[members-discuss] Proposed 2012 Charging scheme, Board comments

Saving 2-3% isn't going to cut it really .. so cutting training completely wouldn't help - and I think that would also be an exceptionally bad idea.  Training is good, we need more of it, it needs to be visible online so it can be used internally and without necessarily the need to send someone out for 2 days when the course could be run internally or at least pre-studied before candidates turn up.

With overheads growing from €10m to €15m in 5 years, this continued pattern of growth seems pretty unsustainable (unless we are prepared to see fees continue to increase every year by 10-20%?) and I think we need to look at where that growth in spend has really come from, and why/how .. plus what can be done to reduce the overheads down to more sensible levels if not at least to the 2007-2008 levels

Meetings are good, and need to be more readily accessible to the membership not less ... we need better / more improved resources, and to ensure that if we include remote participation that we stick to schedules and deadlines defined (no starting early so joiners miss vital presentations or proposals).

Another question which may need more clearly explaining ... What is RIPE doing for us now in 2011 that it wasn't doing for us in 2007 which justifies a 50% increase in budget over that time?  Are all of these functions / services a truly valuable commitment of membership funds?

Compare the value / services RIPE offers to those that say ARIN offer and what are the differences in membership fees between these two organisations?

RIPE seems to be charging for resources (might only be €50 .. although who knows it could be €250 in 5 years time) ... is this a valid method of charging with hindsight?  Are there yet better ways of doing all of this?  Perhaps every member should pay 1c per IP address assigned (might need to be more than 1c as a /20 would cost €41/year but you get the point)?  That may go against the RIPE model of charging for IP addresses, but it is in fact what happens regardless as a resource cost is a resource cost, no matter how you describe it.

I should note I am looking at all of this purely from a business perspective (almost as an accountant) trying to understand why we've gone from €10m to €15m in 5 years (50% increase) with only a 25% increase in the size of the membership base over the same period of time.  

It would also be interesting to see a report on the volume of tickets created over the same period of time and any metrics on the number of assignments and increases in workload / etc

Jon


On 5 Oct 2011, at 10:55, MB Registryno wrote:

> Hi
> 
> Shooting at the meeting cost and training cost is an easy target, but in my opinion slightly silly.
> 
> RIPE NCC does live in the same economical reality as the rest of us. 
> 
> They can implement bugdet cuts like everyone else, so look hard at your costs and come up with cost-saving measure and let your members vote on it like they usually do at the RIPE meeting.
> 
> Mvh
> 
> stj.
> 
> TDC AS
> Mobile: + 47 40 00 02 94
> Direct: + 47 38 05 81 44
> Fax   : + 47 38 05 81 47
> Ægirsv 10
> N-4632 Kristiansand, Norway
> mailto:svein.tjemsland at tdc.no
> http://www.tdc.no
> -----Original Message-----
> From: members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Sascha Luck
> Sent: 4. oktober 2011 23:10
> To: Christopher Kunz
> Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Proposed 2012 Charging scheme, Board comments
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 10:57:49PM +0200, Christopher Kunz wrote:
>> I think the meeting and trainings offered by RIPE shouldn't be seen with
>> the attitude of "I never used it, so you should pay for it". IMHO, the
>> trainings (of which I never could attend one due to lack of a travel
>> budget) and the meetings (ditto) serve a very important purpose for the
>> community: They make it easier for new LIRs to receive the know-how
>> necessary to run their services smoothly. By learning the ropes, they
>> save all the other LIRs time and subsequently, money.
> 
> Training and meetings are two things I'd never argue for the cutting of. 
> Centralising training is also not really an option as the RIPE 
> membership exceeds well beyond the borders of the EU and I do not expect 
> inbound travel to get any easier for non-EU residents due to political 
> mood swings within the EU.
> Since the meetings are usuall held in EU cities anyway, I'd argue for 
> centralising them in NL *if* it would save a significant amount of money.
> 
>> That's why I'll agree to pay for trainings I never use - because I can
>> be fairly certain I'll benefit indirectly.
> 
> Fully agree. And a suggestion to the NCC: Maybe incorporating a tutorial 
> on subscribing to RIPE mailing lists into the LIR training would be a good
> idea ;)
> 
>> And to the people who want RIPE to cut costs by not offering free Wi-fi
>> at their events (etc.): Please tell me that was a joke. In my book
>> that's like not offering complimentary seats during a train ride.
> 
> I blame Ryanair and Michael O'Leary for bringing that attitude into the 
> world...
> 
> cheers,
> Sascha Luck
> 
> ----
> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss
> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page:
> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
> 
> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
> 
> ----
> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss
> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page:
> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
> 
> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.