ICANN’s answer on pre-Reveal Day deals doesn’t settle debate
ICANN answered a question the way ICANN answers most questions: precisely enough to keep the question alive.
The Applicant Guidebook was drafted as the rulebook, but a rulebook only settles what its drafters made unambiguous. This answer is a reading, not a ruling.
Anyone holding a pre-Reveal Day deal wanted certainty, and got a text with two plausible interpretations. That means the real settlement happens later, inside a dispute or a bidder's legal memo.
A clear yes would have repriced secondary deals in new gTLD applications; a clear no would have discounted a contingent asset. Grey is the only outcome that keeps every side negotiating.
The ambiguity will now be resolved transactionally: assignment filings, private auctions, clawback clauses. Anyone structuring around this answer should assume it moves.
ICANN's silence on the hard part is a feature, not a bug. The organization stays out of private arrangements while the market absorbs the risk.
The reporting is Domain Name Wire’s; the read above is Handlemart’s.
Read it on Domain Name Wire