RE: [registrars] knowing when to fold 'em

[Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>The $2MM cap has no affect on smaller registrars whatsoever. The
annual portion of the variable fee (the $3.8MM) is billed quarterly so
it will be&nbsp;paid first before any registrar will hit the $2MM cap.
It will be the transaction fees that cause a larger registrar to hit
the cap. And actually, if one or more large registrars hit that cap it
will mean lower fees for everyone else.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>The reason is that ICANN will have obviously underestimated what the
transaction fee will bring in, and the budget calls for using any
excess transaction fees to reduce the annual portion.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Tim<BR><BR></div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT:
blue 2px solid"><BR>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE:
[registrars] knowing when to fold 'em<BR>From: "Elmar Knipp"
&lt;Elmar.Knipp@xxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date: Sat, October 16, 2004 11:03
am<BR>To: "Paul Goldstone" &lt;paulg@xxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Cc: "Bhavin
Turakhia" &lt;bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxx&gt;, "'Registrars
List'"<BR>&lt;Registrars@xxxxxxxx&gt;<BR><BR>On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Paul
Goldstone wrote:<BR><BR>&gt; That's true, Go Daddy is getting close too
- good for you! &nbsp;Wow. :) &nbsp;I <BR>&gt; didn't think it was
anyone's idea but ICANN's. &nbsp;However, I don't agree <BR>&gt; with
it because after a registrar reaches $2MM, the remaining registrars
<BR>&gt; will pay for their portion of ICANN expenses.<BR><BR>Hi
Paul,<BR><BR>I also was puzzled to read this section about the cap in
the latest <BR>version of the budget. I can only assume that this is a
kind of <BR>"forgiveness" for large registrars?!<BR><BR>Bhavin, can you
please clarify this issue? With no background knowledge I <BR>am against
this $2MM cap. But perhaps there are arguments, which will <BR>change my
opinion.<BR><BR>Best regards,<BR>Elmar </BLOCKQUOTE>