Hello again, I think i found it -- you were right! https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/october-2019/stenograp... "So, now is the number too big or either doing one or the other, we thought it would be an awesome idea if we split it and offer the compromise of the 50:50 chance. This is the part that got confusing unfortunately. You will see then in the presentation the exact numbers and what they mean and one big part which we looked at, if we do 50:50 the amount of money we give back is roughly in the order of what we did in the last years, so what you have expected and kind of got accustomed to. In the 50:50 example it is pretty much the same amount of money. But I'll leave the rest for Gwen, otherwise I'll steal all other slides. But of that the rationale for having three options." However if we see the referenced slides, on slide 6 the values are 528 EUR in 2018 vs. a projected 296 EUR (with 50% for 2019). 296 is around 56% of 528 -- that doesn't really seem "roughly in the order of what we did in the last years" to me... Cheers, Carlos On Wed, 26 Feb 2020, Carlos Friaças via members-discuss wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2020, Skyline Telecom wrote:
Dominic,
I think the reason is that at the GM RIPE misleadingly said that even if we redistribute only ?50%? of the surplus, the amount will be the same as last year. Which clearly it isn?t.
Hello,
I think i was there (at the Rotterdam GM) but don't really recall that.
Is that in the minutes? -- i haven't checked.
Even if it isn't, who said that? It was someone from the Board or a NCC employee?
The Board is elected by the Membership. If you feel you were mislead you can always try to elect different people next time.
Cheers, Carlos
Unfortunately many based their votes on what the people at RIPE SAID and they didn?t do the math themselves, otherwise they would have seen that there is a significant difference in amounts. And now RIPE is covered, they will say ?you voted, case closed? even though they gave very misleading information.
So, that?s why the surplus is so much smaller compared to 2019, and that?s the reason RIPE NCC will also pay taxes to NL authorities, etc etc. Basically, they didn?t want to give money to it?s members, they preferred to give money to the dutch fiscal authority.
From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Dominic Schallert Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 20:38 To: members-discuss@ripe.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Membership Fee Question
I can?t understand why the surplus redistribution in 2019 had been EUR 567,52 and in 2020 it?s only EUR 353,82 per LIR. This does not match with the actual new-LIR development figures in 2019 according to https://labs.ripe.net/statistics/number-of-lirs
Regards
Am 26.02.2020 um 15:26 schrieb Radu-Adrian Feurdean <ripe-ncc@radu-adrian.feurdean.net>:
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, at 21:41, Arash Naderpour wrote:
It doesn't looks fair to me, but you need to see enough support from
the memebers to change it, NCC also like easy money, same as many of
others.
...and as most of its members who do enjoy the redistribution (when there is one) the next year.
Back to the initial question, the membership fee *IS* pro-rated when you *open* the LIR, sometimes to the advantage of the new member (not including an extra quarter for up to 2 or 3 weeks only).
If you perform a merger via "M&A Process", the rules are pretty clear that both LIRs involved need to be with membership fees paid. Even if you would manage to propose a resolution to change this, I'm not sure it will pass.
--
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss@ripe.net
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/ds%40schallert.com