[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

NSI and Ivan Pope: some disclosure


> From: Clough, Christopher [mailto:chrisc@NETSOL.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 1999 7:22 PM
> To: DOMAIN-POLICY@LISTS.INTERNIC.NET
> Subject: Re: [IFWP] NSI purposely disseminated misleading information
> 
> Ivan,
> 
> In the interest of full disclosure to the Internet
> community are you willing to disclose your
> repeated failed attempts to sell your company to
> Network Solutions?
> 
> Chris Clough
> Network Solutions

Did I fail to sell or did NSI fail to buy? 

I was approached first by your bankers, Paine Webber, who I met in New York
with Bob Korzenewski. A sequence of discussions followed which culminated in
nothing at all. This was at the end of last year. I never approached NSI. 
There was one sequence of discussions initiated by yourselves, not 'repeated
failed discussions'.
These discussions were conducted under NDA and I have respected that NDA. 

I believe I acted in good conscience throughout. I have a duty to my
shareholders and I have to take seriously offers to buy. Chris Clough may
want to make it seem like I tried to sell. Sure, I was interested, but I
never started the discussions. The discussions were serious (at least on my
part). NetNames was represented by Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich, Rosati from
the West Coast.

I had extensive discussions with NSI's bankers and with Gabe Battista, Bob
Korzenewski, Don Telage and many others. My view throughout was that I would
only do a deal if I thought it would result in a significant shift in NSI's
attitude and policy towards the Internet. I think that was honorable.

I think the fact that NSI initiated the discussions and would have locked me
in to any agreement gives me credibility both as a competitor and as an
executive within the industry. 

I learned a lot during my discussions with the executives of NSI and I
remember many conversations. Lots of them were hardly complementary about
your then CEO or about your current CTO. I have documentation of course
about the discussions. And WSGR of course have their own records.

Chris, I think your message of yesterday speaks volumes. You call for
disclosure. I know a lot more, but always assumed that NSI would not want it
disclosed. 

Your attempts to damage me are doomed to fail. I have worked in the
interests of the Internet, my company and my employees since the beginning
of the eighties. I believe that the Internet is stronger than any company,
however hard they work against that. 

It will be interesting to see where it all goes from here.

Ivan Pope
Founder and CEO, NetNames International

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clough, Christopher [mailto:chrisc@NETSOL.COM]
> Sent: Thursday, March 25, 1999 7:22 PM
> To: DOMAIN-POLICY@LISTS.INTERNIC.NET
> Subject: Re: [IFWP] NSI purposely disseminated misleading information
> 
> 
> Ivan,
> 
> In the interest of full disclosure to the Internet
> community are you willing to disclose your
> repeated failed attempts to sell your company to
> Network Solutions?
> 
> Chris Clough
> Network Solutions
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ivan Pope [SMTP:ivan@netnames.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 1999 1:40 PM
> > To:   'list@ifwp.org'
> > Subject:      [IFWP] NSI purposely disseminated misleading 
> information
> >
> > As far as I can see, the InterNIC site was where NSI fulfilled their
> > duties
> > to the USG and the networksolutions.com site was where they 
> offered a
> > value
> > added service.
> > It is of course entirely self serving that NSI now claims 
> the InterNIC
> > site
> > as a Registrar site rather than a Registry site. Well, of 
> course they
> > would,
> > but the USG shouldn't let them get away with it.
> > Every time NSI claims an absolute truth, you need to look 
> at the spin and
> > the re-writing of history.
> >
> > And read http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/990325/ny_asensio_1.html for
> > background.
> > I quote 'We believe that NSOL's management has purposely 
> disseminated
> > misleading information, and failed to disclose material negative
> > information'.
> >
> > Ivan
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: cgomes@internic.net [mailto:cgomes@internic.net]
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 1999 1:09 PM
> > > To: list@ifwp.org
> > > Subject: RE: [IFWP] FYI
> > >
> > >
> > > I know many refuse to accept this, but the old InterNIC was
> > > a hybrid site involving both registry (DNS) and registrar
> > > (customer) functions and it is very easy to establish that
> > > most of the functions on the InterNIC site were registrar
> > > related.  InterNIC was not a registry.  There was no
> > > registry, but there will be shortly.
> > >
> > > Chuck
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: John B. Reynolds [mailto:john@reynolds.chicago.il.us]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 1999 11:46 PM
> > > To: list@ifwp.org
> > > Subject: RE: [IFWP] FYI
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > A.M. Rutkowski wrote:
> > > >
> > > > At 05:44 PM 3/24/99 , John B. Reynolds wrote:
> > > > >The old InterNIC site is still up (presumably maintained
> > > in case NSI is
> > > > >forced to pull down the new one):  It's at
> > > http://198.41.0.5/ or
> > > > >http://rs0.internic.net/.
> > > >
> > > > It actually looks like the site for the new registry
> > > > home page, doesn't it?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --tony
> > > >
> > >
> > > If that were the case, it would be appropriate for
> > > http://www.internic.net
> > > and http://rs.internic.net to continue to point to it, since
> > > InterNIC is the
> > > registry (the registrar is WorldNIC).
> > >
> > > ________________________________________________________
> > > NetZero - We believe in a FREE Internet.  Shouldn't you?
> > > Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
> > > http://www.netzero.net/download.html
> > >
> 
> 
> -- 
> DOMAIN-POLICY administrivia should be sent to 
> <listserv@lists.internic.net>
> To unsubscribe send a message with only one line "SIGNOFF 
> DOMAIN-POLICY"
> For more help regarding Listserv commands send the one line "HELP"
>