[michbeck0711]

Möge jeder bitte für sich selbst entscheiden und prüfen:

folgende Seite ist online gegangen:

http://www.dotasia-complot.org

Es wir der Verdacht aufgestellt, dass der CEO des Auktionators und Snap/Backorderdienstes "Pool" sein Insiderwissen dazu benutzt hat, um an begehrte TOP Keys unter .asia ranzukommen (u.a: porn, lotto, stocks, dating, girls, maps, creditcards, mobile, network, store, toys, photo, bet, fashion, hardware uvm)
siehe: http://www.dotasia-complot.org/cat28.html

Es geht um Millionen-Werte.

Gelungen sein soll ihm dies mit der Hilfe von Scheinunternehmen, und natürlich das Wissen, welche Mietbieter mit welchen Höchstgeboten auf die Domains geboten haben.

Untermauert wird dies u.a. durch archivierte Whois-Daten, ausserdem wird aufgezeigt, wer mit wem, von der Registry bis Pool zu tun hat.

Die ganze Geschichte sollte mal einen Blick wert sein, zumindest bin ich gespannt ob das auf Resonanzen trifft....

Grüße
Michael

[Domainsurgeon]

Gut recherchiert!!!!!
Bei dem Domain-Milliarden-Markt kein Wunder, dass jemand sein Insiderwissen und die Möglichkeiten die sich ihm bieten, derart missbraucht um sein "Schäfchen ins Trockene zu bringen"! Business as usual -leider!!!

LG
Thomas

[McDot]

Ich denke, das ist noch nicht einmal ungewöhnlich.
Ungewöhnlich ist nur, dass es aufgedeckt und veröffentlicht wird.

[michbeck0711]

ungewöhnlich auch der Brief/Mailverkehr zwischen der dotasia registry und dem Initiator der Aufklärungskampage. Solltet ihr mal durchlesen, steht unter "mail".

Ich bin gespannt, ob entsprechend gehandelt oder nur geredet wird. Immerhin, müssten man ja jetzt gerechterweise eine neue Auktion ausrufen (und zwar für ALLE!), die Teilnehmer vorher prüfen und das Auktionshaus natürlich wechseln. Das sich jemand dreifach hinter Scheinfirmen versteckt lässt sich zwar nicht ohne weiteres verhindern, dass aber jemand sieht, WER mit WIEVIEL mitbietet sehr wohl!
Wobei ich es taktische gesehen doch sehr seltsam finde, dass große Investoren tatsächlich gleich zu Anfang ein max.bid Betrag eingegeben haben ohne erst mal abzuwarten... das war natürlich so ein leichtes Spiel.

Grüße
Michael

[Richard Schreier]

Leider spreche ich German nicht. Hier ist eine Antwort auf Englisch.

I would like to provide a response to the false and defamatory statements posted at www.dotasia-complot.org by Thomas Reucker and Madunia Modellbau GmbH. It should be noted that we believe the actions taken by Thomas Reucker and Madunia Modellbau GmbH are a retaliation by Reucker/Madunia as a result of their exclusion from certain DotAsia auctions (which Reucker/Madunia itself discloses on the ?notes? section of the website). This exclusion was the result of the investigation by Pool.com and the DotAsia Organisation into possible bid rigging (Ref: http://www.dotasia.org/policies/DotAsia ... -03-24.pdf), which in Canada is a criminal act punishable by fines and imprisonment. This investigation is proper and warranted. We will resist all efforts to interfere in this investigation or otherwise undermine the integrity of the .ASIA auctions.

In regards to specific allegations made on the website, the following are irrefutable facts.

First, www.dotasia-complot.org contains numerous false, misleading and defamatory statements that are intended to harm the reputation and goodwill of Pool.com and Richard Schreier. Richard Schreier nor Pool.com do not have any ownership interest in Drake Domains Corporation, Drake Ventures Limited or Throne Ventures Pty. Ltd. The materials on the Website that state otherwise are factually incorrect and designed to injure Richard Schreier and Pool.com?s business relations with the DotAsia Organisation. Other statements on the Website - for example, that Mr. Schreier is a ?cheat? and/or is engaged in fraudulent or improper conduct ? are untrue and derogatory and malicious in the extreme. They also accuse Richard Schreier and Pool.com of criminal behavior, a statement that is patently false and highly prejudicial.

Second, it is a matter of record that Drake Ventures did submit bids in the .ASIA sunrise auctions during the Sunrise 2 phase supported by their prior rights. These prior rights were verified by an unbiased third party agent to DotAsia Organization as were all Sunrise 2 submissions. All bids were submitted in strict compliance with conflict-of-interest procedures agreed to by DotAsia Organisation. As a Pool.com customer, Drake Ventures bids were deposited with a third party attorney as a safeguard against even the appearance of impropriety.

Third, it is also a matter of record that bids were placed by Drake Ventures at the start of an auction and no further bidding was made once the pre-established bid had been placed. To act on ?inside information? would suggest that bidding continues once competitive bids are known. Auction history records, publicly available to all auction participants, show that Drake Ventures one and only bid for each auction were submitted on the first day of an auction and no further bidding occurred. Indeed, Drake Ventures lost 18 of the 21 domain auctions in which they were a participant. This is hardly an indication that somehow Drake Ventures secured an unfair advantage in auction bidding.

I trust this clarifies and addresses the issues raised by Mr. Reucker. I can assure all .ASIA participants that I and Pool.com are committed to the integrity of .ASIA auctions as we are with all auctions held at Pool.com. Any individual questions or concerns may be addressed to me at richard@pool.com

[McDot]

Thanks for your statement Richard.

...and welcome to our domainforum.

I really hope this issue get completely clarified, since this kind of accusations is not good for our industrie. You see, most people have made the experience, that there is at least a part of truth in this kind of news.

[madunia]

Hello Mr. Schreier,

my provider tried to discuss these facts with the ceo of dotasia, mr. chung. In one of his mails chung indicated, that he was in contact with pool and that he has discussed the issues with pool. All the time, as you already know the issues through dotasia, we got no mail from you, there was no attempt from pool to clarify anything. Either from you, pool, momentous or mr. chung.

If I would be in the position of dotasia, my step would be an own investigation to check the provided facts. To be able to do so, I would stop the running auctions (minimum the auctions where drake and throne are involved). This would implicate the chance to restart the auctions later - but would bring some time for the investigation. My provider and I - we realy expected this step from dotasia. But we see no investigation, only non-comittable mails. Sorry, this was not realy constructive (everybody can see the mails on my site).

Week for week, there were absolutly no consequences - so I decided to go this way now. I tryed again to get in contact with you and mr chung last friday. I send mr chung and you a logincode to the former password-protected site - there was also no response, either from you nor mr. chung until today. If I had got an answer or any signal from you or mr chung, we would have droped or delayed opening the site public to discuss the findings with you. I really tryed to discuss this with you, and my provider tryed the same for weeks with mr chung from dotasia.

One day after publishing there is now a first contact to your lawyers (not realy a surprise) and also to you in this forum. I want to clarify, that I do not like this way very much. But the hope is, that things finally will move now.

I would like to provide a response to the false and defamatory statements posted at www.dotasia-complot.org by Thomas Reucker and Madunia Modellbau GmbH. It should be noted that we believe the actions taken by Thomas Reucker and Madunia Modellbau GmbH are a retaliation by Reucker/Madunia as a result of their exclusion from certain DotAsia auctions (which Reucker/Madunia itself discloses on the ?notes? section of the website). This exclusion was the result of the investigation by Pool.com and the DotAsia Organisation into possible bid rigging (Ref: http://www.dotasia.org/policies/DotAsia ... -03-24.pdf), which in Canada is a criminal act punishable by fines and imprisonment. This investigation is proper and warranted. We will resist all efforts to interfere in this investigation or otherwise undermine the integrity of the .ASIA auctions.

We clarified this already to the registry, and I will do it again by quoting one of the mails to dotasia:

> As the provider of our customers, we tried to contact DRAKE to speak
> about their connections to POOL and about the fact that they are in the same
> auctions as our customers, because we see a lot of interest-conflicts within
> this remarkable relationship. As a result of our contact-mail (not more!)
> DRAKE (!!!) contacted our customers. Not our customers contacted DRAKE! Our
> customers only confirmed that they know us and we are the provider of them.
> There was absolutly no price- or bid-rigging as DRAKE and POOL wrongly
> claimed with this pretextual argument.

I have got an email from drake, not drake from me. After I answered this mail to drake that I know my provider, auctions were suspended immediately. There was no bid-rigging or anything like this.

But I am still amazed how fast all my running auctions were stopped (even these, where drake was not in) and that, after sending dotasia all the stuff, nothing moved like this to drake (as we awaited as I told you above). Very, very curious, but that actualy is not the point.

Richard Schreier nor Pool.com do not have any ownership interest in Drake Domains Corporation, Drake Ventures Limited or Throne Ventures Pty. Ltd. The materials on the Website that state otherwise are factually incorrect .

Ok, if this is so, than let us together brings some light on the construct and the facts we have found out. Perhaps we finaly can repaint images and correct the facts. I realy want to work on this and I believe, that also the (now) informed community has the right to know the truth.

As a first step, you can help by explaning three points:

1) What about Throne, Drake and your Domain drakedomainscorp.com? As everybody here can proof by using public whois-services, this domain is owned by you. See also printout of the irish registries office IRO about ownership of Drake Ventures Ltd. (if you do not believe: for a small fee the IRO will send it to you)
http://www.dotasia-complot.org/article58.html
http://www.dotasia-complot.org/article59.html
http://www.cro.ie/search/

See also printout of the australian registries office ASIC about the ownership of Throne Ventures Pty Ltd. (if you do not believe: for a small fee the ASIC will send it to you)
http://www.dotasia-complot.org/article52.html
http://www.asic.gov.au/

See also todays WHOIS of www.drakedomainscorp.com (older whois on our website http://www.dotasia-complot.org/article76.html )
See also todays WHOIS of www.throneventures.eu

2) Who is Shanna Laughton ?
As you can see in the published annual report of Drake Ventures Limited, she is the mangaging director of drake ventures limited. She is from your country, your city. And there seems to be an oddly connection to the pool-parent momentous as you can see on this url: http://www1.cata.ca/forms/07SRED.cfm. So you can help by doing some investigations who is this person and what is the relationship to momentous ? I'm very curious about your findings!

3) pool in .eu
We found an disput (ADR) for pool.eu from drake ventures limited. So there seems to be a trademark for "pool" owned by drake ventures limited. drake ventures limited is owned by drake domains corporation. The name indicate, that drake domains corporation is active in the business-field of domains - also pool's field of business. As pool you already have customers in europe. For me this seems to be a very hot trademark-conflict, where the company you manage (pool) should be alarmed. What are the actions you took or take against Drake Domains Corp. or Drake Ventures Limited in this matter of abuse your own trademark?

This is very curious for me, too. Can you help us to bring light to this points and to correct me ?

First, www.dotasia-complot.org contains numerous false, misleading and defamatory statements that are intended to harm the reputation and goodwill of Pool.com and Richard Schreier. Richard Schreier nor Pool.com do not have any ownership interest in Drake Domains Corporation, Drake Ventures Limited or Throne Ventures Pty. Ltd. The materials on the Website that state otherwise are factually incorrect and designed to injure Richard Schreier and Pool.com?s business relations with the DotAsia Organisation. Other statements on the Website - for example, that Mr. Schreier is a ?cheat? and/or is engaged in fraudulent or improper conduct ? are untrue and derogatory and malicious in the extreme. They also accuse Richard Schreier and Pool.com of criminal behavior, a statement that is patently false and highly prejudicial.

We published everything we found out with help of legal and public sources. It is comprehensible, everybody can make the same investigations, for example get the reports from the chamber of commerce from ireland, australia and so else. Also the whois of drakedomainscorp.com is public and everbody can query (i just wonder that it still is not changed).

My goal is not to injure you or your company, my goal is to unearth the truth and to get a fair auction - not more. The facts I found out so far actualy are not able to create such a fair auction. Would you participate in an auction where your competitor and the auctioneer seems to be the same person? There are to much things which actualy are not clear. Can you enlight it to clarify?

I hope you will - but actualy I still can not follow your point of view.

Regards,
Ruecker

[madunia]

Richard Schreier responded to the reproaches: "a retaliation by Reucker/Madunia as a result of their exclusion from certain DotAsia auctions ..... This exclusion was the result of the investigation by Pool.com and the DotAsia Organisation into possible bid rigging"

And as a gratification for this "bid rigging", dotasia CEO Edmon Chung offered us to reschedule these auctions at a separated platform?

See Email from Chung here: http://www.dotasia-complot.org/article70.html

[michbeck0711]

Notice:

All further discussions on this thread will be handled in English to make sure that everyone understands.

Anmerkung:

Alle weiteren Diskussionen werden zum besseren Verständnis auf Englisch geführt. Der Thread wird entsprechend verschoben.

[Richard Schreier]

First, as much as I am tempted to drag this whole issue through public scrutiny, I believe enough has been said about this subject publicly. The first I had any knowledge about the website in question was when it went public. I had no previous contact with Mr. Roecker on this subject as he alledges.

Second, I have posted elsewhere the circumstances of the Drake Ventures auctions where they have in fact won only 18 of 21 auctions in which they bid and in each of those their winning bid was $10! Noone bid against them! I am at a complete loss as to how Mr. Roecker can continue to suggest this somehow uses inside information for bidding.

Mr Roecker has refused to recant his accusations and continues to make false allegations. From here on, my lawyers will continue the discussion and I reserve the right to take whatever action is necessary to clear my name of these wrongful accusations.