<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [nc-budget] Report on DNSO Finances
I agree-
Apply payments to oldest amounts owing.
Peter de Blanc
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nc-budget@dnso.org [mailto:owner-nc-budget@dnso.org] On
Behalf Of Erica Roberts
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 7:26 AM
To: Cochetti, Roger; nc-budget@dnso.org
Cc: Diane Schroeder; 'Louis Touton'
Subject: Re: [nc-budget] Report on DNSO Finances
Agreed. As far as I am aware, no constituency has asked to be forgiven
outstanding dues so I see no reason to depart from normal commercial
practice as outlined by Roger.
erica
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cochetti, Roger" <RCochetti@verisign.com>
To: <nc-budget@dnso.org>
Cc: "Diane Schroeder" <schroeder@icann.org>; "'Louis Touton'"
<touton@icann.org>
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 2:00 PM
Subject: RE: [nc-budget] Report on DNSO Finances
> Louis' questions is significant because, according to a Council
> decision
in
> August, it is only for the third call (DNSO dues that were assessed in
2001)
> that the sanctions program for non-payers applies. Moreover, it would
> establish a precedent on how we treat partial payments.
>
> In normal commercial practice, if an creditor has several outstanding
> balances from a non-payer and the non-payer makes a partial payment,
> then that partial payment is credited towards the oldest debt.
> According to
this
> practice, payments received by non-paying Constituencies during 2001
> would be credited towards 2000 dues, until those 2000 dues are fully
> paid.
>
> While I believe that some Constituencies may intend to make payments
towards
> their 2001 DNSO debts in expectation that they can abandon their 2000
> DNSO debts altogether, I do not believe that it is good practice to
> permit this to happen because it would encourage the abandonment of
> old debts to the DNSO and only the payment of current debts. Thus, I
> suggest that we
follow
> the widely-used practice of crediting any payments received towards
> the oldest debt.
>
> This would differ from the practice used in the attached table and
> cause
it
> to be revised.
>
> I'd appreciate your thoughts.
>
>
>
> Roger J. Cochetti
> Senior Vice-President & Chief Policy Officer
> VeriSign
> (202) 973-6600
> rcochetti@verisign.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Louis Touton [mailto:touton@icann.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 11:40 PM
> To: nc-budget@dnso.org
> Cc: Diane Schroeder
> Subject: [nc-budget] Report on DNSO Finances
>
>
> To the Names Council Budget Committee:
>
> Here is a summary of DNSO finances handled by ICANN staff through 7
> November 2001. Please note that amounts paid by the ISP and
> noncommercial constituencies have been attributed to the third call,
> even though these constituencies have not fully satisfied the second
> call. In the case of the ISP constituency, this was because the
> amount received matched the third call. In the case of the
> noncommercial constituency, this was because the the $150.00 was
> received after the third call was made. If the budget committee
> believes either of these amounts should instead be attributed to the
> second call, please let me know.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Louis Touton
>
> 1st Call 2nd Call 3d Call Total
> Recd
> Business Constitutency $5,000.00 $13,642.86 $15,371.00 $34,013.86
> ccTLD Constituency $5,000.00 $5,168.59 --- $10,168.59
> gTLD Constituency $5,000.00 $13,642.86 $15,371.00 $34,013.86
> IP Constituency $5,000.00 $13,642.86 $15,371.00 $34,013.86
> ISP Constituency $5,000.00 --- $15,371.00 $20,371.00
> NCDNHC $5,000.00 $150.00 $5,150.00
> Registrar Constituency $5,000.00 $13,642.86 $25,107.14 $43,750.00
> Total Paid $35,000.00 $59,740.03 $86,741.14 $181,481.17
> Total Called For $35,000.00 $95,500.00 $107,597.00 $238,097.00
>
> Other Donations $9,050.00
> Constituency Donations $181,481.17
> Total Donations $190,531.17
> Earned Interest $2,763.95
> Bank Charges ($252.00)
> Expenses Paid ($19,725.09)
> Total Available Funds $173,318.03
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|