Dear all, while I can understand Thomas idea, I prefer the way Bob looks at it asking for details of the work spend for registrars. If I use a lawyer he normally gives me a detailed list of activities together with his invoice. If we have to pay the bill I would strongly request something equivalent. Pardon, but from my personal experience I am at all NOT convinced that ICANN is working efficient. On the contrary we know from the ccTLDs that ICANN likes to be envolved in additional matters enlaging the competence. siegfried On 9 Jun 2004 at 10:14, Thomas Keller wrote: Date sent: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 10:14:34 +0200 From: Thomas Keller <tom@schlund.de> To: "Robert F. Connelly" <rconnell@psi-japan.com> Copies to: Registrars Constituency <registrars@dnso.org>, Kurt Pritz <pritz@icann.org> Subject: Re: [registrars] Resellers a burden upon ICANN Organization: Schlund + Partner AG
Dear Bob,
I guess the point Paul was trying to make was that the complains to ICANN are not related to the amount of registrations a registrar has. In other words in reality the registrars with more domain names to not cost ICANN more money than smaller registrars with less registrations. Since there seems to be no interrelation to the amount of domains in this regard and on the other hand certainly is no relation to domains on the policy cost site I would like to raise the question why the fees should be domain related at all. This might not be a very popular viewpoint but shouldn't it ,as a matter of fairness and equal opportunity, be the same fee for all of us if we all receive the same service? In theory I do not really see why someone with a successful (or different) business model should be punished by having to pay more for the same service than anyone else. The way almost every tax system is build to take up this analogy again is that the ones with more contribute more to the public good than the others but it is always predictable and there is always a cap. The system I would like to see only relies on caped fixed fees which might even be calculated by the amount of registrations held but has no additional variable or transaction fees. Such a system could look like a ordinary tax table:
These figures are just examples. I randomly picked numbers .-)
0 - 10000 $10000 (Basic fee to be able to play the game) 10000 - 50000 $15000 50000 - 100000 $20000 100000 - 500000 $50000 500000 - 1000000 $80000 1000000 - 2000000 $100000 2000000 - 3000000 $1200000 3000000 - 4000000 $1400000 ...
In the case the money collected in such a way should not sum up to the amount demanded by ICANN I would suggest that ICANN is looking for alternative sources of funding .-)
Best,
tom
Am 08.06.2004 schrieb Robert F. Connelly:
Dear Registrars:
In attempting to justify the large fixed fee for *all* registrars, Paul Twomey stated that much of the large load handled by ICANN staff is created by irate registrants; and he implied that smaller registrars cause a disproportionate number of grievances*.
It appeared to me from the continuing discussion that many of these complaints result from the burgeoning number of resellers.
The discussion turned to whether resellers give registrants adequate notice of who their registrar actually is. It *is* a contractual requirement upon registrars -- but do resellers give sufficient notice?
I can tell you that we have many cases of frustrated attempts to transfer from a registrar which uses resellers. We have hard copies of authorizations from registrants, including registered corporate seals, before we ever queue a transfer request. Often, the registrar of record tells us we must clear that transfer through their reseller:-(
Perhaps we should load our complaints upon ICANN;-}
Regards, BobC, for PSI-Japan, Inc.
* Footnote: I advised Paul that I would classify his statement as anecdotal unless he could quantify it. It would be interesting to see whose "names are on the blotter";-}
Just as long as the quantification does not become a new line item in the budget;-{
Gruss,
tom
(__) (OO)_____ (oo) /|\ A cow is not entirely full of | |--/ | * milk some of it is hamburger! w w w w