Super Shared Server :-)

kompreszor · #1 03-13-2008, 10:09 AM

I want a Shared Server based on the Baby Crock package that has:

Less monthly bandwidth.
Less hard drive space.
Costs more $money.
Only people with this package on this server.

Now don't get me wrong, 277 has been a good shared server. But with these new packages, how can I say this.. it has drawn in less then reputable people. In other words, I want the ability to move to a better neighborhood.

Serra · #2 03-13-2008, 01:32 PM

I agree that there is a gap in the service. Many people would like to have an intermediate level of hosting that could be defined as a "super shared" server.

It would be nice of HG would willing to do that.

Sandro · #3 03-13-2008, 02:41 PM

I agree

tomterm8 · #4 03-13-2008, 02:46 PM

Maybe their is a business opportunity for the resellers amongst us? I personally believe a semi-dedicated plan with 25 users, at say $12.50 per month would be a good offer. shared hosting, but guaranteed undersold

Sandro · #5 03-13-2008, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomterm8

Maybe their is a business opportunity for the resellers amongst us? I personally believe a semi-dedicated plan with 25 users, at say $12.50 would be a good offer. shared hosting, but guaranteed undersold

I will buy it now at that price

tomterm8 · #6 03-13-2008, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sandro

I will buy it now at that price

Given your reaction, I think I should charge more

ickb · #7 03-13-2008, 04:08 PM

I agree also

Serra · #8 03-13-2008, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomterm8

Maybe their is a business opportunity for the resellers amongst us? I personally believe a semi-dedicated plan with 25 users, at say $12.50 per month would be a good offer. shared hosting, but guaranteed undersold

The number of users on the server is NOT an issue. Plus, at that rate, 25 for $12.50, its not worth doing.

People need to realize it has little to do with the total number of users on a server. Its the quality of the users that make the difference. 500 good users would be better than 24 good users and one bad user.

tomterm8 · #9 03-13-2008, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serra

The number of users on the server is NOT an issue. Plus, at that rate, 25 for $12.50, its not worth doing.

People need to realize it has little to do with the total number of users on a server. Its the quality of the users that make the difference. 500 good users would be better than 24 good users and one bad user.

Yes, but I suspect that MOST of the problem users are the ones that are looking for 2,500 gb of bandwidth and 600 terrabits of diskspace for their $4.25 .

If you offer someone a decent and not excessive amount of disk space, and a decent but not excessive amount of bandwidth, I suspect you are less likely to get the problem users.

But this is entirely theoretical, as their is no way in h*ck I'm actually going to do it

I'm not daft, and I already have a business I'm trying to get off the ground.

Shades · #10 03-13-2008, 06:20 PM

Yeah, there should be an intermediate step between shared and dedicated. There was an option when I first signed up (semi dedicated). It was actually one of the reasons I signed up. Many hesitate to go from shared to dedicated because of the huge change in price. Hostgator should allow their customers to grow step by step.

I am probably going to become dedicated soon but I wish there was an intermediate step yeah.

gtgeorge · #11 03-13-2008, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shades

Yeah, there should be an intermediate step between shared and dedicated. There was an option when I first signed up (semi dedicated). It was actually one of the reasons I signed up. Many hesitate to go from shared to dedicated because of the huge change in price. Hostgator should allow their customers to grow step by step.

I am probably going to become dedicated soon but I wish there was an intermediate step yeah.

Semi-Dedicated was a bad step because it was usually 4 bad users on 1 server.

I too think they should offer less for more as many would go for it after they realise they don't need all the space offered to draw the crowds.

Serra · #12 03-13-2008, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtgeorge

Semi-Dedicated was a bad step because it was usually 4 bad users on 1 server.

I too think they should offer less for more as many would go for it after they realise they don't need all the space offered to draw the crowds.

Yes, the semi was a huge dissatisfier. Most of the users who went semi, really need to go dedi and were doing it because it was cheaper and they ended up being a bad fit.

A more secure, better quality server would be better, but lacks mass appeal.

River · #13 03-13-2008, 08:04 PM

well maybe cheaper dedicated though? Like server pronto and others that offers dedicated for 29 usd / month, but I guess they suck... I don't trust them.

Just some alternative between shared and dedicated. I don't know how but there just should be a step between shared and dedicated. There has to be some way..

Serra · #14 03-13-2008, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by River

well maybe cheaper dedicated though? Like server pronto and others that offers dedicated for 29 usd / month, but I guess they suck... I don't trust them.

Companies that offer dedicated servers for less than $100 are really doing a disservice to the industry. I've reviewed a bunch of server that were less than $100 and you'd be better off on a HG shared account.

Remember, when all is said and done, HG shared servers are SUPER POWERFUL! A cheap dedi is going to be a let down after shared hosting at HG. The best deal for servers is at thePlanet. Get one on the $200 range and you'll be happy. Settle for less and you'll not be very happy.

Keep in mind that the HG markup on dedicated servers is very low, so it isn't so bad using a managed over an unmanaged.

gtgeorge · #15 03-13-2008, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serra

Yes, the semi was a huge dissatisfier. Most of the users who went semi, really need to go dedi and were doing it because it was cheaper and they ended up being a bad fit.

A more secure, better quality server would be better, but lacks mass appeal.

Yep, but then again thats what we as smaller hosting companies are here for. When the users look for faster support, non overloaded servers etc. etc.

I know when I was searching for hosting, dependability and speed were on the top of the list. I paid dearly for it because I wanted my site available. And I would bet there would be several users that would pay more for less space etc and better/faster support.

Serra · #16 03-13-2008, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtgeorge

Yep, but then again thats what we as smaller hosting companies are here for. When the users look for faster support, non overloaded servers etc. etc.

Yes, I can't tell you how that has help my bottom line. I have a lot of users who don't fit well in the HG mold. I just don't like to say that here.

odingalt · #17 03-16-2008, 03:27 PM

I too would be willing to pay more for the above features. Basically, I am willing to pay more, if that can help prevent the web host from overselling and cramming 1,000 users on a server.

The jump right now is:

$4-10 - budget host
$40+ - business shared host, only 1GB of space
$??+ - dedicated

Where are the $10-$20 supershared options :-)

Hostgator is running good for me right now, no problems. Hopefully they never turn into an ipowerweb!

eLIANT · #18 03-16-2008, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by odingalt

I too would be willing to pay more for the above features. Basically, I am willing to pay more, if that can help prevent the web host from overselling and cramming 1,000 users on a server.

The jump right now is:

$4-10 - budget host
$40+ - business shared host, only 1GB of space
$??+ - dedicated

Where are the $10-$20 supershared options :-)

I run an unmanaged dedicated for the sites I develop. Occassionally I get requests for "just hosting."

Here's my pricing...
Presence Plan = $100/yr ($8.75/month)
PresencePlus Plan = $130/yr ($11.38/mth)
WorkSpace Plan = $240/yr ($21/mth)

The Presence Plan includes NO email, NO MySQL, and NO scripts. It's just for static sites. Backups are not provided since there is nothing to back up.

The PresencePlus Plan includes 1 email and FP, if requested, but NO MySQL, and NO scripts. It's just for static sites that want a domain-based email address. Again, backups are not provided since there is nothing to back up. But now, if you'd like, I'll manage SpamAssassin for an additional $50 year.

The WorkSpace Plan includes 1 email and an additional FTP account, plus unlimited databases and most non-ecommerce scripts. It's for static small-business sites that want a domain-based email address plus stats, forms, forums, search, etc. (Other restrictions apply.) Now, backups ARE allowed, and if you'd like, I'll do those plus manage SpamAssassin for an additional $100 year.

Is this what you're looking for?

Tela · #19 03-19-2008, 02:14 PM

I'd settle for a virtual option.

The gap for me is $12.95 then it goes to $174....I have no need of reseller space, but I wouldn't mind a bit more power.

Yes, I know virtual hosting is not exactly bug-free at this stage, but it is a viable option and with HG doing it I'd feel a lot better than some of these $30 virtual hosting plans out there. (They set you up and you're on your own. Good luck with customer service if you ever have a problem)