[governance] All Concerned (Re: Public Interest Registry sale by ISOC - .org management sold for profit)

[Seth Johnson (via governance Mailing List)]

If you are concerned about the sale of PIR by our standardbearers at
ISOC, signs are strong they will now move swiftly.  Discussion that
approached an opening up of discussion with the broader community
about the implications of the sale and how else they might serve the
concern of diversifying their revenue sources, has apparently resulted
in a Board meeting to issue a decision quickly rather than giving us
information regarding how the issue had been raised with the community
thus far as they had seemed to promise.  This was how they responded
to a request from Ian Peter to that effect.

If you are among those concerned or you signed the Savedotorg.org
statement, saying something constructive right now to the Internet
Society will be in order.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Richard Barnes via InternetPolicy <internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org>
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2019 18:40:34 +0800
Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] Internet Policy] Private equity firm
buys PIRfrom ISOC
To: Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
Cc: ISOC Internet Policy <internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org>, joly at punkcast.com

Hi Ian,


On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 5:17 PM Ian Peter via InternetPolicy <
internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Vint,
>
> Alternative approaches were available and may have been more prudent.
> These would include
>
> 1. Before deciding on a particular offer, determining whether the sale was
> in the best interests of the organisation and its stakeholders. Given that
> at least some reports suggest that the concept of such a sale was discussed
> informally well in advance of the actual offer, either within ISOC or with
> PIR staff, there would have been opportunities for this.
>

The board has made such a determination, after intensive deliberation.  I
don't think we could have reasonably approved the transaction otherwise.
Unfortunately, some of the information on which that determination was
based is not yet public.


> 2. Prudent financial management would have suggested that ISOC discuss
> years ago as a policy issue whether reliance on a single major income
> source was fiscally prudent. This would have lead to a general policy
> discussion as to whether a sale of PIR - or perhaps even a dilution  of
> shareholding - might be a useful step.
>

Diversification of revenue has indeed been a topic of board discussion for
at least a decade.  As others on this list have pointed out, selling PIR is
a form of diversification -- instead of having a single asset in a single
market, we can now have a diversified portfolio.


> 3. When an offer was received, enquiring either discretely or by public
> comment whether other contenders for such a purchase might be interested
> would be a more normal process. A competitive bidding process usually
> results in a higher price and only rarely deters potential buyers (although
> they are likely to claim that their offer will be withdrawn to try and
> circumvent such processes)
>

In the minutes that the board approved today, you will find that the board
did in fact consider multiple offers.

I hope this helps clarify things.

--Richard


>
> So I don't think it is fair to say that the circumstances demanded a rapid
> secretive response. But certainly ISOC acted that way, and probably really
> believed it was the best response.
>
> But there were alternatives.
>
> Ian Peter