[members-discuss] Charging scheme discussion
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Charging scheme discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Charging scheme discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Rob Golding
rob.golding at othellotech.net
Wed Jul 25 04:07:42 CEST 2012
>> "count" of ip's within a block - no, it's back >> to them being a "commodity" >> (altering the tax status) > This is wrong and leads to misinformation. > Until last year RIPE membership had a cost > depending on a class model > (large, small, extra large, etc), which on > its behalf depended on the > number of allocated resources. *number* of resources, not *size* of resources So thank you for confirming my point:p If the charging switches to per-IP then they become "product" or "stock" or "items" or similar, and have a value, and that WILL change the tax-status of RIPE - which at current levels, will mean 25% tax which *WILL* have to be taken from members in fees So, hands up who wants a 25% price hike ? Rob
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Charging scheme discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Charging scheme discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]