.ASIA Scam by Richard Schreier CEO pool.com

[damagedgoods]

This subject deserves a new thread. The original .asia scam thread is here


Most of the posts there are from frustrated domainers like myself during the .asia registration process debacle, but now that it's over there is clear evidence that in fact the whole process was corrupt.

The details can be found here.

here

In my case I registered bet.asia February 20 2008 and waited patiently for an auction that never came, only to find out that the CEO of the auction company grabbed that name.

Are there any others here who had the same experience as me who can find their domain in Richard Schreier's portfolio? click here for the domain list

 

[Spade]

...added with the number of primary domains ending up in the hands of the company controlled by the auctioneer, certainly give rise to some level of a complicity theory, insamuch as the odds would be almost incalculable.

Im still confused how your coming to this conclusion? Is there evidence beyond whois info?

 

[james2002]

Can I clarify just for simple people like me

These names were obtained in the Sunrise period which was exclusively for TM holders.

If there was only one genuine applicant, the domain would be granted

If there were multiple applicants (with genuine TM credentials), it goes to auction between those competing TM holders.

But the 'complot' is that some of these names, despite having multiple applicants did not go to auction but were granted to a company with shared ownership with Pool.

Is that the crux of the claim?

So, damagedgoods, are you stating you had TM credentials for bet.asia, applied, realised that there would be/were multiple applications, waited for the auction but it never happened? You had a genuine TM claim for bet.asia?

If so then it's an absolute disgrace.

If not, and Drake Ventures were the only genuine applicant then it's still questionable how Drake Ventures managed to have so many varied TM claims but then again, even if they manufactured these TM's in advance deliberately, then IMO that's clever forward thinking.

There seems to be another claim involving the auctions but I don't quite understand the accusation...

Netfleet

What I can't understand is that why Drakes Ventures hold so many TM for those premium domains?

Do they run porn business to claim TM for porn.asia?

Do they run gambling business to claim TM for gambling.asia, bet.asia?

Do they have many pussies to claim TM for pussy.asia? OR is it due to the director being a female who has a pussy/cat?

They got around at least 50 -100 such domains. I dont think they hold TM for all those 50-100 domains.

I could not get this.

I think indpendent lawyer/investigator should look into this and if the company cheated, then should release all domains without any exceptions.

:talk: :talk:

 

[netfleet]

New Information!! Google involved (well sort of)

Now this is very interesting...

I did an ASIC search on the company "Throne Ventures" here in Australia. It has one sole director by the name of Mark Tucker.

It turns out that Mark Tucker is a the only Australian director of Google Australia of all companies! Also he has been reported on previously for having dubious business practices...

http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23542257-15306,00.html

http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,23535299-15306,00.html

Interesting eh...?

And for you, Spade, the connection is as follows:

Drake Ventures is owned by Drake Domains Corporation, a company in Barbados (which interestingly is the same country which the above newspaper artcicle links Mark Tucker to).

Drake Domains Corp was owned by Richard Shreier, CEO of Pool (although this is only going by WHOIS data - I suspect it's harder to get reliable hsitorical company information out of the Bahamas than Ireland or Australia)

http://www.dotasia-complot.org/article76.html

Also, as an aside, the sole director of Drake Ventures is apparently employed by Pool's parent company...

So there's no question there's a connection and a strong one. The question is whether that connection was used unfairly.

 

[MaguirePhD]

Spade

I am not attaching anything of an evidentiary value to Drake, Throne, etc.
Just trying to determne how the auctioneer ends up with a number of premium names that did not appear in auction and with no other bidders.

I think you can readily agree that anyone acquiring 47 premium domain names (and perhaps, more) with this method certainly leads fair-minded people to reason out some impropriety.

The one fact that can be substantiated is that this was not some outsider doing this without inside assitance, as that would be largely impossible to effect.

Doc

The auction matter is that:

There are quite a few of us who applied for names that were being sent to auction due to the multiple application rule.

We were never notified of the auction.

Cannot find the domains listed in any auction.

And the auctioneer now has them.

Doc

 

[InvisionTech]

I registered a few .ASIA domains back in october / november, long before sunrise and all the other craphases along with business credentials in Asia, yet somehow these bastards ended up getting the names.

 

[MaguirePhD]

Just one...

Well, I ended up with 60 .asia domains and some are not too bad http://www.chicagotrust.net on the Asia button.

These were all regged AFTER .asia opened to the general public March 26th.

So. most people probably think I don't have a dog in this fight because my looking into this matter only involves one .asia domain. right?

Well, my .asia just happened to be pool.asia. Now, who do you suppose owns that?

Doc

 

[netfleet]

Doc,

Can you confirm that these applications you made (inc Pool.asia) were in the TM Sunrise period?

You had TM justification for them?

If 100 people applied for Pool.asia and 99 of them had there applications refused due to inadequate TM claims, leaving Drake Ventures as the only genuine applicant then that is quite correct. The domain should never have gone to auction.

The validity of Drake's TM statuses is another matter of course...

Damagedgoods - can you also please confirm that you had a TM claim for bet.asia?

 

[Frank Michlick]

One think to remember when you're looking at sunrise registrations with trademarks is that you just have to have a trademark, there's no need to have operated a business by that name. This part is reminiscent of the .EU sunrise registrations where many entities would register trademarks (and companies for that matter) in order be able to apply for many generic .eu domains.

But I am not a lawyer, so I am not sure about all the details.

The other part that I still don't get is why an area where the majority of population does not speak English, would want an "English" language (ASIA) domain. Considering the Chinese for example have their own TLDs in their own characters that only work from within China. But kudos to those who see something I may be missing - I have unfortunately not yet been to ASIA.

/FM

 

[trlsker01]

We get crumbs...and they get the big loaves.

 

[MaguirePhD]

netfleet

I am US-based and had a silk road strategic partner in Hong Kong who had the claim.

My firm was whatever money was necessary, as it was our intent to take the name out in a public stock offering here in the U.S., more specifically, New York City.

Direct Public Offerings is what we do. Have never had ANY involvement with domains before other than ones I bought for my own operations in Dallas, Houston, Chicago, Miami, Phoenix etc.

We were never notifed of any application, auction or auction results on pool.asia.

And that was the ONLY one applied for before the opening to the general public.

All other domains came in the general grab bag approach starting on March 26TH.

Doc

 

[DomainTalker]

If - and I say IF - Mr. Schreier was involved in illegal, sham, and scam, processes via related party transactions that resulted in him having a beneficial interest in an improbable number of the most valuable keywords going around (for minimal cost), I doubt very much if the process he used would survive a proper forensic examination of the electronic trail......It would not be hard to expose.


If this happened, then people that try this kind of thing count on the fact that noone will take the time, trouble, and expense to track it down - and prove it....Then mount legal action in the courts to reverse it....They count on inertia - and most times they get away with it.


(As a side-note....its interesting that, in his correspondence with Doc, Mr Schreier says that neither he, nor Pool.com, have any ownership, or vested interests, in Drake Ventures....Yet - in the very same letter - he goes on to display an awful lot of knowledge about exactly what Drake Ventures did - or did not do - in this whole process.....Very curious).


Scam artists aren't concerned with reputation, or ethics - only outcomes, and getting away with it. They don't care what you or I think of them.


If I thought that someone had 'stolen' a true premium name that I wanted - via unfair practices - I would go after them with forensic evidence - ALL the way (some of you know this from the recent Sedo mess).


Perhaps someone here will do this? Then we would ultimately know what really happened.

.

 

[Sam]

reminds me of the benelux .eu scam

 

[raredn.com]

If on a premium domain roundup, wouldn't they have also taken travel.asia, market.asia, hotels.asia, sport.asia and others which seem to be missing from their list

 

[Traveler]

If you defrauded people like this in the real world, you'd find yourself behind bars and for a very long time...

Isn't the domain business the real world? It is not like we are doing this with monopoly money.

 

[bmugford]

I have no dog in this fight, and personally could care less about .ASIA, however I would like to see more evidence backing these allegations.

I have dealt with Richard Schreier several times in the past and never had any problems with him. He is a rare CEO who will actually address any problems. From my dealings he seems like a decent guy.

I haven't read through the entire thread but from what I have seen there are definitely some points here that need to be explained.

Brad

 

[MaguirePhD]

raredn.com

Don't think we can make a supposition by exclusion. Just because they didn't take ALL of them pales in comparison as a metric to measure non-complicity because the sheer number that pool.com and the Australian Google guy ended up with are just astronomical.

Think this may be a matter for ICAHNN (if I have their initials correct).
I understand that they get involved in dispute resolution. If they will not get involved in this, then they would be turning a blind eye and share in the ex post facto complicity.

I am going to drop this in the lap of ICAHNN and stay on them until they look into this entire matter. If they fail to act resposibly, they can be next up under the microscope.

Doc

 

[1901gt]

The other part that I still don't get is why an area where the majority of population does not speak English, would want an "English" language (ASIA) domain. Considering the Chinese for example have their own TLDs in their own characters that only work from within China. But kudos to those who see something I may be missing - I have unfortunately not yet been to ASIA.

Same question here. Why would anyone from US or Europe buy a .Asia when they are not even living or working in Asia.

 

[accent]

Don't think we can make a supposition by exclusion. Just because they didn't take ALL of them pales in comparison as a metric to measure non-complicity because the sheer number that pool.com and the Australian Google guy ended up with are just astronomical.

Think this may be a matter for ICAHNN (if I have their initials correct).
I understand that they get involved in dispute resolution. If they will not get involved in this, then they would be turning a blind eye and share in the ex post facto complicity.

I am going to drop this in the lap of ICAHNN and stay on them until they look into this entire matter. If they fail to act resposibly, they can be next up under the microscope.
Doc

It is ICANN - often spelled around here as ICANN'T --- and for very good reason. The corruption of the .EU landrush was discussed on this board, you might want to use the search box at the top right of this page to read up in that. Someone mentioned the .travel landrush that was also a corrupt mess.

The most damning issue, and the only one which I followed closely because I had several domains involved, is Registerfly. This registrar took peoples money and did not renew their domains, and they sold customers' domains and kept the money for themselves, for something like a year. There were thousands of complaints to ICANN. The total I understand is about 250,000 domains that were totally lost to their owners, without any restitution. After months of dithering, ICANN finally got the remaining domains transfered to Godaddy, but Registerfly.com is STILL in business selling domains. Again, search Namepros for details.

ICANN is nearly hopeless, they give Verisign and the other registrys whatever price raises and monopoly powers they ask for. The non-US based people here hate that ICANN is still controlled by the US government. - But the central question in my mind is: wouldn't corporate or UN control be even worse?

 

[MaguirePhD]

Icann and pool.com

Now I know it is ICANN and making it a US-based firm is better because I can really take them to task over the airwaves, if they will not act upon this matter.

I don't know Rich Schreier at all. Never even heard of him until 10 days ago.
May be a personable " hands-on " CEO who gardens, goes to church and helps the needy;however, no one ended up with all these domains without some degree of subterfuge and internal cooperation.

This is not a matter of his character or reputation. This is matter that defies credibility.

I will glady let this matter go, if somone can supply me with how this was accomplshed under the process that was supposedly in place and also render an answer to the preposterous odds of it happening without internal collusion.

Doc

Adiboy:

Bought .asia domians to sell to US businesses wanting to do business in ASIA.

Doc

 

[james2002]

Well, I ended up with 60 .asia domains and some are not too bad http://www.chicagotrust.net on the Asia button.

These were all regged AFTER .asia opened to the general public March 26th.

So. most people probably think I don't have a dog in this fight because my looking into this matter only involves one .asia domain. right?

Well, my .asia just happened to be pool.asia. Now, who do you suppose owns that?

Doc

I have seen your domains and your expections for prices are more than the values of its counterparts with .com extension.