I don't see how Oversee expects this incident not to balloon out of control. They hide auction history and expect us to take the word of a 3rd party forensics firm that works on their behalf. The wrapper is pretty, rebate and 5.22% interest - the inside is a maggot-infested piece of candy noone should eat. Waiting on the announcement of the class action lawsuit. Oversee needs to shape up or else.
this is a very interesting story and we still don't know the details. i would expect collusion from multiple high ranking snapnames people beyond brady. brady might be the fall guy. but this is an enormously lucrative industry with zero regulation and the temptation for corruption is endless.
oversee must have done a cost/benefit analysis and figured they would come out ahead by announcing this.
what i am unclear at is why they came clean at all?
what forced the issue?
i can only imagine they believed that the impending scandal, potential lawsuits and expenses where somehow vastly cheaper for them.
many people are looking around in disbelief.
i cannot believe this is a snapnames only problem
aren't there other auction houses with have even LESS transparency, with un-named bidders the norm?
if you think the other houses aren't ROUTINELY employing these exact same strategies I have a bridge to sell you.
i hear you and i sympathize i hope to see change.
but i am unsure what change is required.
we all want more transparency, yet this means additional regulation and government involvement.
honestly i'm not sure who is the worse bed fellow.
govt protection generally flows towards those making the most money, so i would expect verisign or ICANN to somehow profit from this and a few smaller registrars take the fall.
