1. Welcome to DNTrade. If you want to find out about the latest domain name industry news or talk, share, learn, buy, sell, trade or develop domain names - then you've come to the right place. It's a diverse and active community, with domain investors, web developers and online marketers - and it's free! Click here to join now.
    Dismiss Notice

auDA ends exclusive negotiations with AusRegistry...

Discussion in 'General Domain Discussion' started by Andrew Wright, Apr 26, 2017.

  1. Andrew Wright

    Andrew Wright Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    275
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    https://www.auda.org.au/mailouts/au...in+relation+to+the+Registry+Licence+Agreement

    "The auDA Board believe, as a key piece of national infrastructure, a market exercise is the most appropriate next step in ensuring a rigorous process is undertaken to test the value, accountability and performance of building a best-in-class registry.

    AusRegistry will be invited to participate in the restricted tender process, as will other operators, once the scoping exercise and tender documentation is complete. "

    Hmm. Not what I was expecting.
     
    DomainNames, snoopy, robert and 2 others like this.
  2. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    1,154
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    As I wrote on Domainer a short while ago, commonsense and transparency have at last prevailed.
     
    DomainNames and robert like this.
  3. Bacon Farmer

    Bacon Farmer Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    932
    Likes Received:
    579
    That's embarrassing. So why did aUSregistry get the boot?

    Tender by invitation? Who gets to decide who is their mate or not their mate?
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  4. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,529
    Likes Received:
    1,801
    Excellent news. Hopefully AUDA is genuine about this and is capable of carrying out the process.

    Awarding the contract to someone else would be the best thing AUDA could do for their own credibility and would likely carry significant benefits for registrants in terms of cost.
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  5. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,529
    Likes Received:
    1,801
    No idea, but if Ausregistry were smart they would have dragged out the negotiations for as along as possible. You drag it out so it is difficult for the other party to find someone else due to time constraints.

    This period of exclusive negotiation should have ended within a much shorter period of time, e.g. 30 days (it had been going for 4 and half months going by the dates AUDA has stated) but at least AUDA has done something.
     
    Christopher likes this.
  6. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    393
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    I suspect the Government said NO - so they made this excuse to look good.
     
    snoopy, robert, Andrew Wright and 2 others like this.
  7. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,529
    Likes Received:
    1,801
    Could well be the case as AUDA seem to be rumbling a bit about the Golden Gate Capital stuff and it wouldn't surprise me if the govt was pushing them over that issue. Ownership of the registry has slid too far down the ladder in my view. Bad enough that is went overseas but now it is the plaything of 30 something VC's?

    Who would entrust public assets to these guys?

    http://www.goldengatecap.com/team/
     
    neddy, Scott.L and DomainNames like this.
  8. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    393
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    I recall the suggestion that C.Boredman said,
    We would need to clarify on the policy settings for direct registration first. [before going to tender]
     
    Bacon Farmer likes this.
  9. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    Not Good Enough from auDA again... It shows a confused auDA and the again lack of "openness" we had been promised. What they have announced is NOT Transparency.... it just raises more questions and doubts about processes and industry, government and domain name registrant consultation.

    http://www.domainer.com.au/commonsense-transparency-prevails/

    The Department of Communications
    needs to step in now and do the role of auDA and Wholesale registry database manager.
    Cancel the auDA contract. It is due in 2017. auDA staff can apply to do their jobs at the Commonwealth Government who will take over the role completely. Dept of Comms can advertise the roles.
    Cancel the Ausregistry / Neustar contract. It is now overdue and has not been renewed.
    Use the current $10 million auDA has to for the rollover. That massive money shows the huge profits auDA has made but it does not show the massive waste of money over the years on expenses.
    Dept of Comms has evolved to now cover all aspects required. They can manage the registry plus the role of auDA. In many countries this is what is done.. not a self interest group of profiteering supply monopolies which is what we have had for too long in Australia
     
  10. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    393
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Use the current $10 million to build their own registry - why does it need to go to tender? would this not be a win / win for all?
     
    DomainNames and snoopy like this.
  11. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,529
    Likes Received:
    1,801
    This would be a far better situation, seems like low odds of it happening though. It is a public asset and given all that has happened it should be run by the government not by a board that has been dragged down by members with conflicts of interest.
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  12. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    auDA has failed to properly perform it's role for too long. It needs to be dissolved and removed from it's contracted role completely.

    They have seemingly shown over the years to look after themselves and several powerful auDA Board members as first priority.

    "Industry Self regulation" has not worked especially when several Supply entities will seemingly always do whatever they can to maximise their own profits.

    "Supply" has basically run auDA and policy for many years. Still today several auDA Demand members say this is true and they have little if any power or say.... We noted several Demand members campaign over the years against the competing proposed additional supply pushed .au extension and other changes and improvements FREE COR, wholesale registry open tendering etc but in the end what happened.. they fell silent and muted once on the auDA Board yet several Supply parties and their associated entities remained seemingly vocal in their own agenda's even though facts where against their statements and claims.
     
    Christopher likes this.
  13. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    393
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Yes, build it - no need for any more speculation, argument or disputes about tenders.

    ,
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  14. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,529
    Likes Received:
    1,801
    Agree, the demand/supply model is broken. It needs to be run in the public interest and not demand/supply members interests. It took all the shenanigans of .au to really bring this to the forefront.

    Dissolution of AUDA is the only way to solve the conflicts of interest and branch stacking. AUDA is never going to be able to sort itself out because the problem is the board, the problem is the members.

    Under the current CEO things have not improved, transparency has actually gotten worse with minutes disappearing and a very dubious member code of conduct. How was that even possible for the transparency situation to actually get worse?

    At least the contract is now going out to tender though, why did we just waste 4 months talking to Ausregistry though?
     
    DomainNames and Christopher like this.
  15. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,529
    Likes Received:
    1,801
    Speculation file (courtesy of domainer.com.au): Australian Govt may have said no to AUDA wanting to reaward contract to Ausregistry/Golden Gate Capital resulting in in AUDA being now forced to take it out to tender.

    Has Ausregistry/Golden Gate been blackballed completely?

    Is this the first stage of heavy government intervention?
     
  16. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    393
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    if you want a "Speculation file"

    Imagine for a moment that auDA is loosing ground with the supply side because the new .au is loosing traction - so to get around this auDA simply builds its own registry to manage the DNS itself - Effectively becoming Austregistry, now the scene is set to offer cheaper wholesale pricing to the supply side and satisfy the demand sides NO vote against implementing the new .au - win/win

    ,
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  17. chris

    chris Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,253
    Likes Received:
    829
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Good news, a positive step in the right direction!

    Also big thanks to Tim and the other board members that are pushing for these changes.
     
    DomainNames, robert, Scott7 and 3 others like this.
  18. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,529
    Likes Received:
    1,801
    I don't think it would be a good idea to have AUDA running anything of a critical nature, can you imagine them being in charge of a registry? I think it would need government department running it personally.
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  19. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,529
    Likes Received:
    1,801
    Tim was pro competition in his campaign but I don't think we know anything about the position of other directors to say they are pushing for these changes. If anything most seem to be pushing for Ausregistry to keep the contract and it appears likely that government intervention has brought about this change.
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  20. chris

    chris Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,253
    Likes Received:
    829
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    True @snoopy, just assuming there must have been some support to make it happen.