<HTML dir=ltr><HEAD><TITLE>Re: [arin-discuss] [ppml]Counselstatementon Legacy assignments?(fwd)</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16527" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText62807 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>We're not talking about buying real estate. We're talking about the allocation of a natural resource, i.e. namespace. I am not an ARIN or IP allocation expert, but I've been getting IP numbers from ARIN for a long time and I seem to be in the second highest tier of fee level. I pay the fee just under what AT&T pays, Sprint pays, etc. and probably will eventually pay the same fee. It would seem that ARIN should try to incur only the barest expenses in the performance of its mission while fairly allocating the costs to the members according to their impact on the expenses of ARIN. As far as I can tell, my small regional company pays $9,000 per year and AT&T pays $18,000 per year. Am I missing something? Shouldn't the largest communications company in the US pay more than twice as much as my company? </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Dean Anderson [mailto:dean@av8.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Fri 10/5/2007 4:25 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Chad Kissinger<BR><B>Cc:</B> michael.dillon@bt.com; arin-discuss@arin.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [arin-discuss] [ppml]Counselstatementon Legacy assignments?(fwd)<BR></FONT><BR></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><FONT size=2>On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Chad Kissinger wrote:<BR><BR><BR>> My point is this: In a year in which no<BR>> requests for allocations occur, it takes twice as much effort to<BR>> handle a member with a /19 than it does a similar member with a<BR>> /20....<BR><BR>Just how is that? Many/most? legacy's don't do swip. [I'd advise against<BR>swip, because it exposes your customer database to your competitors.]<BR><BR><BR>> I just think they're unfair.<BR><BR>Its unfair that the guy who buys a house in the first phase of a new<BR>housing development pays less than the guy who buys the exact same house<BR>in phase 2. Or is it? The guy who buys in phase one takes a bigger<BR>risk: The risk that the housing development won't be finished, or won't<BR>be attractive, and his unseen house won't be as nice as the brochure<BR>says it will be.<BR><BR>The folks who buy in phase 2, can see the houses are nice, and that the<BR>development is attractive, and that there is value in what they are<BR>getting.<BR><BR>There is no unfairness benefiting legacy's. We legacy's also took<BR>greater risks by getting in early. We put in more effort. If it<BR>weren't for our effort, you wouldn't be making money now off the<BR>internet.<BR><BR>You really should be putting a profit-sharing check in the mail each<BR>month to the legacy's. That would be fair. Paypal is fine. Oh wait,<BR>that uses the internet, too. How ironic.<BR><BR> --Dean<BR><BR><BR>--<BR>Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service?<BR>www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service<BR>617 344 9000 <BR><BR><BR></FONT></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>