
Network Solutions’ scammy bullshit signup funnel - StuntPope
https://easydns.com/blog/2019/05/03/network-solutions-scammy-bullshit-signup-funnel/
======
LinuxBender
I've been watching NetSol devolve in this direction. It started when they were
acquired by web.com. They have really gone downhill. I had to teach their
escalation support how to use "dig" against external / authoritative servers.

That said, I have found they are still better than most of the registrars that
have popped up since. Some of the registrars can't even handle apex names as
NS records. The scammy upselling appears to be a trend and isn't limited to
registrars. Comcast did that to me as well with their bandwidth plans.

~~~
crikli
NetSol were scammy long before the web.com purchase. Back in 2007/2008 they
were "front-running" meaning that if you searched for a domain name and didn't
buy immediately, those dickheads would buy the domain and then demand a much
higher price to sell it to you. Then when they got called out for it they
tried to act all "oh, this is for YOUR benefit."[1] And they blatantly lied
about the details of what they were doing.

[1] [https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/01/network-
soluti...](https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/01/network-solutions-
defends-frontrunningto-stop-frontrunners/)

~~~
Spare_account
Your source doesn't support your assertion.

> _He acknowledged that the company does, indeed, put a hold on the domain
> name after a search is performed and reserves it for four days, but that if
> a customer searches for the same domain within that time at
> networksolutions.com, it will be available to register. After the four days
> is up, the domain is released._

~~~
crikli
I'm the source because I experienced this firsthand in 2007. I found the
article because I needed to validate an almost 12 year old memory. :)

As for the quote you picked out, it's a partial truth.

The partial truth is that sure, the domain was "available to register"...at a
multiple of the standard price. I don't remember what the multiple was. And if
you wanted to purchase through another registrar you couldn't because NetSol
held the domain.

This all resulted in a class action lawsuit:
[https://techcrunch.com/2008/02/25/network-solutions-icann-
su...](https://techcrunch.com/2008/02/25/network-solutions-icann-sued-over-
domain-front-running/)

That was settled a year later: [https://domainnamewire.com/2009/04/29/network-
solutions-sett...](https://domainnamewire.com/2009/04/29/network-solutions-
settles-class-action-from-frontrunning-practice/)

Edit: I removed where I said the part about the domain being released after
four days was a lie. I remember it being much much longer but at the same
time, I don't remember all the details well enough to make a statement of that
potency.

------
inetknght
I've been an American consumer all of my life. Everything in here is business
as usual for American consumers (and this comment is clearly hyperbole). Thank
you for pointing it all out though.

In seriousness though; I sure wish these practices were illegal.

~~~
chmod775
Most of that stuff _is_ horribly illegal in the EU. Explicitly even.

Plus if you took them to court after getting a surprise-bill, I'd imagine even
a US court siding with you.

This is just fraudulent.

------
hitpointdrew
Man, I have only heard horror stories about Network Solutions. When I started
out I was using 1&1, turned out they weren't that great either so switched to
hover.com and have been very happy there. Not sure if it is true but I have
heard people say they check if a domain is available on Network Solutions,
then check the next day and suddenly it is more expensive, very shady if true.

~~~
mey
I have been very happy with hover.com as well

------
bill_mcgonigle
Mark may be bombastic, but he's not usually wrong.

It's hard to believe they actually did the pre-auth - anybody here at PayPal
reading this?

~~~
nyx_
Right? It's blowing my mind that it's possible to pre-approve PayPal payments
without knowing how much you're going to be billed. The system should _not_
allow users to hand a blank check to a retailer.

------
droithomme
What you document solidly here are definitely deceptive practices. The adding
on of services and labeling them "FREE" when they will result in ongoing
recurring charges is highly deceptive.

------
spartas
The prices aren't listed in the dropdowns, but if you choose an option, then
the price should be displayed on the right: <
[https://imgur.com/a/1hSJOUq](https://imgur.com/a/1hSJOUq) >

~~~
StuntPope
Added an update to post to acknowledge this.

------
mike503
NetSol is a plague. Web.com was garbage and bought them to consolidate even
more garbage in house. They don’t even encrypt customers passwords. I was
asked to confirm a plaintext password once on behalf of a client. No identity
confirmation required!

Typically I login and simply want to change nameservers for clients and I’m
prompted to buy services while I navigate through their convoluted portal for
a simple change. It’s almost amusing how pathetic it is.

------
dammitfoo
Kinda off topic.. but does anybody here have any experience with the registrar
dynadot?

I have a few domains with them since last year and it's been uneventful. But I
was just wondering if anybody else had any good/bad stories about them?

------
ikeboy
>Netsol charges $35 for a 1-year .com renewal! (It’s $15 here).

And $8 at cloudflare.

~~~
mfatica
Just to note however that they only do renewals and transfers, no new
registrations

------
Fnoord
Is this kind of behavior legal in the EU?

------
Canada
Remember when they put a wildcard in the gLTDs? Assholes.

~~~
asclepi
This was Verisign, which acquired Network Solutions in 2000. Verisign had
already spun off the registry unit from Network Solutions when this incident
happened. The remaining registrar business of Network Solutions, along with
the name, was sold less than a month later.

As of today, the registry unit is still part of Verisign, while Network
Solutions changed hands many more times.

~~~
Canada
You're right, it was in 2003.

