Questions For Netfleet

QuestionsGiven the recent telemarketer incident – and other matters that flowed from that – there are still a lot of unanswered questions which I believe Netfleet need to address.

Jonathan Gleeson gave me his committment on Thursday that he intended to answer them all.

So to assist matters, I’m going to list below all questions that I can think of. If there are any that I have missed, please add them in the comments section below, then I will consolidate them into this list.

Jonathan can then answer them in one central place (if he still chooses to).


  1. How many telemarketers do you employ?
  2. Who trained them – and continues to train them?
  3. What information do they have access to?
  4. Does David Lye act as a telemarketer for Netfleet? If yes, how long has he been doing so?
  5. You say that Publishing Australia (P.A) has no access to the “back end” or other data – yet are you aware that Mark Lye (as a Director of NetAlliance) holds a 1/3 share in P.A?
  6. Given all this, do you now see how a “fair minded person” could easily maintain that there is a conflict of interest between the Lye Brothers / Publishing Australia and the clients of Netfleet?
  7. Are you aware that Netfleet had a private bid data leak via an old RSS feed which allowed some parties to see blind bids others had placed for the better part of a year?
  8. What is the extent and background of the “legacy way” – who could have had access, do you have log files showing access and when, how long has it been accessible?
  9. Will you consent to an independent examination of log files and telemarketing records going back at least 4 months? Ditto the RSS feed?
  10. Are you aware that Netfleet has a history of threatening clients with bans if they disclose or report on security issues and privacy breaches?
  11. Who do you report to? Can Mark Lye still instruct you to act in a certain way? Does David Lye “suggest” things to you?
  12. Why have you further reduced the transparency of your blind bidding system on expired auctions?
  13. How many domains have been acquired (via Netfleet) using “inside information” for Publishing Australia, Mark & David Lye and any other entities or people related or “technically unrelated” to them? Not just talking “expired auctions” either – I refer to your whole marketplace.
  14. Do you intend to address possible compensation claims for clients that may have been “gazumped” – or alternatively who were forced into bidding higher due to fears of potential insider trading?
  15. What do the two Melbourne IT Directors of NetAlliance Pty Ltd (Netfleet) say about past conduct?
  16. Do they condone the abusive text that their fellow Director sent me? As General Manager, do you condone it?

Any other questions I should add to the list?

7 thoughts on “Questions For Netfleet

  • October 18, 2015 at 2:44 pm

    17. If a director or technician does not like a certain bidder who is bidding for a name on Netfleet, is the system in its current format able to stop the bidder from securing a name, if they have the winning bid? ie – Can Netfleet simply choose to “let a name drop” to deliberately stop a bidder from securing the name on the Netfleet platform?

    18. How many days would it take for Netfleet to change their BLIND bidding platform to a TRANSPARENT bidding platform, if they chose to do so?

    19. When will Netfleet change their bidding platform to a TRANSPARENT bidding platform? (Give the exact date please).

    20. What does, [the telemarketer] “found a legacy way” to access the information that caused Greg to lose his domain name mean? Please explain the technical details behind the term “legacy way”.

    21. Do you agree that if you are in charge of one of the only three Australian drop platforms, then it is a conflict of interest and can be seen as having unfair “insider information” if you then bid and win on dropped names yourself for your own monetary or website development gain?

    22. Assuming you agree with the above question, faced with the previous few weeks’ allegations against the Lye brothers, can you now understand how it is very likely to be impossible going forward for the domaining community (and probably the entire Australian Business Community who use domain names once this is taken to the next level) for anyone to trust Netfleet while Netfleet is being controlled by the Lye brothers and/or while Netfleet continue to force their BLIND bidding platform on us all, from this very day forward?


  • October 18, 2015 at 9:24 pm

    Although I personally believe the auDA Misspellings Prohibition Policy should be eradicated (especially when massive corporations are being protected from names that aren’t even misspellings – they’re real words!), new domainers are accidentally buying some of these Prohibited Misspellings domain names from Netfleet, losing their money and being told “no refunds”, only to see the name go up for sale again two weeks later. This certainly looks like double dipping.

    So my next questions is:

    23. Will Netfleet continue to sell “misspelled” names from the “Prohibitions On Misspellings Policy” list created by auDA, knowing full-well that most people are not allowed to own these names, only to resell them two weeks later?

    If Netfleet are open to a possible solution, maybe they could allow customers ONE chance for a refund if they have not been told about this rule before, as it is quite obscure to new domain name buyers (especially when the “misspelled” word is actually a *word* in its own right, but protected for reasons unknown!)


    • October 19, 2015 at 2:09 am

      @Robert, there is no real issue with the misspelling policy, it is not a registrar’s responsibility to make you follow all auDA Policies. Registrars rely upon the warranties registrants give them. I do not see a problem in Netfleet, Domain Shield, Drop or any other registrar selling PD domains, this is not an issue. I’m sorry if you have fallen foul of this in the past but these are the rules and the work pretty well.

      • October 19, 2015 at 3:17 am

        @Erhan – you make a good point, BUT this issue has been raised many times. And as you can see from this thread on DNT, Netfleet committed to showing the MS symbol for misspellings.

        Like many other things, this changed.

        What upsets me and others is when the misspelling is promoted on their email blasts and their “Headline Makers”.

      • October 19, 2015 at 12:38 pm

        I stand by what I said. Just because there is a rule for something, doesn’t mean it is right or fair.

        I still believe the auDA misspellings policy and list of names list needs to be looked at sometime in the near future. In the meantime, I don’t think any drop platform charging customers for names appearing on this list (without refund) is fair.

  • November 5, 2015 at 1:56 pm

    At least one promise has been kept – the bids on Netfleet are now showing again. Thanks Jonathan.

Comments are closed.