Page History
...
For other times: http://tinyurl.com/gwhbldd
PROPOSED AGENDA:
1. Welcome
2. SOIs
3. RSP Accreditation
4. Applicant Support
5. Application Process & Cost
6. Application Submission Period & Queuing
Apologies: Laura Watkins, Vanda Scartezini
On audio only: none
Action Items/Discussion Notes:
Notes and Action Items 13 December
4. Applicant Support
- Financial support by itself is inadequate (e.g., coaching, mentoring, partnering)
- Need perspectives of those in relevant areas
- Rubens - one idea is to lift a bit vertical integration restrictions for under-developed markets
5. Application Process & Cost
- Clarity of Application Process
- Clarifying Questions, Streamline Answer Submission, Contacts by Categories, Knowledge Database
- Streamline Answer Submissions
- Re: RSP "tick a box" to note using RSP (already identified via RSP discussion, should be tied back here)
- What is the purpose of seeing the actual CQ and responses versus the themes, categories, etc. as identified in the PIRR?
- Trang - As Donna mentioned, CQs could be indicative of the nature of the question, which is not a process issue. They could also be an indication of the non-structured way that answers were collected, which is a process issue that can be fixed.
6. Application Submission Period & Queuing
- Is there a floor price that should be established to avoid TLDs becoming a commodity? Or ceiling?
- Invoices - allow for generation, but make it optional (since there may be tax implications)
- Should $185k have any bearing on future costing estimates/models?
- Cost recovery was basis for 2012 round - should that carry forward? It's very difficult to do without a true understanding of demand (e.g., 2012 round had far more than the estimated 500 applications)
- Is there support for cost recovery in future processes? What are the alternatives?
- Rubens - "market value" pricing
- Donna - Went with fixed fee because demand was unknown
- Cheryl - Support the concept of cost-recovery, thinks that first-movers assume some risks, higher costs. As such, uneven playing field is ok.
- Alan - Supports points of Cheryl. How/who puts forward a number?
- Rubens - Perhaps the policy and the implementation drifted apart, but the policy guidance was cost-recovery and this still seems to resonante with people.
- Kurt - we won't know costs until the policy and implementation work is done, i.e., when we have a new question set. E.g., if categories are included, that would drive costs up; and the form of objection processes drive costs also.
- Support from multiple commenters to stick with previous approach from 2012 round.
