Hi,

- for a reasonable price (is €500 reasonable? compared to the €50 of option 2.3)
Could be from a "strategic pricing point of view) - but the cost may be higher.

Well, the €50 is a strategic pricing point as well I guess, so I don't see that as a problem.

The membership fee per year for LIRs *might* be a little bit higher, but because membership fees have been going down steadily over the last couple of years and the number of members is currently around 10k I would be really surprised if this will be very noticeable for any LIR's fee.
If we currently have 10 000 members at 1600 EUR (proposed 2015) that gives a revenue of¨16M
1000 legacy holders at 500E would give anoither 0,5M totaling 16,5M

That assumes that lots of legacy holders take the DAU option. I think in reality most will take the €50 option.

If the fees were distributed evenly it would be 1500 pr member

I do not have a particulary strong feeling about the fees. My company can easily afford the 1600 over the 1500.

But several new LIR who only get the /22 have expressed that they think this fee is unfairly high so they would also like to pay only 500.

They get a /22 and can get IPv6 addresses etc. The legacy holders bring their own resources.

Weird. Everybody seems to assume option 2.4 is a cheap version of becoming a member, while it is the opposite: it is an expensive version of the €50 package...

Personally I can live with both - but I would like to see the fee strucure easily beeing explainable.

Definitely! :)

Sander