+Auctio... ) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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.
= = = =
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/
_______________________________________________ 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
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
All, I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum 12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment Policy, see at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en, see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below). “The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected expenditures.“ I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used in non-profit organizations. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN – SVP & CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Phone: 310-301-5838 Mobile: 805-312-0052 Fax: 310-957-2348 From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Date: Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM To: Dietmar Stefitz <djs@bemarnet.es>, Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas@gmail.com>, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> Cc: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting 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<mailto: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.
Alan’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<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> > wrote:
Dear All,
Please find below the notes and action items from today’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[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=6OyX-H7GEmBCRJWXNDGE46VvO6oDVoRB82Z2AeomXAg&e=>.
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[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_quarterlyreports&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=baFsmaqAdvnSkJG4eoXhzZNn5-StHSA9z08s4kUvK4E&e=>)
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: “To 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[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_CWGONGAP_2017-2D08-2D10-2BCCWG-2BNew-2BgTLD-2BAuction-2BProceeds-2Bcall&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=FQiYsQAxL7CV_3RJCSjIYJtSMgDGoFBN-QeXmJoUPBU&e=> ) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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.
= = = =
Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto: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
Hello, Xavier is right about reserve that covers operational expenses for minimum is say 12 month being normal practice. Some even do it for more; some RIRs have way above 1 year already while others are working towards same. However ofcourse none can match the fat figures of ICANN budget. ;-) However I don't think auction proceeds in this context can be referred to as surplus that can get ploughed back to achieve reserve target set by ICANN management NOR do I think it is a target/goal that this group should try to achieve. I for will suggest that we should consider mechanisms that allow some community projects that ICANN normally fund in their budget to be eligible, which if approved (based on the process) may then result to more surpluses to ICANN and they(Board) can decide to put that to reserve. Regards Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Aug 10, 2017 10:26 PM, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez@icann.org> wrote:
All,
I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum 12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment Policy, see at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en, see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below).
“The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected expenditures.“
I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used in non-profit organizations.
Thank you.
Best,
Xavier
Xavier Calvez
ICANN – SVP & CFO
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094
Phone: 310-301-5838
Mobile: 805-312-0052
Fax: 310-957-2348
*From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> *Date: *Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM *To: *Dietmar Stefitz <djs@bemarnet.es>, Michael Karanicolas < mkaranicolas@gmail.com>, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> *Cc: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
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. >> Alan’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 today’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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_D...>
*. >>> 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[icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_quarterly...>
*) >>> 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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or >>> a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds†*
*>>> 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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...> *) >>> and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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/[surveymonkey.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_re...>
* ) >>> = = = = >>> Joke Braeken >>> ccNSO Policy Advisor *>>> joke.braeken@icann.org <joke.braeken@icann.org>
*>>> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: *https://twitter.com/ccNSO[twitter.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ccNSO&d=DwM...>
*>>> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: *https://www.facebook.com/ ccnso/[facebook.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_ccnso_...>
http://ccnso.icann.org[ccnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ccnso.icann.org_&d=DwMFA...>
*>>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
*>> _______________________________________________ >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
*MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <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 <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds>*
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
All, A couple of thoughts on this topic. On the subject of whether or not ICANN should have a 12 month operating expense reserve in place. Agreed that it seems to be common practice in the not for profit sector. Whether or not it should be the case for ICANN is an interesting question, but agreed, not one for this CWG. In any event, Xavier has clarified that the current policy is that the level of operating reserve should be 12 months. My understanding of the question for this group is not whether or not we would sanction the (auction fund) money being used to top up the reserves. But rather, whether or not we would like to see rules in place that sanction ICANN (the organisation) applying for auction funds. In evaluating that question of ICANN the organisation as a prospective applicant, a use or test case for that consideration is ICANN applying (under the same rules as anyone else) for auction funds to top up the ICANN reserve funds. My personal view is that ICANN should be demonstrating a commitment to fulfilling its current policy (to have in place a 12 month reserve) by budgeting an operating surplus to build that reserve. In addition (independently of this CWG), ICANN should review its current policy on reserve funds. If these two criteria were met, it would make me personaly much more sympathetic to potentially topping up reserve funds (to some extent) with auction funds. At the risk of being repetitive, it seems to me that the question for this CWG remains: - Whether or not ICANN the Organisation should be permitted to apply for funds? and - If so, what constraints should be place on this (use of funds, quantum etc)? Thanks, Jonathan From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 7:18 AM To: Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez@icann.org> Cc: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting Hello, Xavier is right about reserve that covers operational expenses for minimum is say 12 month being normal practice. Some even do it for more; some RIRs have way above 1 year already while others are working towards same. However ofcourse none can match the fat figures of ICANN budget. ;-) However I don't think auction proceeds in this context can be referred to as surplus that can get ploughed back to achieve reserve target set by ICANN management NOR do I think it is a target/goal that this group should try to achieve. I for will suggest that we should consider mechanisms that allow some community projects that ICANN normally fund in their budget to be eligible, which if approved (based on the process) may then result to more surpluses to ICANN and they(Board) can decide to put that to reserve. Regards Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Aug 10, 2017 10:26 PM, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez@icann.org <mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org> > wrote: All, I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum 12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment Policy, see at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en, see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below). “The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected expenditures.“ I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used in non-profit organizations. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN – SVP & CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Phone: 310-301-5838 Mobile: 805-312-0052 Fax: 310-957-2348 From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> > on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> > Date: Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM To: Dietmar Stefitz <djs@bemarnet.es <mailto:djs@bemarnet.es> >, Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas@gmail.com <mailto:mkaranicolas@gmail.com> >, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> > Cc: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> " <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> > Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting 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 <mailto: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.
Alan’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 <mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> > wrote:
Dear All,
Please find below the notes and action items from today’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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_D...> .
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[icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_quarterly...> )
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: “To 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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...> ) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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/[surveymonkey.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_re...> )
= = = =
Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> >>> joke.braeken@icann.org
Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO[twitter.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ccNSO&d=DwM...>
Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/[facebook.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_ccnso_...>
http://ccnso.icann.org[ccnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ccnso.icann.org_&d=DwMFA...>
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> >>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list MK <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> > 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 _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
I will like to add my +1 to the two questions posed by Jonathan. I will attempt to provide a response to the 2 question if we agree it's the way to approach this matter. Regards Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Aug 11, 2017 10:10 AM, "Jonathan Robinson" <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
A couple of thoughts on this topic.
On the subject of whether or not ICANN should have a 12 month operating expense reserve in place.
Agreed that it seems to be common practice in the not for profit sector.
Whether or not it should be the case for ICANN is an interesting question, but agreed, not one for this CWG.
In any event, Xavier has clarified that the current policy is that the level of operating reserve should be 12 months.
My understanding of the question for this group is not whether or not we would sanction the (auction fund) money being used to top up the reserves.
But rather, whether or not we would like to see rules in place that sanction ICANN (the organisation) applying for auction funds.
In evaluating that question of ICANN the organisation as a prospective applicant, a use or test case for that consideration is ICANN applying (under the same rules as anyone else) for auction funds to top up the ICANN reserve funds.
My personal view is that ICANN should be demonstrating a commitment to fulfilling its current policy (to have in place a 12 month reserve) by budgeting an operating surplus to build that reserve.
In addition (independently of this CWG), ICANN should review its current policy on reserve funds.
If these two criteria were met, it would make me personaly much more sympathetic to potentially topping up reserve funds (to some extent) with auction funds.
At the risk of being repetitive, it seems to me that the question for this CWG remains:
- Whether or not ICANN the Organisation should be permitted to apply for funds? and
- If so, what constraints should be place on this (use of funds, quantum etc)?
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:* Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 7:18 AM *To:* Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez@icann.org> *Cc:* ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
Hello,
Xavier is right about reserve that covers operational expenses for minimum is say 12 month being normal practice. Some even do it for more; some RIRs have way above 1 year already while others are working towards same. However ofcourse none can match the fat figures of ICANN budget. ;-)
However I don't think auction proceeds in this context can be referred to as surplus that can get ploughed back to achieve reserve target set by ICANN management NOR do I think it is a target/goal that this group should try to achieve.
I for will suggest that we should consider mechanisms that allow some community projects that ICANN normally fund in their budget to be eligible, which if approved (based on the process) may then result to more surpluses to ICANN and they(Board) can decide to put that to reserve.
Regards
Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On Aug 10, 2017 10:26 PM, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez@icann.org> wrote:
All,
I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum 12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment Policy, see at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en, see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below).
“The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected expenditures.“
I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used in non-profit organizations.
Thank you.
Best,
Xavier
Xavier Calvez
ICANN – SVP & CFO
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094
Phone: 310-301-5838
Mobile: 805-312-0052
Fax: 310-957-2348
*From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> *Date: *Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM *To: *Dietmar Stefitz <djs@bemarnet.es>, Michael Karanicolas < mkaranicolas@gmail.com>, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> *Cc: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
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 shouldMK> only determine whether or not money be fed into ICANN's reserveMK> account, without also indicating what proportion should be used toMK> that effect?MK> If so - I don't see how the CCWG could consider anything beyond thatMK> simple yes/no question, as we'd have no indication how much money weMK> would have leftover to work with, once the reserve is replenished.MK> Decisions about allocation priorities can't really be made unless weMK> also look at how the pie should be portioned out, right?MK> Michael KaranicolasMK> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Kavouss ArastehMK> <* 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.>> Alan’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 today’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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_D...>
*.>>> 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[icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_quarterly...>
*)>>> 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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or>>> a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds†*
*>>> 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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...> *)>>> and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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/[surveymonkey.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_re...>
* )>>> = = = =>>> Joke Braeken>>> ccNSO Policy Advisor*>>> joke.braeken@icann.org <joke.braeken@icann.org>
*>>> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: *https://twitter.com/ccNSO[twitter.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ccNSO&d=DwM...>
*>>> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: *https://www.facebook.com/ ccnso/[facebook.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_ccnso_...>
http://ccnso.icann.org[ccnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ccnso.icann.org_&d=DwMFA...>
*>>> _______________________________________________>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list*>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
*>> _______________________________________________>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list*>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
*MK> _______________________________________________MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list*MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <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: 7bitContent-Disposition: inlineX-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 listCcwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds>*
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
A very useful summary, thank you Jonathan. Once again, apologies for getting us slightly off topic, but I do think this question should be resolved. Stephanie On 2017-08-11 05:10, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
All,
A couple of thoughts on this topic.
On the subject of whether or not ICANN should have a 12 month operating expense reserve in place.
Agreed that it seems to be common practice in the not for profit sector.
Whether or not it should be the case for ICANN is an interesting question, but agreed, not one for this CWG.
In any event, Xavier has clarified that the current policy is that the level of operating reserve should be 12 months.
My understanding of the question for this group is not whether or not we would sanction the (auction fund) money being used to top up the reserves.
But rather, whether or not we would like to see rules in place that sanction ICANN (the organisation) applying for auction funds.
In evaluating that question of ICANN the organisation as a prospective applicant, a use or test case for that consideration is ICANN applying (under the same rules as anyone else) for auction funds to top up the ICANN reserve funds.
My personal view is that ICANN should be demonstrating a commitment to fulfilling its current policy (to have in place a 12 month reserve) by budgeting an operating surplus to build that reserve.
In addition (independently of this CWG), ICANN should review its current policy on reserve funds.
If these two criteria were met, it would make me personaly much more sympathetic to potentially topping up reserve funds (to some extent) with auction funds.
At the risk of being repetitive, it seems to me that the question for this CWG remains:
-Whether or not ICANN the Organisation should be permitted to apply for funds? and
-If so, what constraints should be place on this (use of funds, quantum etc)?
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:*Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 7:18 AM *To:* Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez@icann.org> *Cc:* ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org *Subject:* Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
Hello,
Xavier is right about reserve that covers operational expenses for minimum is say 12 month being normal practice. Some even do it for more; some RIRs have way above 1 year already while others are working towards same. However ofcourse none can match the fat figures of ICANN budget. ;-)
However I don't think auction proceeds in this context can be referred to as surplus that can get ploughed back to achieve reserve target set by ICANN management NOR do I think it is a target/goal that this group should try to achieve.
I for will suggest that we should consider mechanisms that allow some community projects that ICANN normally fund in their budget to be eligible, which if approved (based on the process) may then result to more surpluses to ICANN and they(Board) can decide to put that to reserve.
Regards
Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On Aug 10, 2017 10:26 PM, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez@icann.org <mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>> wrote:
All,
I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum 12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment Policy, see at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en, see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below).
“The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected expenditures.“
I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used in non-profit organizations.
Thank you.
Best,
Xavier
Xavier Calvez
ICANN – SVP & CFO
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094
Phone: 310-301-5838
Mobile: 805-312-0052
Fax: 310-957-2348
*From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> *Date: *Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM *To: *Dietmar Stefitz <djs@bemarnet.es <mailto:djs@bemarnet.es>>, Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas@gmail.com <mailto:mkaranicolas@gmail.com>>, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com <mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> *Cc: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
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 <mailto: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.
>> Alan’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 <mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> *> >> wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>> Please find below the notes and action items from today’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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=6OyX-H7GEmBCRJWXNDGE46VvO6oDVoRB82Z2AeomXAg&e=>*.
>>> 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[icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_quarterlyreports&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=baFsmaqAdvnSkJG4eoXhzZNn5-StHSA9z08s4kUvK4E&e=>*)
>>> 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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or >>> a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds†**
**>>> 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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...> *) >>> and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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/[surveymonkey.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_results_SM-2D6GNDQHJ6_&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=yulKeXnAn5CN2_dNRAj8nx_5IeuwBT4F1Heh3dtZJWI&e=>*)
>>> = = = =
>>> Joke Braeken
>>> ccNSO Policy Advisor
*>>> joke.braeken@icann.org <mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>
*>>> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: *https://twitter.com/ccNSO[twitter.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ccNSO&d=DwM...>
*>>> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: *https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/[facebook.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_ccnso_...>
>>> http://ccnso.icann.org[ccnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ccnso.icann.org_&d=DwMFA...>
*>>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> >>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
*>> _______________________________________________ >> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> >> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds *MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list *MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds/
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <mailto: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
Jonathan Thank you for your thought. I fully agree with the way you have describe the process provided that CCWG is not involved whether or not ICANN should or should not have reserve account NOR we interfere to argue or determine or fixe any level /ceiling for such reserve account . In other words we just could discussed as you have summarised at the end of your message. Regards Kavouss Sent from my iPhone
On 11 Aug 2017, at 16:18, Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
A very useful summary, thank you Jonathan. Once again, apologies for getting us slightly off topic, but I do think this question should be resolved.
Stephanie
On 2017-08-11 05:10, Jonathan Robinson wrote: All,
A couple of thoughts on this topic.
On the subject of whether or not ICANN should have a 12 month operating expense reserve in place. Agreed that it seems to be common practice in the not for profit sector. Whether or not it should be the case for ICANN is an interesting question, but agreed, not one for this CWG.
In any event, Xavier has clarified that the current policy is that the level of operating reserve should be 12 months. My understanding of the question for this group is not whether or not we would sanction the (auction fund) money being used to top up the reserves. But rather, whether or not we would like to see rules in place that sanction ICANN (the organisation) applying for auction funds.
In evaluating that question of ICANN the organisation as a prospective applicant, a use or test case for that consideration is ICANN applying (under the same rules as anyone else) for auction funds to top up the ICANN reserve funds.
My personal view is that ICANN should be demonstrating a commitment to fulfilling its current policy (to have in place a 12 month reserve) by budgeting an operating surplus to build that reserve. In addition (independently of this CWG), ICANN should review its current policy on reserve funds. If these two criteria were met, it would make me personaly much more sympathetic to potentially topping up reserve funds (to some extent) with auction funds.
At the risk of being repetitive, it seems to me that the question for this CWG remains: - Whether or not ICANN the Organisation should be permitted to apply for funds? and - If so, what constraints should be place on this (use of funds, quantum etc)?
Thanks,
Jonathan
From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 7:18 AM To: Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez@icann.org> Cc: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
Hello,
Xavier is right about reserve that covers operational expenses for minimum is say 12 month being normal practice. Some even do it for more; some RIRs have way above 1 year already while others are working towards same. However ofcourse none can match the fat figures of ICANN budget. ;-)
However I don't think auction proceeds in this context can be referred to as surplus that can get ploughed back to achieve reserve target set by ICANN management NOR do I think it is a target/goal that this group should try to achieve.
I for will suggest that we should consider mechanisms that allow some community projects that ICANN normally fund in their budget to be eligible, which if approved (based on the process) may then result to more surpluses to ICANN and they(Board) can decide to put that to reserve.
Regards
Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On Aug 10, 2017 10:26 PM, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez@icann.org> wrote: All, I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum 12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment Policy, see at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en, see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below).
“The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected expenditures.“
I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used in non-profit organizations.
Thank you.
Best,
Xavier
Xavier Calvez ICANN – SVP & CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Phone: 310-301-5838 Mobile: 805-312-0052 Fax: 310-957-2348
From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Date: Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM To: Dietmar Stefitz <djs@bemarnet.es>, Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas@gmail.com>, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> Cc: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
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.
Alan’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 today’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[community.icann.org].
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[icann.org])
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: “To 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[community.icann.org] ) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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/[surveymonkey.com] )
= = = =
Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
joke.braeken@icann.org
Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO[twitter.com]
Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/[facebook.com]
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Great summary. Thank you Jonathan. On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:10 PM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@afilias.info> wrote:
All,
A couple of thoughts on this topic.
On the subject of whether or not ICANN should have a 12 month operating expense reserve in place.
Agreed that it seems to be common practice in the not for profit sector.
Whether or not it should be the case for ICANN is an interesting question, but agreed, not one for this CWG.
In any event, Xavier has clarified that the current policy is that the level of operating reserve should be 12 months.
My understanding of the question for this group is not whether or not we would sanction the (auction fund) money being used to top up the reserves.
But rather, whether or not we would like to see rules in place that sanction ICANN (the organisation) applying for auction funds.
In evaluating that question of ICANN the organisation as a prospective applicant, a use or test case for that consideration is ICANN applying (under the same rules as anyone else) for auction funds to top up the ICANN reserve funds.
My personal view is that ICANN should be demonstrating a commitment to fulfilling its current policy (to have in place a 12 month reserve) by budgeting an operating surplus to build that reserve.
In addition (independently of this CWG), ICANN should review its current policy on reserve funds.
If these two criteria were met, it would make me personaly much more sympathetic to potentially topping up reserve funds (to some extent) with auction funds.
At the risk of being repetitive, it seems to me that the question for this CWG remains:
- Whether or not ICANN the Organisation should be permitted to apply for funds? and
- If so, what constraints should be place on this (use of funds, quantum etc)?
Thanks,
Jonathan
*From:* Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 7:18 AM *To:* Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez@icann.org> *Cc:* ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
*Subject:* Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
Hello,
Xavier is right about reserve that covers operational expenses for minimum is say 12 month being normal practice. Some even do it for more; some RIRs have way above 1 year already while others are working towards same. However ofcourse none can match the fat figures of ICANN budget. ;-)
However I don't think auction proceeds in this context can be referred to as surplus that can get ploughed back to achieve reserve target set by ICANN management NOR do I think it is a target/goal that this group should try to achieve.
I for will suggest that we should consider mechanisms that allow some community projects that ICANN normally fund in their budget to be eligible, which if approved (based on the process) may then result to more surpluses to ICANN and they(Board) can decide to put that to reserve.
Regards
Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On Aug 10, 2017 10:26 PM, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez@icann.org> wrote:
All,
I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum 12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment Policy, see at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en, see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below).
“The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected expenditures.“
I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used in non-profit organizations.
Thank you.
Best,
Xavier
Xavier Calvez
ICANN – SVP & CFO
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094
Phone: 310-301-5838
Mobile: 805-312-0052
Fax: 310-957-2348
*From: *<ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> *Date: *Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM *To: *Dietmar Stefitz <djs@bemarnet.es>, Michael Karanicolas < mkaranicolas@gmail.com>, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com> *Cc: *"ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> *Subject: *Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting
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 shouldMK> only determine whether or not money be fed into ICANN's reserveMK> account, without also indicating what proportion should be used toMK> that effect?MK> If so - I don't see how the CCWG could consider anything beyond thatMK> simple yes/no question, as we'd have no indication how much money weMK> would have leftover to work with, once the reserve is replenished.MK> Decisions about allocation priorities can't really be made unless weMK> also look at how the pie should be portioned out, right?MK> Michael KaranicolasMK> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Kavouss ArastehMK> <* 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.>> Alan’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 today’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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_D...>
*.>>> 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[icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_quarterly...>
*)>>> 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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or>>> a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds†*
*>>> 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[community.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_dis...> *)>>> and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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/[surveymonkey.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_re...>
* )>>> = = = =>>> Joke Braeken>>> ccNSO Policy Advisor*>>> joke.braeken@icann.org <joke.braeken@icann.org>
*>>> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: *https://twitter.com/ccNSO[twitter.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ccNSO&d=DwM...>
*>>> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: *https://www.facebook.com/ ccnso/[facebook.com] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_ccnso_...>
http://ccnso.icann.org[ccnso.icann.org] <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ccnso.icann.org_&d=DwMFA...>
*>>> _______________________________________________>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list*>>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
*>> _______________________________________________>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list*>> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
*MK> _______________________________________________MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list*MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <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: 7bitContent-Disposition: inlineX-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 listCcwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org <Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds>*
_______________________________________________ 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
Thanks Xavier for the clarification and Jonathan for the below summary .. A couple of thoughts/questions: - I believe both questions as identified by Jonathan are part of charter question number 10 which states: ‘To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds?’ .. Is this now agreed, as I’m not sure how we concluded on the call ? - I think we now have 2 discussion tracks: o funding external projects/initiatives, and o whether ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part of it can benefit from the auction proceeds .. Are those 2 tracks separate or inter-related somehow ? In other words, can both discussions run in parallel or should they run in a specific order ? Just thinking out loud ☺ !! Kind Regards --Manal From: ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org [mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Robinson Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 11:11 AM To: 'Seun Ojedeji' <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>; 'Xavier J. Calvez' <xavier.calvez@icann.org> Cc: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting All, A couple of thoughts on this topic. On the subject of whether or not ICANN should have a 12 month operating expense reserve in place. Agreed that it seems to be common practice in the not for profit sector. Whether or not it should be the case for ICANN is an interesting question, but agreed, not one for this CWG. In any event, Xavier has clarified that the current policy is that the level of operating reserve should be 12 months. My understanding of the question for this group is not whether or not we would sanction the (auction fund) money being used to top up the reserves. But rather, whether or not we would like to see rules in place that sanction ICANN (the organisation) applying for auction funds. In evaluating that question of ICANN the organisation as a prospective applicant, a use or test case for that consideration is ICANN applying (under the same rules as anyone else) for auction funds to top up the ICANN reserve funds. My personal view is that ICANN should be demonstrating a commitment to fulfilling its current policy (to have in place a 12 month reserve) by budgeting an operating surplus to build that reserve. In addition (independently of this CWG), ICANN should review its current policy on reserve funds. If these two criteria were met, it would make me personaly much more sympathetic to potentially topping up reserve funds (to some extent) with auction funds. At the risk of being repetitive, it seems to me that the question for this CWG remains: - Whether or not ICANN the Organisation should be permitted to apply for funds? and - If so, what constraints should be place on this (use of funds, quantum etc)? Thanks, Jonathan From: Seun Ojedeji [mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 7:18 AM To: Xavier J. Calvez <xavier.calvez@icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>> Cc: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting Hello, Xavier is right about reserve that covers operational expenses for minimum is say 12 month being normal practice. Some even do it for more; some RIRs have way above 1 year already while others are working towards same. However ofcourse none can match the fat figures of ICANN budget. ;-) However I don't think auction proceeds in this context can be referred to as surplus that can get ploughed back to achieve reserve target set by ICANN management NOR do I think it is a target/goal that this group should try to achieve. I for will suggest that we should consider mechanisms that allow some community projects that ICANN normally fund in their budget to be eligible, which if approved (based on the process) may then result to more surpluses to ICANN and they(Board) can decide to put that to reserve. Regards Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Aug 10, 2017 10:26 PM, "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez@icann.org<mailto:xavier.calvez@icann.org>> wrote: All, I apologize if I did not make the following clear: ICANN’s current policy is to have in place a reserve fund equivalent to at minimum 12 months of operating expenses. Refer to ICANN’s Investment Policy, see at https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2014-07-30-en, see the paragraph “Size of Funds”, copied below). “The Reserve Fund shall contain any amounts not contained in the Operating Fund. Any surplus funds will be used to build up the Reserve Fund to a balance sufficient to cover an emergency requirement. The Reserve Fund is expected to reach and maintain a level of funds to maintain a minimum of 12 months of expected expenditures.“ I indicated that this level of a reserve fund is the commonly used in non-profit organizations. Thank you. Best, Xavier Xavier Calvez ICANN – SVP & CFO 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094 Phone: 310-301-5838 Mobile: 805-312-0052 Fax: 310-957-2348 From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> Date: Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 1:41 PM To: Dietmar Stefitz <djs@bemarnet.es<mailto:djs@bemarnet.es>>, Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas@gmail.com<mailto:mkaranicolas@gmail.com>>, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> Cc: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting 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<mailto: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.
Alan’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<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> > wrote:
Dear All,
Please find below the notes and action items from today’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[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=6OyX-H7GEmBCRJWXNDGE46VvO6oDVoRB82Z2AeomXAg&e=>.
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[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_quarterlyreports&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=baFsmaqAdvnSkJG4eoXhzZNn5-StHSA9z08s4kUvK4E&e=>)
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: “To 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[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_CWGONGAP_2017-2D08-2D10-2BCCWG-2BNew-2BgTLD-2BAuction-2BProceeds-2Bcall&d=DwMFAw&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=IWWGaKyGUGcKQNGe7LtArAou7HP6fPR5aWjbPBUFZ3k&m=HKuU-9DAESnqcGMIdaNf5MeIgsXuBdt1W6-AYHyIJIc&s=FQiYsQAxL7CV_3RJCSjIYJtSMgDGoFBN-QeXmJoUPBU&e=> ) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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.
= = = =
Joke Braeken
ccNSO Policy Advisor
joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds MK> _______________________________________________ MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list MK> Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto: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<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Dear Kavouss I believe our group can make such proposal. From my particular view a % of this amount will be interesting to be reserved for raining days. Some analysis related to DNS industry doe not estimate real growth and ICANN shall have a better reserve the proposal is on us to make even if the final decision is not depending on us. Kisses Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. From: <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com<mailto:kavouss.arasteh@gmail.com>> Date: Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 14:50 To: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>> Cc: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting 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. Alan’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<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>> wrote: Dear All, Please find below the notes and action items from today’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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=4zHolvsBo6lsC2fsFnhbQd0l8fVzyqdj0t9oV6_NWjM&s=-vuUpZTVZXrpFcq3-nA--Ltl_ESCT71X4cBhx3axkEY&e=>. 1. 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. 1. Welcome – DOI 1. 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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds” The group needs to discuss this at a later stage. 1. 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+Auctio...) and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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<mailto: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<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Hello, First apologies for missing the call (i guess for a couple of a few more to come as well). I don't think it will be a bad idea in itself to replenish the reserve with certain part of the auction proceeds and I certainly don't think it will be out of scope for this group to we determine that. I quote from the auction proceeds page: "Auction proceeds will be reserved and earmarked until the Board determines a plan for the appropriate use of the funds through consultation with the community" So we can indeed propose to the ICANN Board to use the funds for whatever we have consensus upon and that may include using it for reserve. What I think may be out of scope for this group is to be discussing current status of the reserve in other to justify the need to apportion funds from auction proceeds to it, so the point about having a 12, 18 or 24 months reserve isn't an objective for this CCWG to achieve. I think we just need to agree on whether apportioning funds to ICANN reserve will in any way serve the objectives of the auction proceeds/this CCWG [1] Regards 1. Am sorry if this is already done(after the survey), may be good to have a pointer to where the objectives are published. Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Aug 10, 2017 4:56 PM, "Joke Braeken" <joke.braeken@icann.org> wrote:
Dear All,
Please find below the notes and action items from today’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 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=4zHolvsBo6lsC2fsFnhbQd0l8fVzyqdj0t9oV6_NWjM&s=-vuUpZTVZXrpFcq3-nA--Ltl_ESCT71X4cBhx3axkEY&e=>* .
1. *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.
1. *Welcome – DOI*
1. *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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds”
The group needs to discuss this at a later stage.
1. *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 group’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/
_______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
Dear Seun, Please allow me to react to your question regarding the objectives: 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. The mind map is published here as well: https://community.icann.org/display/CWGONGAP/2017-08-10+CCWG+New+gTLD+Auctio... Best regards, Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto: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 From: Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, 10 August 2017 at 23:20 To: Joke Braeken <joke.braeken@icann.org> Cc: "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> Subject: [Ext] Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Notes & action items from today's CCWG-AP meeting Hello, First apologies for missing the call (i guess for a couple of a few more to come as well). I don't think it will be a bad idea in itself to replenish the reserve with certain part of the auction proceeds and I certainly don't think it will be out of scope for this group to we determine that. I quote from the auction proceeds page: "Auction proceeds will be reserved and earmarked until the Board determines a plan for the appropriate use of the funds through consultation with the community" So we can indeed propose to the ICANN Board to use the funds for whatever we have consensus upon and that may include using it for reserve. What I think may be out of scope for this group is to be discussing current status of the reserve in other to justify the need to apportion funds from auction proceeds to it, so the point about having a 12, 18 or 24 months reserve isn't an objective for this CCWG to achieve. I think we just need to agree on whether apportioning funds to ICANN reserve will in any way serve the objectives of the auction proceeds/this CCWG [1] Regards 1. Am sorry if this is already done(after the survey), may be good to have a pointer to where the objectives are published. Sent from my mobile Kindly excuse brevity and typos On Aug 10, 2017 4:56 PM, "Joke Braeken" <joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org>> wrote: Dear All, Please find below the notes and action items from today’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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_x_DLHDAw&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=7_PQAir-9nJQ2uB2cWiTDDDo5Hfy5HL9rSTe65iXLVM&m=4zHolvsBo6lsC2fsFnhbQd0l8fVzyqdj0t9oV6_NWjM&s=-vuUpZTVZXrpFcq3-nA--Ltl_ESCT71X4cBhx3axkEY&e=>. 1. 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. 1. Welcome – DOI 1. 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[icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_quarterlyreports&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=HyTT2ymvadmiQcmo6B088sWOukGjEbibHJ64u5rMiME&m=Jfn_U6Vg93ZJEyeXhHm3JqWpGAX2iqm981nlv2RV6TA&s=krmE7JSaUfGde9oAFJ2FA014go_2qjhPfy8gH155tw8&e=>) * 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: “To what extent (and, if so, how) could ICANN, the Organization or a constituent part thereof, be the beneficiary of some of the auction funds” The group needs to discuss this at a later stage. 1. 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)[community.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__community.icann.org_display_CWGONGAP_2017-2D08-2D10-2BCCWG-2BNew-2BgTLD-2BAuction-2BProceeds-2Bcall-29&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=HyTT2ymvadmiQcmo6B088sWOukGjEbibHJ64u5rMiME&m=Jfn_U6Vg93ZJEyeXhHm3JqWpGAX2iqm981nlv2RV6TA&s=ayz_Rfeuu4akWyOZpJ8NGOzUFKDK-POON0F7FpYJFZM&e=> and to share any further questions for Xavier on the group’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/[surveymonkey.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.surveymonkey.com_results_SM-2D6GNDQHJ6_&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=HyTT2ymvadmiQcmo6B088sWOukGjEbibHJ64u5rMiME&m=Jfn_U6Vg93ZJEyeXhHm3JqWpGAX2iqm981nlv2RV6TA&s=vhT0y1fHT2jlBYrS-E1f6c9FOCnZIrLzgiM91Hw17yE&e=> ) = = = = Joke Braeken ccNSO Policy Advisor joke.braeken@icann.org<mailto:joke.braeken@icann.org> Follow @ccNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ccNSO[twitter.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ccNSO&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=HyTT2ymvadmiQcmo6B088sWOukGjEbibHJ64u5rMiME&m=Jfn_U6Vg93ZJEyeXhHm3JqWpGAX2iqm981nlv2RV6TA&s=9QteaHIqCtxfWtR9mYstMPqdtZGrHI4hfQ7m9d8cauw&e=> Follow the ccNSO on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ccnso/[facebook.com]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_ccnso_&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=HyTT2ymvadmiQcmo6B088sWOukGjEbibHJ64u5rMiME&m=Jfn_U6Vg93ZJEyeXhHm3JqWpGAX2iqm981nlv2RV6TA&s=JieRqiMdUUhBlJdbAWpl6K_lPJG0g20kZeVQCbJ8I10&e=> http://ccnso.icann.org[ccnso.icann.org]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ccnso.icann.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=HyTT2ymvadmiQcmo6B088sWOukGjEbibHJ64u5rMiME&m=Jfn_U6Vg93ZJEyeXhHm3JqWpGAX2iqm981nlv2RV6TA&s=IRFILK__VY7iTuxmmZxQnL_88qP97z91wneKFkfGrlY&e=> _______________________________________________ Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
participants (16)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Arasteh -
Dietmar Stefitz -
elliot noss -
Erika Mann -
Joke Braeken -
Jonathan Robinson -
Judith Hellerstein -
Kavouss Arasteh
-
Manal Ismail -
Maureen Hilyard -
Michael Karanicolas -
Seun Ojedeji -
Stephanie Perrin -
Vanda Scartezini -
Xavier J. Calvez