>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from ["Roeland M.J. Meyer"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 13:10:45 -0400 (EDT)
>
>>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jul 23 13:10:43 1999
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Received: from condor.lvrmr.mhsc.com (condor.lvrmr.mhsc.com [199.108.175.226])
> by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22B39F086
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 23 Jul 1999 13:10:42 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from hawk (hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com [199.108.175.236])
> by condor.lvrmr.mhsc.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with SMTP id KAA15911;
> Fri, 23 Jul 1999 10:04:09 -0700
>Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From: "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Meeks, Brock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "IDNO" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: RE: What if ICANN implodes?
>Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 10:04:09 -0700
>Message-ID: <005c01bed52d$60fcafd0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
>In-Reply-To: <E7951A633926D211900F00805FBE764B7EA460@MSNBCSEC02>
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
>Importance: Normal
>
>> From: Meeks, Brock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Friday, July 23, 1999 7:36 AM
>>
>> ICANN is already "broke."
>>
>> During yesterday's testimony, Mr. Roberts acknowledged that
>> ICANN is more
>> than $730,000 in the RED. Actually, they owe about $800,000,
>> according to
>> Roberts. Of that amount, Roberts said, some $500,000 is owed to ICANN
>> lawyer Joe Simms, who has, as yet, not been paid.
>
>WOW! Add that to the ~$600,000 they started with and they've spent
>$1.4MUS, in 11 months (~$128KUS, per month), and still no data center.
>The other question is who did they borrow the money from? I accept that
>they could be self-funding, but at this level?
>
>I have long-since stipulated that there are many practical reasons that
>a non-profit wouldn't work, to manage a privatized Internet. One of them
>is that non-profits have an abysmal track-record in collecting the funds
>they need to start up. It is usually done with a large donor-infusion,
>upfront. ICANN doesn't have that (not enough, anyway).
>
>> Ester Dyson, when questioned on how the organization "keeps
>> going" said,
>> "we're doing what any good compnay does: manage cash flow."
>> At which point,
>> she was asked, "do you have any cash flowing?"
>>
>> "Some," she said.
>
>>From personal check-book to ICANN coffers? Scarey thought.
>
>> But basically, she made it sound like everyone is footing
>> their own bill and racking up unpaid expenses.
>
>This is less than good.
>
>> ICANN has STILL not filed its 501(c)3 papers, Roberts said,
>> but they are
>> doing that soon. Roberts, I believe, said that the IRS wants to see a
>> financial statement first, which now that I recall, isn't correct.
>
>Absolut! Part of the tax filing IS a financial disclosure. I wonder who
>they have cooking their books? CPA's typically want cash upfront.
>
>> Anyway, they now have a financial statement, which they consider
>> confidential because it wasn't disclosed in public yesterday (at the
>> hearing). From what Roberts said, the financial picture isn't pretty.
>
>>From information that is available, a cash-picture estimate is certainly
>possible (I just did one), on a rough scale.
>
>It's too late now, but iff ICANN had formed as a for-profit DE corp, as
>was suggested in Sep98, they'd have had Venture funding (VC) a long time
>ago. It's a natural infrastructure play and that's what's selling to the
>VC right now, as we speak. However, their well is now poisoned, IMHO.
>Even if they reformed the ICANN corp, there are very few VC that would
>give money to that crowd. The fact that they were stupidly stubborn
>enough to even insist on the track they are on, is telling. Their only
>hope for rescue is the USG. I may be wrong, but I don't think so.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Roeland M.J. Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Sent: Friday, July 23, 1999 3:54 AM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Meeks, Brock; IDNO
>> Subject: What if ICANN implodes?
>>
>>
>> That was an interesting note from Meeks. What I still don't
>> understand,
>> with their avowed concern for stability of the net, that NTIA/DOC
>> transfered the root to an organization that admitedly has
>> only two month
>> operating capital left in the bank and NO visible prospects
>> for getting
>> more and no forseeable revenue stream before the current cash
>> stash runs
>> out.
>>
>> I was at work during the hearings, did someone mention this to the
>> congress-critters? I know that we are all expecting ICANN to make $$$
>> magically appear. But, if any other contractor, with the USG
>> ( and ICANN
>> are one), were to fall into such a situation, the last thing the FARs
>> would allow is giving them even more responsibility without
>> proving that
>> they had the $where$with$all$ to stand the gaff.
>>
>> I am more and more certain that NTIA/DOC is acting illegally. But,
>> IANAL, and therefore not sure about that.
>>
>> What if ICANN does go broke, while they control the
>> a,root-servers.net?
>> Yes, I know that the other root-servers would instantly take up the
>> slack, but it's a scarey thought, isn't it?
>>
>> If they [ICANN] can continue to operate without visible funding, or
>> declaration of additional funds infusion, then ICANN would
>> lose whatever
>> credibility they have left. At that point, the IDNO might consider
>> standing alone, as an independent association.
>>
>> This is just something to think about folks. What does it
>> mean when the
>> ICANN can continue to operate without visible sources of funding, or
>> revenue? That should scare the bejeesuz out of everyone.
>>
>
>
>
--
Richard Sexton | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dns.vrx.net/tech/rootzone
http://killifish.vrx.net http://www.mbz.org http://lists.aquaria.net
Bannockburn, Ontario, Canada, 70 & 72 280SE, 83 300SD +1 (613) 473-1719
