Direct registration; stakeholder qualitative interviews

[Bacon Farmer]

From auDA's recent email:
"Direct registration; stakeholder qualitative interviews
In the coming weeks, we will be announcing other ways members and all stakeholders can contribute to the policy development.
There will be opportunities to participate in direct registration research that will feed into policy development. If you’d like to take part, please email media@auda.org.au to register. Interviews will take place in March and April this year either face to face or over the phone.
Once this research is complete, the report will be made available to the public.
We aim to have policy for direct registration agreed and ready for implementation planning by the beginning of the new financial year."

So no panel? No voting on what version of direct implementation get's up? Just token "consultation" and then here's the new rules? So doesn't this also assume that the negotiations with a.US.registry are a done deal? Seems pretty transparent. Must be a good deal but how do you know it's a good deal if there's no other offer because no other potential bidder has been allowed to make a counter offer?

I dare any current director to make a comment of any type about this pathetic behaviour. Please feel free to consult your NDA's before you get a phone call from your keeper.

 

[DomainNames]

Every domain name owner is a consumer. It seems this is one of the largest "cons" ever perpetrated. Its been ongoing for 16 years or longer. Melbourne IT had the monopoly before auDA began. They remain one of the most expensive registrars/ resellers in Australia, as auDA board members it seems odd they have not become more "innovative" to actually compete on pricing and services. Their prices are a rip off.

Here is what needs to be investigated plus more.. see the auDA suggestions page on the forum;

• Vote and survey rigging. Sending out yes only votes with false and misleading information is vote rigging and a conflict of interest.
  
• Supply member stacking of supply and demand to rig board seats. Why else would they have themselves, family and staff also sign up as demand now.... gives them more votes! Which demand class member candidate did these "supply" linked people and companies all vote for?
  
• No tender again for a $100+ million Australian Critical Infrastructure and a 100% foreign owned company being on the auDA board and auDA committees and an auDA "supplier"
• False and Misleading claims certain parties including an long term auDA board member supply company and their related entities around the benefits, need for an success overseas of "direct registrations" using false information about the success of .uk and .nz ( which have actually both failed" and not been successful at all
• Change in auDA public board meeting minutes which gives no meeting detail at all including no proper disclosures or "registry of interests".
  
• When was the last time there was a wholesale reduction in domain name prices in Australia?
• How much profit is the monopoly auDA getting
• How much profit is the contractor Ausregistry Neustar Inc USA getting? How much profit goes overseas out of Australia?
• Why are Australian companies not able to tender for the Australian Wholesale Registry contract?
  
• What domain name or domain industry experience did the new auDA CEO Cameron Boardman have to get the job? How did he actually get the job? Was it just due to his personal connections with a few other board members and their close ties to the Liberal party? How did he even know about the job? Was this process proper as someone else has asked? https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/au_domain_administration_ltd_aud
• How can the new CEO be trusted when he said Deloitte will do a business case if the new competing extension is even needed or should go ahead but then this is not the job given to Deloitte by him at all they told me and his latest announcement says?
• How can the new CEO be trusted when he said the wholesale tender will go out to international open tender then he puts out a statement a week later about an exclusive tender with Ausregistry ( auDA board member) again. he also says there are issues that need to be fixed with the current registry etc..
• In December the day after the AGM The new CEO told me he met with Deloitte and they told him ": there is no business case for another .au extension"
• Australians and domain name Consumers are being ripped off with this self regulation rigged auDA body and it's board full of conflicts of interest. Its about time people really spoke out.
• If Ausregistry / Neustar Inc USA got shot down tomorrow or had a major issue what is the backup for Australia? There is No Australian owned Registry backup system at all and this should worry people. auDA should go for open tender for both and have the Federal Government look to see if they can provide the service also due to it being " Australian Critical Infrastructure.
  
• Why has auDA stopped new members from joining?
• Why has auDA not responded to questions about the auDA Foundation and there is now missing info from that website?
• The list goes on

People need to know auDA itself is just on a contract with the Australian Federal Government. "Issues" around contracts and their own management, expenses, foundations etc can be very serious is fully investigated... that day will probably come one day and it can probably go back to previous directors, staff, old suppliers and contractors etc also.. The Corporations Law.... ..ACCC...

 

[Bacon Farmer]

Ned dropped this relevant link on Domainer - Tennis Australia under investigation over TV deal that didn't get put out to tender

No wonder the directors of auDA are silent. I wonder if auDA will pay for their legal advice if ASIC come knocking?

 

[DomainNames]

Ned dropped this relevant link on Domainer - Tennis Australia under investigation over TV deal that didn't get put out to tender
No wonder the directors of auDA are silent. I wonder if auDA will pay for their legal advice if ASIC come knocking?

Eddie Obeid had legal advice.QC's...Barristers..Political connections....In the end it did not help him much.

 

[Bacon Farmer]

You ok Sean?
That's the shortest post you've ever done
I'm not complaining, short points in this digital age can pack a bigger punch.

 

[DomainNames]

You ok Sean?
That's the shortest post you've ever done
I'm not complaining, short points in this digital age can pack a bigger punch.

Haha yes! I edited the longer post and moved to it's own thread
I know many old hands don't read the long one's but some new newbies who do not know all the historical background do.
Some more detailed posts often contain info search engines pick up....method to the madness

 

[snoopy]

• In December the day after the AGM The new CEO told me he met with Deloitte and they told him ": there is no business case for another .au extension"

Is this true? Big news if correct.

 

[Bacon Farmer]

I wonder if the directors know?

And if they do why are they pushing direct registrations and the unsolicited aUSregistry proposal through so quickly?

 

[DomainNames]

Is this true? Big news if correct.

100% this is true. I met Cameron Boardman at the Hilton Hotel after the AGM and after he had met with Deloitte. This is why I am very pi$$ed off with the auDA processes, conflicts of interest, coverups, false and misleading information used to try and justify another .au extension and everyone should be. of couset those who will make money are not against it... auDA, Ausregistry. Neustar Inc USA, Meblourne IT, possibly some domain name IP lawyers who may profit from added disputes etc

When I met with Deloitte they also told me they think there are obvious "conflicts of interest" but it is not in their scope of work to get onto that at all!

Deloitte was interested how the auDA "Not for profit" could have over $10 million in the bank from the Australian domain registrations, the auDA and Ausregistry / Neustar monopoly positions, domain pricing etc, board voting procedures. Again they will not be including this in their report they said but the background was of interest so they could understand the proposed competing .au processes followed to date.

I suggest concerned people contact me via PM here if you want to really be involved in the "Deloitte" consultation. I can pass on the 2 Deloitte consultants direct details.

My concerns are Deloiite have been told by auDA to just rehash their 2011 paper and ignore the facts against another competing .au extension which are now public and which they also now have been provided. Deloitte was hired last time by Ausregistry / Auda so I do not feel they where an appropriate consulting form to use again when there are many more who have no previous auDA/ Ausregistry relationships to choose from..