___________________________________________________________________________
____
This message is intended for the individual or entity named above. If you
are not the intended
recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to
others; also please
notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from
your system. Thank you.
___________________________________________________________________________
____
Jay, I am quite aware of where you sit.
(Embedded
image moved Jay Fenello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
to file: 07/16/99 09:38 AM
pic14977.pcx)
Extension:
To: "Joe Sims" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: Eric Weisberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (bcc: Joe Sims/JonesDay)
Subject: Re: [IFWP] Why fail on purpose?
At 06:03 AM 7/16/99 , Joe Sims wrote:
>Eric, I have been following this very useful exchange between you and
>Diane, and I hope you continue; it is helpful. One point I should make:
a
>very significant hurdle to any election process is the lack of money to
run
>it. It might well be a sensible strategy, especially at this stage of its
>development, for ICANN to have some professional election help, but it has
>no money to pay for that, and given the reaction of some to the effort to
>generate funds through payments by registrars, the prospects for any
>significant funds soon are not good. There is a serious catch-22 here
>that for some ICANN critics is probably not coincidental: complain about
>the lack of an elected Board, and simultaneously make it impossible to
>generate the funds to elect a truly representative Board. I don't know
>what the solution to this conundrum is, but there is no doubt that the
>opposition to the creation of any regular source of funding is a serious
>impediment to devising and implementing a credible At Large election
>process.
Hi Joe,
When you consider that one of the primary purposes
of this *interim* board was to establish an electorate,
and hold formal elections to elect the first official
*initial* board, your comments simply don't add up.
In fact, based on ICANN's own estimate of required
funding for next year, I have estimated ICANN's
revenues and expenditures below. (These are only
estimates, mind you, because you and the rest of
the board have refused to provide additional
details).
Curiously, money hasn't really seemed much of
a concern to ICANN thus far. For example, I've
estimated that . . . .
-- The law firm of Jones Day, your employer,
has billed ICANN for $585,000, substantially more
than required to simply incorporating a non-profit
entity, and/or to hold elections.
-- The ICANN Board has spent $600,000 on *three*
Board meetings, despite the fact that many in
these debates have pleaded with this board to
actually *use* the Internet to hold these meetings.
>From where I sit, your refusal to hold elections
has nothing to do with funding, and everything
to do with priorities!
IMHO & FWIW,
Jay.
At 03:30 PM 7/9/99 , Jay Fenello wrote:
>
>Since ICANN's financial performance
>remains hidden, I've roughed out these
>calculations. ICANN Board members are
>encouraged to correct any miscalculations:
>
>+++
>
>http://www.icann.org/contributors.html
>
>- $397,000 in Private Donations
>- $57,000 in Registrar Application Fees
>
>[TOTAL REVENUE = $454,000]
>
>http://www.icann.org/correspondence/bliley-response-08july99.htm
>
>- The DARPA research contracts paid for the full direct and indirect costs
>of the IANA, including staff salaries and wages, office facilities and
>rent, computer equipment and network connectivity, ISI's institutional
>overhead, and telephone and travel expenses. These costs were assumed by
>ICANN as of January 1, 1999, and ICANN has received no USG funding support
>since that time.
>
>[$?????? x 6 months = $???????]
>
>- ICANN has contracted with The Darwin Group for the full-time services of
>Mr. Roberts and for support of the Office of the ICANN Interim
>President/CEO on a month-to-month basis at the rate of $18,000 per month.
>
>[$18,000 x 8 months = $144,000]
>
>- Costs of professional and technical services agreements are projected at
>$1.0 million for the year, or approximately $85,000 per month, which is in
>line with recent experience. The largest single expense within this
>category is for legal services. Technical services, which currently exceed
>$20,000 per month, are expected to decline during the year as permanent
>staff additions are made.
>
>[$65,000 x 9 months = $585,000 in legal fees]
>[$20,000 x 6 months = $120,000 in technical fees]
>[Ogilvy Fees -- not referenced]
>
>- Estimated costs of four three-day Board of Directors meetings, plus
>bimonthly telephone conference meetings, total $850,000. The Board, which
>will expand during the year to its full complement of nineteen Directors
>from the current ten, will continue to meet in major regions of the world
>in order to enable its constituents to have an opportunity to physically
>participate in board public forums and committee meetings. Board public
>forums will continue to feature video and voice distribution over the
>Internet.
>
>[3 meetings (Boston, Singapore, Berlin) = $600,000]
>
>[TOTAL EXPENSES = $1,449,000]
>
>+++
>
>If ICANN's expenses have been approximately
>$1,450,000, and their revenue has been approx.
>$450,000, WHERE IS THE OTHER $1,000,000 ??????
>
>Who's been paying these bills?
> or
>Who's been extending this kind
>of credit, and why?
>
>
>Respectfully,
>
>Jay Fenello
>President, Iperdome, Inc. 404-943-0524
>-----------------------------------------------
>What's your .per(sm)? http://www.iperdome.com
pic14977.pcx
