Deloitte Report

[snoopy]

Why has this not been released? We are now going to skip it and go straight to the "policy development" bit?

At the end of last year, auDA commissioned Deloitte Access Economics to undertake a global market assessment and report back to us on the following:...............
• further benchmarking of the impact of direct registrations, globally, to better inform the policy development for direct registration.

https://www.auda.org.au/blog/happy-new-year-from-the-ceo-at-auda/

 

[Scott.L]

• further benchmarking of the impact of direct registrations, globally, to better inform the policy development for direct registration.

LOL - Exactly how does Deloitte go about assessing the impact of .au direct registrations globally? its impossible to measure; I mean, does Deloitte have access to all the ccTLD global data and policy impact stats within their localized economies; how can that be analysed and compared to our own market when global ccTLD's operate in different policy environments and economies. So many questions...at very best the report will be a copy and paste from googlelized info.

 

[snoopy]

LOL - Exactly how does Deloitte go about assessing the impact of .au direct registrations globally? its impossible to measure; I mean, does Deloitte have access to all the ccTLD global data and policy impact stats within their localized economies

I assume they will look at the effect of direct registrations in the UK and NZ?

Personally I assumed this report would be nothing more than a whitewash (i.e. just saying what AUDA want them to say), but the fact that it hasn't come out in close to a year is on the nose in my view.

 

[Scott.L]

I assume they will look at the effect of direct registrations in the UK and NZ?

Yes of course but How do they get this data?

Personally I assumed this report would be nothing more than a whitewash (i.e. just saying what AUDA want them to say), but the fact that it hasn't come out in close to a year is on the nose in my view.

I agree, just an expensive poster. Even if the directors were privy to its disclosure then it should be released as market sensitive news - that is to say, IF auDA would like to follow ASX best practices.

edit - the information contained in it could give some a market advantage either way.

 

[snoopy]

Yes of course but How do they get this data?

I think the first port of call would be just the raw registration statistics. Beyond that who knows. I guess when you think about it how would they spin that data (which is bad) into something positive? Maybe that is why AUDA is seemingly hiding this report?

I agree, just an expensive poster. Even if the directors were privy to its disclosure then it should be released as market sensitive news - that is to say, IF auDA would like to follow ASX best practices.

edit - the information contained in it could give some a market advantage either way.

AUDA's talk about best practices is pure spin, they follow the principles that suit them (not releasing minutes) and ignore the rest.

You can read it here, they are breaking just about every principle, in particular those related to disclosure, rights of members, communications, disclosure of remuneration whilst some of it is just AUDA's twisted version of it (e.g. calling a demand elected director independent to try and fit a principle)

http://www.asx.com.au/documents/asx-compliance/cgc-principles-and-recommendations-3rd-edn.pdf

What does principles relating to ASX listed for profit companies have to do with a non profit organisation anyway? It's all messed up.

 

[Scott.L]

What does principles relating to ASX listed for profit companies have to do with a non profit organisation anyway? It's all messed up.

Yeah, auDA is a hybrid organisation with NFP and FP components which make it a twisted combination of governance attributes. It wants to uphold ASX principles yet is tied into Not-For-Profit type governance; due to its composition it has no other real "siblings" to compare itself too, at least not in the Australian market.

Strange SECT 5 (Not For Profit Status) of the constitution isnt working? https://www.auda.org.au/[sitetree_link,id=]#5

 

[DomainNames]

I have very good records of what I provided to Deloitte, auDA and what I was told in meetings.

Everyone needs to remember Ausregistry and auDA have paid Deloitte for reports before. This report again was paid for. Can Deloitte really go against the .au and auDA's / others push?

Is someone/ some people trying to get Deloitte to censor and re do some of their report for a more favourable support of the proposed competing extra .au extension? This would be highly improper and I do hope Deloitte does not lose their own reputation in some way by being caught out.

Some statements to me;

1. "Deloitte says there is no real demand or proper business case for another .au".
2. "it appears auDA is making too much money"
3. "there seems to be clear conflicts of interest in the processes and material put out"
4. "the board can choose to not go forward with the direct .au, as auDA we do what the Board directs us to do" auDA CEO
5. "how can auDA have so much money in the bank as a not for profit?"
6. "when was the last wholesale .au price reduction?"