Re: [registrars] RE: Appeal to ICANN Finance committee to modify ICANN Budget proposal

[Larry Erlich <erlich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

tbarrett wrote:
> 
> I have some serious concerns about the recent ICANN budget discussions.
> 
> 1. The various business models deployed by registrars should not be an issue
> in determining the appropriate ICANN budget.  The registrars should not
> allow this to be a distraction.  The real issue, in my view, is to how to
> insure fiscal discipline and accountability (to ICANN tax-payers)in the
> ICANN budgeting process.
> 
> 2. I'm dismayed to see that ICANN staff has factored registrar business
> models into their budgeting thinking as well.  The ICANN staff and board
> should not be using various registrar business models as rationale for
> increased budget fees.  Simply put, ICANN should be developing their budget
> based on their needs and not based on industry business models that may or
> may not exist in a few months.  This is a slippery path.  A more
> business-model-agnostic approach would be to simply add a ICANN transaction
> tax on the fees paid by the registries to ICANN.
> 
> 3. As any business person knows, there are never the resources available to
> do everything on the budget "wish list".  The process of prioritizing
> business needs and conducting "triage" is healthly for the business.
> Providing a business unlimited funds, to do anything it wants to do, is a
> recipe for failure.  When an organization is not forced to make spending
> trade-offs, it leads to bloat.
> 
> Just as we registrars are forced to make hard choices to how to spend our
> available funds, so too, ICANN needs to make hard choices in how to spend
> its funds.  This is not bad.  This is good and will lead to a lean and
> efficient ICANN.

What I would like to see is an analysis
of the budget document by a third party that can analyse what
ICANN is asking for and suggest possible changes. My guess is
that there are plenty of items that can be scaled down. I would be
willing to pay something toward this effort. How many other
registrars are interested in this? Once again I don't think that
the answer is to simply take the money they are asking for
out of a different pocket.

Larry

> 
> 4.  The only way ICANN will be forced to make hard choices, is to deny it
> the full budget it is asking.  There needs to be a fiscal discipline and a
> growth cap imposed on ICANN funding.
> 
> As a quasi-governmental body, ICANN generates funds through taxes from
> registrars and registries.  As tax-payers, we need to push for a cap on the
> annual growth of taxes that we pay to ICANN.  The ICANN staff and board
> should agree on this growth cap to help enforce fiscal discipline within the
> ICANN organization.  Without this, ICANN will not be truly motivated to
> pursue other sources of revenue.  A growth cap also helps create
> accountability by ICANN to its tax-payers.  Without it, ICANN will simply
> come back year after year asking for more money.
> 
> Sincerely Yours,
> 
> Tom Barrett
> EnCirca, Inc.
> 
>

> >
> >

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----------------------------------------------------------------