Here is the text from the page:
Page Updated 11:23 P.M. PST January 10, 2002
Network Solutions
is not
a reliable company.
-Movie Company
Network Solutions is a Bad Company.
Verisign is a Bad Company
Netsol is a Bad Company
To View More Reliable Alternatives To Domain Registering Visit:
Internic.net
1 The names in this story are fictitious to protect the identity of those actually involved.
Thank You for your interest and for reading this message!
Email this article to a friend.
Register your own domain for only $8.00 at: Memphisexpress.com
No Minimum.
You are Visitor Number:
Verisign is a bad company
NetworkSolutions.com has:
A. Bad Service
B. Poor Representation
C. Bad Customer Relations
D. Poor Salesmanship
E. Poor Account Control
F. Average phone wait time = approximately 1 hour.
"We will never do business with: Network Solutions / NetSol.com again." - Movie Company
The problems with our Internet registrar began in November 2000. For years, Network Solutions held an exclusive government contract as registrar for Domain Names on the World Wide Web. When the law changed a few years ago their monopoly ended. Soon thereafter, Network Solutions was then purchased by VeriSign, a California company, which began aggressive efforts to expand the number of its registrants. By then, large numbers of other registrars had entered the market, offering the same services and allowing owners to modify their account names online. These new registrars gained a significant market share from VeriSign/Network Solutions.
In November 2000, salesmen from VeriSign/Network Solutions contacted my representatives about obtaining our business. Our Domain Names were registered at the time with "netwiz," "dotster," and "bulkregister." The VeriSign/Network Solutions salesmen persuaded us that they would provide far better service than our existing registrars. They said their system was "state-of-the-art," and promised that a specific engineer would be assigned to our account. They also promised that all our names would be completely transferred to their computers by December 15, 2000. We took them at their word and negotiated a contract to seal the bargain. The agreements were signed on December 14, 2000.
VeriSign/Network Solutions immediately began transferring the information about our Names, but the transfer was never completed. They called to say their system had "crashed." At the time, we believed their story. Although our written agreement had promised that all our Domain Names would be transferred by January 31, 2001, the transfers of our Names still has not been completed nearly a year later. We no longer believe that VeriSign/Network Solutions' computer system had "crashed." We believe the real reason that VeriSign/Network Solutions could not transfer our domain names was because their software was undeveloped and poorly engineered.
This disastrous experiment has been catastrophic to our business. Several of our domain names have been completely deleted and picked up by other companies from overseas and still others were not even transferred at all. We still cannot make any modifications to our accounts. The registration dates for all of our Domain Names are still incorrect. Worst of all, our company is no longer shown as the owner of many Domain Names.
On January 3, 2001, Mr. Jones1 told us that all of the domain names had been transferred. It was not true. Thousands of names were still missing or inaccessible. On January 30, 2001, Jones again told us, "all but four Domain Names are at NSI." Again, he was wrong. On February 1, I asked Jones when I could transfer a Name to a new client. He responded, "After the account is set up." I asked him when the account would be set up. Jones responded, "Very soon!" We felt frightened, frustrated, and helpless as we watched our business disintegrate.
On February 16, "Lena" became our new contact person. She told us that they would have a new "fix and transfer" tool that would permit them to complete the transfer of our Names. It did not.
On April 3, "George" assured us that VeriSign/Network Solutions had assigned an engineer to check their records and investigate the problem with our Names. They did not.
On May 15, 2001, we still could not access our account to view the list of our registered Domain Names, make modifications to our accounts, sell or transfer any Domain Names without intervention from VeriSign/Network Solutions, or verify previous Name transfers. I then began receiving phone calls from other companies indicating that I had been named as the registrant for their domain names! I had never registered these names. VeriSign/Network Solutions had incorrectly designated us as the owner of their Names.
Our business has been decimated. We think that they are the worst domain name register company that exist today. We will never do business with them again. Their management is poor and unorganized.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, P.C. Announces Class Action Suit Against VeriSign, Inc.
PHILADELPHIA--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 10, 2002--Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, P.C. has filed a class action suit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of VeriSign, Inc.("VeriSign" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:VRSN - News) between January 25, 2001 and April 25, 2002, inclusive. The action is pending in the United States District Court, Northern District of California against defendants VeriSign, Inc., and certain of its officers and directors. The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market between January 25, 2001 and April 25, 2002 (the "Class Period"), thereby artificially inflating the price of VeriSign securities. As alleged in the complaint, VeriSign provides digital trust services to businesses engaged in securing digital commerce and communications. Plaintiff alleges that during the class period, defendants artificially increased the Company's revenue and margins thereby created the false perception that its deferred revenue growth was derived organically. As part of their effort to boost VeriSign's stock price, defendants misrepresented VeriSign's true prospects and concealed improper accounting activities until they could effect the sale of at least $26 million worth of their own VeriSign stock and use VeriSign shares to acquire other companies in stock-for-stock transactions.
More info Here
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Losangelesnews.com also suggests that all foreign and domestic company's CEO, CFO and the entire companies management team's business activity of the past 5 years be carefully audited for possibilities of business fraud and misconduct to boost their stock prices and for the possibility of taking bribes under the table. Most of these companies hide their money in banks overseas where they pay no taxes ( Country Belize) under phony company names.
CBS MARKETWATCH TOP NEWS
VeriSign gets two-week warning from ICANN
By Frank Barnako CBS.MarketWatch.com
RESTON, Va. (CBS.MW) -- The exclusive registrar for the Internet's dot-com domain has been given two weeks to clean up its record keeping or face losing the right to sell Web site addresses.
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers warned VeriSign (VRSN: news, chart, profile) because it "blatantly ignored" warnings to fix inaccuracies in the Whois database, which contains information as to a domain's ownership. Brian O'Shaughnessy, a VeriSign spokesman, said the company will fix the problems immediately but contested whether ICANN's citation of 17 inaccuracies over 18 months shows a pattern of abuse, the Washington Post reported. "It's like holding a few grains of sand in your hand and calling it a beach," he said.
Verisign/Networksolutions is sued for millions for bad business practice.
