Today should be an interesting day at the auDA office. First proper board meeting since the Special General Meeting of members on 31st July.
There have been many questions asked of auDA in recent times, but few answers have been forthcoming.
This cartoon seemed apt. I live in hope.
Ned O’Meara – 14th August 2017
Disclaimer
I’d like to see an answer on this from the article in The Age,
http://www.theage.com.au/small-business/smallbiz-tech/millions-of-australian-domain-name-owners-ripped-off-20170807-gxqpzs.html
I’d like to know who interviewed Michaela.
https://www.auda.org.au/assets/auDA-Board-Minutes-10-October-2017.pdf
I would like to see not only an answer from auDA but a full refund plus interest to every .au domain name registrant affected.
– What was the contract terms wholesale price drop amount? $3, $5, $7?
– What volume increase was required for the wholesale price drop?
– When was it supposed to come into effect?
The fact is auDA, the Board and Ausregistry should have reduced the wholesale .au price years ago as per their announcements and auDA should have gone to proper tendering procedures over the years to ensure fair market price competition, fair consumer pricing ( Supply Registrars/ Resellers and .AU Domain Name Consumers) and 100% Australian ownership for Australian National Critical Infrastructure purposes.
Allowing vast profits to be sent offshore to foreign owners is not in the interests of auDA, .au registrants, Australian tax payers, Australian consumers or the Australian Government.
How much did Ausregistry pay for the contract in the first place?
What profits have they and others made from it?
Where has the money from the wholesale registry contract gone?
Would it have been better for the Government to have run it or gone to tender and the money made for Australia as a whole or lower .au pricing?
https://www.crn.com.au/news/118m-payday-for-melbourne-domain-name-firm-407350
http://www.afr.com/technology/theres-still-dough-in-domain-names-as-melbournes-bombora-technologies-sold-for-1185-million-20150731-k9zvg
“When AusRegistry’s contract was renewed in 2008 AusRegistry’s media statement documented
“new pricing that sees a drop in AusRegistry’s wholesale price to $14 (for a two-year licence) for .com.au and .net.au domains and further drops as volumes increase.”
auDA Posted by Jo Lim on 26 February 2009
https://www.auda.org.au/news/auda-extends-ausregistrys-au-registry-term-to-2014/
“new pricing that sees a drop in AusRegistry’s wholesale price to $14 (for a two-year licence) for .com.au and .net.au domains and further drops as volumes increase.”
It seems that the disease is spreading:
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/17/uks_internet_operator_nominet_goes_dark/
This is exactly why I would never recommend Nominet as a template or exemplar for other ccTLDs.
And yet senior auDA staff spent a long time in Oxford “learning” from Nominet’s experiences. Well colour me surprised.
Knowing some of the Nominet members as I do, it would not surprise me to see a campaign similar to “Grumpy.com.au”.
Nominet members revolted some years ago about direct registrations, and forced Nominet to change their plans three times!
Agree. Nominet is not an example to be followed, it is an even bigger basket case than AUDA. Clearly they have been swapping note for a while, direct registrations, hiding minutes and proposed expansions into areas they know nothing about.