Indeed, I quoted your quote - from the wording of your post it seemed you were unsure about the source of those whois details, so I thought I would try and clear it up.

The last bit was for anybody else who is curious.

Edited by Adrianuk (Sun 06-Sep-15 19:57:42)

No. I was deliberately not giving a direct link to the domain name, seeing as it had presumably been deleted as part of the OP . I admit I didn't know about the connection you provided, assuming that it would be pointing at webcollect.

The website URL is in the OP's Profile anyway, which is permitted. @ BatBoy.

You lot in here are like E-Detectives lol

Don't get me wrong i'm not for one minute saying that it's a bad thing

LOL
How about (at least one of) the OP's business accounts for the last five years? (To 28 February 2014). Must have come up with a killer product!

Webcollect appears to just be his payment processor and membership manager rather than host - his site is hosted on a Siteground server (either directly as a hosting customer through them or a reseller, can't tell which) - site itself has been made with some site design software I have never heard of before.

Edit: Having looked at their hosting plans - I would put money on the .net domain being the 'free' domain with his hosting package and the .org being registered elsewhere which explains why one has whois protection and the other not.

Edited by Adrianuk (Sun 06-Sep-15 20:23:24)

Re the site, I was just guessing, based on this page. Other than that, I largely agree with what you say.

That Xara doesn't look at all bad, on a 73.6-second skim.

I hadn't gone to the lengths of checking where the host was.

Posting whois information is against this site's rules.

Posting certain whois info is. Not all such. If you think I broke a rule, and I'm sure I didn't, report the post and it will be deleted by the site management.