RE: [registrars] knowing when to fold 'em

["Bhavin Turakhia" <bhavin.t@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

i believe the $2mn cap is a remnant from the NSI contract - as rob pointed
out. Since NSI has a fee cap at 2 million it has to be equitably offered to
any other registrar too.

The 2 mill cap is an old contractual clause. As tim mentioned - it is not
upon the suggestion of any specific registrar that this cap has been put.
While I too partly think it is a lil unfair, I do believe it would be
monumentally difficult to get that changed, and it may not have a
significant impact upon the registrar community.

and on the positive side - it is a CAP. That in effect to a certain extent
keeps a check on the total size of the icann budget. At this point in time
we have to live with that much of a consolation :)

bhavin
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Elmar Knipp
> Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2004 9:34 PM
> To: Paul Goldstone
> Cc: Bhavin Turakhia; 'Registrars List'
> Subject: RE: [registrars] knowing when to fold 'em
> 
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Paul Goldstone wrote:
> 
> > That's true, Go Daddy is getting close too - good for you!  
> Wow. :)  I 
> > didn't think it was anyone's idea but ICANN's.  However, I 
> don't agree 
> > with it because after a registrar reaches $2MM, the remaining 
> > registrars will pay for their portion of ICANN expenses.
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> I also was puzzled to read this section about the cap in the 
> latest version of the budget. I can only assume that this is 
> a kind of "forgiveness" for large registrars?!
> 
> Bhavin, can you please clarify this issue? With no background 
> knowledge I am against this $2MM cap. But perhaps there are 
> arguments, which will change my opinion.
> 
> Best regards,
> Elmar
>