[members-discuss] Input from Membership on RIPE NCC Charging Scheme Model

On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 01:13:26PM +0200, Floris Bos wrote:
>On 09/15/2016 09:46 AM, Carlos Friacas wrote:
>The cost per customer is a lot higher for smaller members than large 
>ones, and as such the latter have an economic advantage.

While this holds truth, it is not (and cannot legally be) the job
of the NCC to redress market imbalances. That is a job for a
government - which the NCC is *not*

>Furthermore the setup fee already provides a sufficient barrier 
>preventing the number of companies signing up as LIR to explode.
>No need to keep the membership fee artificially high for smaller 
>member for that purpose.

It does not necessarily follow that higher fees for larger
members means cheaper fees for smaller ones. 
It could be argued that, if there were cheaper fees for startup
members, this would encourage creating LIRs for ipv4 speculation
but it is, of course, not the function of the charging scheme to
create an artificial barrier-to-entry, either.

Kind Regards,
Sascha Luck