Page History

...

1. Financial need of the applicant (primary and mandatory)
2. Corporate structure of the applicant
3. The need of the community to be served by the proposed TLD
4. Existing levels of service in the script of the proposed TLD string (in the case of IDNs)
5. Location of the applicant, the TLD registry and/or the primary stakeholders in a lesser developed country

As well. it is necessary to combined and weight these criteria in a manner that provides a predictable and stable indication of the kinds of applications that would qualify for support under this program.

3.1 Financial Need

The overriding consensus of the WG is that financial need is the primary criteria for determining eligible applications. It is important that, while determining need, that the applicant also demonstrate sufficient stability and sustainability. It is undesirable that a TLD would fail, for instance, if its sponsor was wholly dependent on external grants without long-term commitments. So while maximum operating metrics are to be established to demonstrate need, minimum metrics will also be required to demonstrate stability and  sustainability.

Amongst the criteria proposed as required for an applicant to qualify for assistance are:

• Community based applications such as cultural, linguistic and ethnic.
• Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs), civil society and not-for-profit organizations;
• Applicants located in emerging markets/nations;
• Applications in languages whose presence on the web is limited;
• Local entrepreneurs, who otherwise meet other criteria in this section, in those areas where market constraints make normal business operations more difficult. 

As well. it is necessary to combined and weight these criteria in a manner that provides a predictable and stable indication of the kinds of applications that would qualify for support under this program.

3.1 Financial Need

The overriding consensus of the WG is that financial need is the primary criteria for determining eligible applications. It is important that, while determining need, that the applicant also demonstrate sufficient stability and sustainability. It is undesirable that a TLD would fail, for instance, if its sponsor was wholly dependent on external grants without long-term commitments. So while maximum operating metrics are to be established to demonstrate need, minimum metrics will also be required to demonstrate stability and  sustainability.

Amongst the criteria proposed as required for an applicant to qualify for assistance are:

• Minimum gross income being three times the combined operational and contingent risk costs required to sustain operations of the gTLD;

  unmigrated-wiki-

  Minimum gross income being three times the combined operational and contingent risk costs required to sustain operations of the gTLD;

  unmigrated-wiki-markup
  \[ is this accurate? If not, what should it be? \]

• Maximum annual income, unencumbered assets or liquid resources being not more than five times the conventional cost of obtaining a gTLD (currently set at $185,000)

  Wiki Markup
  \[ Is this number too low? too high? \]

• the ability to pay for all expenses remaining after reductions and support are factored in.reductions and support are factored in.

Note that in the Milestone Report the WG agreed by consensus that Applicants who are financially eligible or needy must not benefit from more than 50% of the reduced fee provided by ICANN, therefore the Applicant must be able to meet its self-financing responsibility for at least 50% of the reduced fee. No limits have been imposed to the manner in which fundraising for the other 50% of the reduced fee is done by the financially eligible or needy Applicant. 

Applicants are not eligible if there are factors that would hinder the Applicant from availing itself of the WG support. It would be self-defeating to support an applicant who, by virtue of other disabilities, may not be able to avail themselves of any support granted e.g. if the applicant is already bankrupt, is the subject of pending litigation or criminal investigation etc.

3.2 Applicant mission and structure

The WG, by full consensus, agrees the eligible Applicant must have some function that is (refer to S.

3.2 Applicant mission and structure

2.8 of the Milestone Report)

• social,
• philanthropic,
• community base
• minority IDN build-out. 

The WG, by full consensus, agrees that consideration for eligibility be considered for: groups which exist to support cultural, linguistic and ethnic communities. Indeed, some in the WG believe that the process to evaluate eligible applicants could take advantage of the existing Applicant Guidebook processes for evaluating the “Community” category of gTLD application.

While for-profit companies, private-public partnerships and hybrid entities can be eligible, the WG agrees that this support program must not be used as a substitute for conventional business risk; it and the applicants set out in 3.3 are not eligible for support. It should be used to enable new gTLDs that could -- without this program -- be unimaginable.

...