spams again, so this means war has found its way to this blog again, and if you want to blame anyone for bringing my attention back to this blog you can thank them.

For the last 6 months I have been between buying a new home, packing, moving, fixing up the old house to return it to the to land lord, and fine tuning my new house, all while trying to juggle web design clients that seem to choose the most inconvenient times to give me business. The next step is designing a desk.  From that I have learned I am no carpenter, and should perhaps stay away from power tools. Meanwhile this site was pretty low on my priorities. But while all of this has been going on has been doing a rather aggressive marketing campaign.

Now before anyone wants to get into a whole argument about how I am anti-capitalism, I am going to cut the argument down. I am not against making money, so long as it is done ethically. Spamming is not ethical; in fact it is downright invasive. Given I have a career in the webhosting industry that spans just a little over a decade; I think I have real reason to hate spam. Between installing counter measures, dealing with abusers, and having to delist my servers off spam lists (some of which pretty much required a ransom to remove them) I have lost a lot of time, money, and productivity that could have been used to grow my business. My hatred of spam goes beyond ethics; it extends to my wallet and lost time. So I take spam very personally, especially from a company that claims to be in their own words “Oldest Successful Hosting company of India”.

By aggressive mailing measures I find that has returned to mailing my yahoo email addresses something they have not done since 2010 on July 17, 2013.


I would have wrote about it back then mostly because it pisses them off every time I write an article. Than I meant to get this done last week, but I made a mistake of involving myself in rewriting the content for a client’s site. My brain may be leaking out of my ears because I learned a little too much about my customer’s insurance business. But today this little email came in reminded me what I was supposed to do last week: spam sent January 20, 2014

Dear Customer,

Thank you for your association with Asia’s No 1 hosting company, we are

glad to inform you that now India’s oldest hosting provider is giving

reseller hosting package at just Rs 10000 for 3 years.

The reseller package is been given with the below features no1 data center,

48gb DDR3 Ram, high speed,Complete up time, unlimited domain, No


Please contact us immediately at 080-42400333 or 18002580258 to avail the

promo .


Oldest hosting provider

Oldest hosting provider? Really, I don’t think so

The header information is attached here: spam headers

Never mind I have never been and never will be a customer of, something is missing in this email.  The odd thing about this email, like many of the emails from is that they leave out any name or reference to their company. All I have is this phone number to a company called Target Information Management. I know that is because some of the spam that has their name on it, also has the same phone number. Strangely their call center is not located out of India, but my country the U.S. out of the state of Michigan. Target Information Management is defiantly worth looking into considering their relationship with But for now I want to focus on their spam and where it is coming from, and if you came here because you got spam from what steps you can take against

Looking through the header information in their earlier and latest spam I find the domain name I find that they are hosted by A company I reviewed last year that tried to pay me to do a post on their company and join their hosting program. But there is no surprise that is using a .tk domain.’s time has come, what you can do

So if you have been getting emails from a hosting company that with any of the following information:

Brigade Gateway,
Bangalore- 560055

That is indeed

There are four steps that need to be taken against

  1. Forwarding the spam with headers intact to at [email protected], make sure to leave the headers intact.
  2. After which the next step is to get the domain name removed from control.  As before forward all spam with headers attached to abuse with headers intact.  Header information will look like this this text file.
  3. Contact’s network provider, which I am a little shocked to see is Rackspace. Forward the spam with headers attached to [email protected] Make sure to connect as outlined how is connected to the spam.
  4. The last and finale contact should be the very provider of’s domain, You can reach them at [email protected] Which is where you can forward your complaint, as well as details that link the spam to

Steps 3 and 4 are a little more complicated because has kept their domain and name out of the bulk of their spam. So you will need to connect the dots for and The best way is to have them Google “ 18002580258”, which is the same number found in the spam. They can also try calling the number and ask to buy a account. Or you can point them to this post.

The below pics are copies of the whois info for and their spam domain

hostingupdatestk whois manashosting whois is not really that bad…… are they?

I could go into a whole time line of events with, but I did that the last time I covered them: Spams again!!!

Since 2010 has been up to the same tricks, which are not just limited to spamming my Yahoo and Hotmail accounts. also likes to comment spam forums and blogs with fake positive reviews, often for the sake of drowning out negative reviews. One of the worst sites to show case public relation spamming attempts is:

Given that I have penetrated a first page reviews, I have also been targeted with fake positive reviews. Which is probable because I also have a lot of negative reviews from their past customers. The biggest blatant give away that they fake their reviews is that most of the comments come from the same ip address. The other is that they may seem like different people but they put in the same email address and/or domain for many of these reviews.

manashosting spams again

Normally  I would  avoid calling any company a scam, but I think has earned that title. As may be the worst hosting company in the world, and their business practices tell me why I should not try them. – Less than a year to top host at is as I type this post being show cased as number 7 on’s so called top 10 list. Until this year I had never heard of, after all there are thousands of hosts I have never heard of. Earlier this month I was cleaning out a screen shot folder to get rid of the many files I will never use (never mind I should be focusing on packing for my move).Where I found a screen shot I took of a so called review site that show cased earlier. Never mind what should have caught my attention was a host I never heard of on the top 10 for After all I know all the hosts that find themselves on these kinds of lists. This so called review site thought it was cleaver posting spam on the Facebook page for this site, in hopes of milking it for traffic. Per usual I took a screen shot of the spam banned the person who posted it. At best this review site is worth a screen shot.

hostmetro spam

But a direct link would probable not be a good idea as their traffic score is no better than a newly bought domain. But they had me wondering who was, and why were they on the’s top 10 list? The question you may be asking is why even bother doing a post on Truth be told, this is more about and the big lie I caught them at. was picked by as a top host because?

Now before I go over the whole relationship between and I would like to make it clear what the connection is. like all of the hosts that appear on’s top 10 sites have an affiliate program.  Which pay out roughly in the $100 range per sale. With the exception of all of these hosts including have (commission Junction) affiliate programs as well as their own in house programs.

Once again I don’t have a problem with affiliate programs, even that of In short its just a form of advertising. In fact, I am an affiliate of many of the programs covered under At best I have an issue with the bulk of a customer’s payment going to an affiliate and not their service. Yet that does not make affiliate programs evil. The only reason hosting review sites like show case companies like is because of the high payout. has an affiliate program. has 2 affiliate programs. The first is directly through the payout is $65 per referral. The second one has far more appeal because a third party ( is involved and the payout is $100.  In addition goes further to say on

Our affiliate program offers $100 for each hosting account referral. There is no minimum hosting account purchase or term. If you can send more than 15 referrals each month we can increase your commission rate to reward you for being a high performing affiliate. We will also provide you with a dedicated affiliate representative to make sure all your needs are being met. ”

Normally most hosting affiliate programs offer a higher payout per amount of sales, but wants you to contact them to arrange a higher payout. Something I was not aware that had capability for negotiations. But as far as why a third party is a good thing in the case of an affiliate program, they get paid when the affiliate does. does not have FTC compliance in their affiliate agreement does not have a FTC compliance clause like many companies such as hosts with EIG (Endurance International Group). Several companies sent out FTC compliance emails in 2011 like this one:

The reason I bring up the affiliate program is to get a clear understanding of why would show case Which is they are in this to make money. Despite giving a editor’s choice award to (who happen to get 8/10 on user feedback with no customer feedback), they would not show case the host in their top 10. I have two theories behind that 1. The payout was not that high. 2. They gave an award to leech their traffic.

But is different from, as they have a high payout.

How old is hints at 3 – 5 years. Time for!!!

If you read what has to say about you would think the host was at least 5 years old:

HostMetro is an established, reliable web host based in Schaumburg, Illinois. The management and ownership team boasts a combined total of some 50 years in the website hosting industry; the support staff (all US-based) and server technicians have, on average, 5 years experience in web hosting support. This experience is a benefit to all customers – this is a company with deep roots and stability.

So in effect I think it is safe to say they have around 10 employees. . But to be honest, never out and out states that the age of There are other things to look at like Facebook, Twitter, and the Better Business Bureau to get a better grasp of how old might be.

According to the first tweet was on February 4, 2013. shows they joined on June 20, 2012. However they have no activity on their Facebook page.

Oddly they have 2,638 followers on Twitter (I am following them), and only 30 likes on Facebook.

According to the Better Business Bureau:

Business started 07/19/2012

BBB file started 12/28/2012

As I have stated many times before the BBB does not actually confirm the age of a company. The start date is something that the BBB asks, and they don’t bother to check any records to confirm this data. But I think based off everything I have seen that it is safe to say that was an honest answer. So as of today, is not even a year old. has reviews for all the way back to 2011.

So the BBB has a start date of July 2012, heck even has this for on March 2011 (a simple domain parking page). But when was the first customer review?

The first review was a negative one by someone calling themselves Robert, on May 10, 2011.  However I don’t believe there was a Robert. Nor do I believe most of if any of those reviews existed before last month.

So how is it that has reviews (62 to be exact) all the way back to May 10, 2011?

Not to mention has no history of any of those reviews prior to this month.

But there is another host on added not too long ago – has been around for a while, a lot longer than January 15, 2013 they had a total of 6 reviews from July 29, 2011 to September 16, 2011

Then back in March 2013 they somehow managed to go from 6 to 46 reviews and miraculously is 7th host on the top 10 list at Not to mention the reviews change, as the earliest they had any reviews was August 4, 2011. It appears the first 2 negative reviews were deleted. Plus where there were no reviews after September 16, 2011 on January 15, 2015 there were now 42 reviews that had been added in.

I think it is safe to say most if not all of the reviews at are fake.

But here is the weird part.,,,,, and don’t have any reviews after early April 2012. Over a year and 6 out 10 major hosting companies don’t have any reviews. That is unheard of for my site and I get less traffic than The only site I have no covered is and I even get positive and negatives on this host. So should be drowning in reviews from these companies both good and bad.

Somewhere after April 25, 2013 decided to add to their system along with the fake reviews. as I said before is in this to make money, and if they have to throw ethics out the door to do it, well fabricating fake reviews for and is a small price to pay when the truth does not matter. an award winning host

Now this might have been the end of the post, and I would not bother going any further with Yet like some hosts they decided to show case so called awards that had some pretty noticeable flaws. Either did not bother to validate the awards they received, or they hoped people would just be impressed by the sheer volume of awards. Looking through the awards I found the following problems:

  • No significant traffic (which was the bulk of the sites)
  • Don’t have links to proof of the award
  • Incomplete sites that were offering awards
  • No customer reviews
  • Certification or registered with a company, not an award
  • Non-active award site
  • 4 award sites are owned by the same group, and feature as number 1
  • An award from 2003, despite a business start date from 2012

What is perceived as an award by would be for starters: (award 2), did not start monitoring uptime for until May 2013. June 5, 2013 is when they supposable agreed to’s code of ethics. Never mind this is what WHS equate as ethics:

IMG_0469 IMG_0471 (Award 12) does nothing more than add to their system to give an “attendance” award.  There is no direct link to’s page on, where there are no customer reviews. (Awards (15 and 20) provided certification, not awards. (award 16) – award graphic simply says verified firm and “learned from reviews” (no idea what that means) they did not have any reviews until June 19 where they got 2, and another one on June 20, 2013.

While most of the awards for are vague some are nonexistent these awards stick out.,,, and (awards (5 ,8, 14, 17.21, and 23) are all owned by the same individual / group. Plus may have fake reviews, and like lies about the age of the company:

HostMetro has quietly and confidently been providing some of the best web hosting services in the industry since 2003.

Tevin — October 25, 2012 “HostMetro has quietly and confidently been providing some of the best web hosting services in the industry since 2003.

But never mind that, despite being owned by the same person/group their top 10 lists are not in the same order with each site, there is one host that is number 1. Which begs the questions does own these fake top 10 review sites? - Domain Dossier - owner and registrar information, whois and DNS records - Domain Dossier - owner and registrar information, whois and DNS records (1) - Domain Dossier - owner and registrar information, whois and DNS records (2) - Domain Dossier - owner and registrar information, whois and DNS records (award 19) – Looking at this domain you would expect to find at least 10 hosts listed, but there is only one host – I would not be surprised if this is owned by someone with in The domain creation date was December 18, 2012. (Award 25) is not actually an active website and has a launch page.

The last award (26) which I think is for has no link, and is an award for 2003 which is impossible considering was not around back then. proves that had nothing more than a coming soon page back in 2003: is another host that I will be following, and proof that is not to be trusted as unbiased review site. and their former employee Taylor Chapman

Chances are if you watched anything in relation to Dunkin Donuts last week, you saw what is one of the worst kinds of public relations a company could have. Clearly I am not talking about Dunkin Donuts having a bad week, if anything they had one heck of a great public relations week. Abid Adar (the guy behind the counter that had to deal with Taylor Chapman) may have cost the company somewhere in the neighborhood of $10 – 20 to try and appease someone that was impossible to please.  Yet he brought the company good public relations on rather tiny budget.  The company I am referring to that had a bad pr week is the one that Taylor Chapman worked for:

I ended up watching that Taylor Chapman posted because I later found out she worked for a “SEO” company. So like I had to look at stats, but more about that further in.  As first I would like to cover why I don’t think the customer is always right.  Taylor Chapman is the perfect example of why you can’t please all the people all of the time. For some time I have wanted to address this.

When people post their reviews about a hosting company, I sometimes get complaints from people about a host and I get told “the customer is always right”. I guess since this site is a customer advocacy site some people think I agree with that train of thought. But I am a business man and I don’t agree, if anything people like Taylor Chapman come to mind as those that I have constantly rejected as being a customer. Honestly I don’t think I would have near the patience that Abid Adar has.  When I ran a hosting company I would literally send irrational customers packing.  If I had found a customer like Taylor harassing my staff I killed their site. As they broke the terms of service they signed up for. Most hosts have this in their terms of service.  But really Taylor and those like her are not customers; they are a drag on productivity.

Sometimes customers that I had like her would as their form of revenge would take to forms and review sites to bash my company. It probably would of helped them not to be irrational, as it backfired on them, but no where as well as it did with Tailor Chapman. She thought she would try to video her experience in hopes she could somehow hurt Dunkin Donuts, all because she did not get a receipt.  Dunkin Donuts policy is the meal is free if the customer does not get a receipt.  Which has happens to me every so often, but I don’t actually care if they don’t give me one. As it generally takes time to fix a mistake, and I worked in fast food at one point in my life. So I have sympathy for those that have to work for minimum wage to make a living. So I tip nicely and avoid anything that might cause management to come down whoever helped me.  I don’t think Taylor has had a retail job, perhaps I am wrong.

Somewhere at the start of the video she claims to have gotten a lawyer. Which is pathetic.  I have over 10 years of running a hosting company. So I have had my fair share of people who pay less than $10 a month for hosting, that turn around and threaten to have a lawyer come after my company. If they had to deal with a lawyer, they would realize lawyers are not free.  An estate issue I am currently going through I had to plop down $1,500 just to start with. My sister has a lawyer that bills her $75 for every letter he sends out. But that is beside the point, as while she is telling them she has a lawyer, a young man named Abid Adar (who should be employee of the month if not year) is calmly trying to accommodate her. Yes I know he could of asked her to leave, or called the police. Yet I honestly think he did ultimately the best thing one could do, as this all backfired on her. For 8 minutes and 18 seconds you hear a triad crap come out of Taylor’s mouth which gets worse the further end you go finishing off with racism.  Which is the main reason I don’t post the video here. Keep in mind she had a job in public relations and a business degree that she ruined in a matter of minutes.  Clearly she thought that everyone would take her side as she posted the video that went viral, which enraged “the internet”. She has a long path to redemption. former employer of Taylor Chapman. is a “Internet Marketing and SEO”, or as they claim”#1 Internet Marketing SEO“. They had Taylor Chapman as a spokesperson for their advertising video’s. I am not exactly sure how her video got on YouTube since she claimed to be posting the video to Facebook. Which as me wondering if someone else did that was on her friends list. But at some point it hit YouTube and spread like a wild fire. It did not take long before we knew who her boyfriend was and soon who she worked for. Some people (who should be ashamed of themselves) took it upon themselves to contact the company in a uncivil manner. Which is the point where a marketing site had been handed lemons, so they should have made lemonade right? I can tell you there could have been no better time given the companies condition before Taylor gave them national exposure.

I am a graphics guy; I don’t do the SEO part of my business.  I will not make any claims of being an SEO expert, in fact I would go so far as to say that I had everything I know about SEO beaten into me by some of the best. The only site that I am actively running right now that I do the SEO for is this one. So it really is bad when I can pull off better search engine rankings without help from my own experts than a company claiming to be “#1 Internet Marketing SEO“. After all their Google page rank is 1, and their Alexa score is 3.4 million. As I have stressed many times before the lower the number the better when it comes to Alexa. Based off that data alone it’s not worth the bother to go over the rest of their stats. Never mind that the design job is poor, also not worth the time to go over in detail.

powersalesteam alexa

They don’t even know how to make video advertisements for their customers.  Never mind that is one major focus of their business. As one commenter on this whole fiasco stated, they could take a better video with their iPhone than this company. Which is true as they don’t shoot most of their videos in wide screen, and the quality of the videos are less than that of an iPhone. One of the videos I seen had audio not synched with the video. They don’t even have their own YouTube channel; their videos are on (whose site’s stats are worse than  Also the opening video (which annoyingly starts the moment you load the page) on the main page for was shot in really bad lighting.  The video that has Taylor Chapman looks like it was shot in the 70’s and the back ground noise is awful.

But speaking of Taylor’s video the page that show cases the other professionals has some poorly edited out Taylor Chapman spots.

Website Video - Commercial - E-Commercial Video Presentation copy

Also for the life of me, why would a company that claims to be “”#1 Internet Marketing SEO“” have Google Adsense on their site? Google is generating ads for other SEO companies on their front page.   You can’t take this company seriously when they are advertising for their competitors. Yes I have Adsense, but I am not selling anything. Which is why Adsense works for my site.

1 Internet Marketing   SEO - 954.526.9608 - Fort Lauderdale Boca Raton copy

Now while I thought Tailor Chapman was a real piece of work, Mr. Williams whom I assume is the owner may actually be worse. The worse mistake by far that did was having a graphic of the person they fired with a customer’s web address.

Taylor Chapman is Not Employed Here Anymore   Internet Marketing   SEO

If it was me the first thing I would be doing is removing and replacing every single commercial that had Tailor Chapman in it. Yet the decision was to take short cuts and grab whatever picture they could find of her (a screen shot of video clip it seems). While this customer’s web address is shown during the company’s official response they decided to play the hate messages that were left on their answering machine. I am pretty sure that the customer they listed is also getting nasty phone calls because of this lack of foresight.

powersalesteam customer

If anything I would have had a rep of the company in the video, make it clear and short that Taylor Chapman was let go because she does not understand that public relations is important to a marketing company. Playing the hate messages to “the internet” and being snide about it is only going to make matters worse. had a chance to turn lemons in to lemonade given their poor traffic stats, yet they would rather have something vile instead., 3 Million customers and only one site to show for it. is on television rather frequently. Often with promises of “Helping your business succeed online.”  Not to mention that all too alluring Get a custom built website from the experts at for FREE!”  Who can argue with free right?

At the same time you have people giving their testimonials. Which is where I come into all of this.

Recently I was emailed by one of their customers who showed me their invoices. I can’t say I have not been interested in their operation. No I never entertained the idea of trying them. From the websites I have seen displayed on television everything looked cookie cutter.  But I have never really gotten a look at their work.  Despite testimonials they don’t show websites. Its not like does not have time or the customers under their belts for posting websites that are well worth show casing. states” has 30 years of experience helping over 3 million small businesses succeed online.”.  Which begs the question, when was the internet first available to the public? The first website was created in 1991. However 1998 appeared to be doing something other than webhosting.

But this has more to do with the people that appear in the television commercials. 3,000,000 plus customers and they don’t show case customers sites just their name and company.  Searching for the site with both details has been problematic like for this person’s site:

Steve greenup fse

What that asterisk means:  “*These results are not typical. Search Engine Optimization is only one of the factors that affects search engine ranking.

Searching for “Steve Greensup  F.S.E. Inc.,”  I don’t find a conclusive site. The site I found does not match the one that has in this graphic. But seems to fit the bill as there is a “Powered by /” on the bottom. I think the site looked better before got to it.’s Stuck in the 70’s television advertisement

But there is one video I am highly certain I found all of the web sites:

  • Mark Castelluci – a safer pool edge –
  • Martha Smith – a loave affair llc –
  • Lory Rosa  – Cleveland living –
  • John LeProvost – Malibu Real Estate Today –

These 4 people also appear on the video locate here on

It took a bit, but I found the domains for these 4 customers that gave glowing testimonials for  The first three sites are no longer active.  Search engine results by name and company did not take me directly to the first two and But confirms that the logo was on the bottom of both sites.

The third was a bit more tricky as all I could find was a profile page with and a Facebook page.

The last site is active,’s effect on gives me a chance to see what does, and personally I would have picked a different customer to  show case. There is too much wasted space at the top of the site. Plus take it from someone that has spent the last three years looking for a house.  The Property search  is not user friendly. While I can enter in criteria, I can’t sort the results and I only can get 5 listings per page.

Search engine ranking for  is abysmal

The page rank is 1.

Search engine results are even worse.

I have to wonder what a television ad might do for customer whose site address is actually shown. and Jim Furyk

When it comes to golf (or any sport really) I am by far no expert. Personally I find golf boring. Yet there is a whole channel on Directv dedicated to just golf.  No matter how unentertaining I find golf, it is a huge market.  When I watched’s recent commercial with Jim Furyk something caught my eye.  I have dealt with many Facebook pages and what I saw on a 80 inch screen stuck out like a sore thumb.

Jim Furky fake and real facebook page

The top part of the picture is the actual Facebook page which was not easy to find as I thought it would be.  The Bottom part is a doctored up Facebook page that was show cased in the commercial.  From what I can see there was nothing about the site being enhanced or anything.  But the advertisement clearly lists 43,145 likes versus the reality of 309 yesterday and 311 today.  There is no videos or foundation tabs on Jim Furyk’s Facebook page.  What interested me about the Facebook page that showed was it had no thumbs up by the number of likes. Below on the left is a snap shot of the real Facebook page for, on the bottom right the fake. They can be clicked on for a better view.

Jim Furyk facebook page realJim furky video fb page

This is the reality that is not showing:

When I search for Jim Furyk I get the following results.

Jim Furyk

Jim Furyk has a page made by a fan that could easily be tapped into to bring in more likes. I am more than certain if asked, the page operator would be all too happy to send fans to the official fan page. Frankly whomever generated the fan page looks like they would be better at managing the Facebook page than

When I first looked at Jim Furyk’s site, at first glance I missed the Facebook page link as it blended in with the header graphic and not a traditional blue and white that Facebook comes in. Perhaps if had done more than just Facebook for social media for Jim Furyk than I would have noticed it sooner. According to this link, the golf ad has ran 116 times. Maybe if actually showed the direct link and corrected the Facebook link they could improve the likes for

Keep in mind charges $189.95 for their Facebook package.

I will be keeping an eye on the progress of under’s handling. (your affiliate) is trashing your company has in the past responded to past posts, and I hope they will do so again. Because one of their affiliates is trashing their company. Clearly it makes no sense for to pay someone that is telling people to avoid

A few months ago I encountered, a forum that is trying to be a review site. Despite claiming to be an expert on hosting, they provide nothing that will prove they have used the hosts they recommend or advice to avoid. There is no data that might help prove a host is good or bad.

But when I pointed out that had affiliate links to hosts bash the brand for like the owner had this to say:

Second, if somebody is stubborn, and going to sign up with one of those hosts anyway — likely due to the lure of cheap “unlimited” — then yes, we’ll take the affiliate commission for it.

Personally if I was the owner of I would  at least cancel their affiliate membership, if not seek collecting any payments that were made to Their membership id is PID=3235990.

This is what has to say about

So perhaps may not be sold on that, more proof is needed that is really trashing their brand. Well there is a whole post designated for just that:

IX is a Commission Junction affiliate, and has a payout of $50-150 per sale. (All CJ publishers can readily see what the payouts amounts are, so this is a verifiable fact.) So when you see “review sites” with IX listed as a “top rated” host, you know why. What they really mean is “IX pays us the most, so buy from them so we can get our $50-150”. By contrast, quality hosts generally cannot afford to pay out more than $5-25 per sale, because they actually invest their income in quality hardware, quality bandwidth, quality datacenters (rental or otherwise), as well as trained/knowledgeable support techs.

Every place I look that shows up on I find the clickable link. Clicking the link for I find the following code in the URL for PID=3235990.

Not to mention some of the hosting companies that recommends do a lot of what does.

The following hosts depend on the amount of sales per month. So if you only bring in 1 customer you get the lowest amount, or should you bring in more 10 or more you may get the max per sale.

  • $65 – $110 (65 – $125 per sale through
  • $40 – $100
  • $70 – $135
  • $50 – $125
  • $50 – $150 ($7 – 80 per sale through
  • $50 – $100 ($100 per sale through
  • $40 – $150
  • $25 – $100

But some of these hosts upon review find themselves on “review sites”. I search for a few that I knew are frequently on review sites with the term “*host name* reviews” and here is what I found.

  • –
  • –
  • –
  • –,,, and all magically appeared on, a review site that charged host for being in the 1 – 25 spots. A small summation how was not to be trusted.

Any surprise that hosts that find themselves on other so called review sites are also on One has to wonder if feels they have not got enough payments from and changed their stance.

But there are companies that pay out far more than such as: $60 -$5000 or 5% reoccurring commission.

Back when I first looked at the host recommended I found that 89% of the hosts they recommend have very clear affiliate programs. 2 of the three had affiliate login areas. The one host that did not have a clear affiliate program had WHMCS which has a built in affiliate manager. goes further to trash

You’ll see these sorts of hosts referred to as “oversellers” or “unlimited” hosts. This is because they’ll oversell their services, stuffing too many clients onto a single server, which causes everything to run slow. And because resources are finite — there’s no such thing as an “unlimited speed” CPU or an “unlimited size” chip of RAM — you’ll find that there are very narrow limits on what can be done with your hosting account. These limitations are buried in their site documentation, such as the Terms of Service. Unless you’re hosting a teeny tiny little HTML-only homemade site for personal use, then you’ll want to seek better quality services. These are NOT business-grade plans, as uptime tends to be unreliable, and there’s little room for expanding your site (including more traffic as your business becomes more popular). For that matter, it can be unacceptable for a high-traffic personal site.

And to make the situation ironic, many of the better hosts are the same price, or even a little less costly. Go figure. The primary difference is a good host puts a cap on the space and bandwidth you’re allotted. It’s not “unlimited”.

But changed their stance on Unlimited hosts back in March.

Excluding a few well-managed hosts like JaguarPC or Site5, unlimited hosting plans are impossible, made with promises that cannot be kept.

Why change their mind on recommending unlimited should be clear. After all how much did those two hosting companies pay out?

  • $65 – $110 (65 – $125 per sale through
  • $25 – $100

Most review sites don’t link back to host they don’t recommend. Especially when they make it a point to capitalize on trashing a host while recommending another.

I meant to do this sooner, but as I have stated many times before this site does not pay the bills. That and I have a new house being built, the time table was recently moved up from being finished in late October to late July. Just in case thinks I lost interest. I plan on doing one of these posts for every host that chooses to trash like For those that ask by no means is this a defense of I just feel that two wrongs do not equal a right. If’s actions did not influence a customer to choose, than they should not be paid for that referral.

Here is who they recommend instead of

Again, if you want an enterprise-grade quality host, look at EuroVPS.

If you want a cheap host, that still has some quality, look at Stablehost or Ninjalion Hosting.

  • – $26
  • – $25
  • $30

I am sure that would include some of the hosts they now recommend that offer unlimited hosting.  Because the current list is between $25 – $500. So the very reasons that uses to claim that is a bad host, makes them a bad review site.

Just in case decides to change or delete their post here is a screen shot.

Ixwebhosting review  Are they a good host for my website  - Support Forum (1) copy copy

So in short claims that they are a bad host based on their being with and offering payouts near the same as the hosts they recommend. is also a bad host because they offer a unlimited has a clause that makes it very clear they can terminate bad affiliates:

F. Defamation/Libel

You agree that in the course of any performance under this agreement or otherwise with respect to any dealings between you and IX Web Hosting that you will not transmit any information which is or might be considered to be defamatory or libelous.

Clearly claims of a high affiliate program (that clearly signed up for) and unlimited hosting are all points to be used against choosing a host like are grounds for removal.”

So one has to ask, will take action on this rouge affiliate

A guide to fake hosting reviews

Hosting reviews would seem like a simple search engine result that will take you to the very information that you seek.  You would expect Hosting reviews from your peers. People that actually use the hosting companies they recommend, or used the ones they recommend to avoid. The problem is many of these sites were not put up to inform people who to choose that will best serve your needs. They are telling you who to host with all for the sake of a sale. The most common held belief by those that understand what most hosting review sites are, is that they are about high affiliate payouts. Which does happen, but not with all hosting reviews. Some don’t do it for affiliate payments.

For over a decade there are sites that specialize on hosting reviews and other phrases one might search for in hopes of finding a good host.  Most do it for one sole purpose and that is to get you to sign up with one of the hosts they recommend.  March 2013 I decided to go after a site that thought it would capitalize on their hosting own reviews. The funny thing is they choose to call out other hosting review sites for doing what they were doing. Like many so called review sites, had no data to back their claims. But it went a little deeper than that, as the claim was these fake  review sites were only interested in high payouts and were blogs. While at the same time a disclaimer that made it seem like it was a crime to make a commission.

Which brings me to the reasoning behind this post. Back in March I was told by someone that I should reference was no different than any other review site. They offered reviews, with nothing to prove their claims.  Hosting review sites being blogs and all about high payouts was nothing more than one distraction of the many stereotypes used to make a case to pick a host they recommend. The popular perception of review sites is that they only promote high payouts, which is not entirely correct. As for the perception that they are all blogs, many may be. It would be great if every site offering Hosting reviews was just a blog endorsing only those that offer high affiliate payouts.. I would have had little reason to expand from a single page website. wants to distract from the fact they are a forum, with a list of hosts where at best only 89% of the hosts paid out a commission. Interestingly enough those that may not pay were at the bottom of their category. Which begs the question would you rather sign up with hosts 1 -5 or 6 – 10? But not always are hosting reviews done for the sake of an affiliate payout. Despite they deceptions, its not unreasonable to assume that there are other reasons besides affiliate payments for those 11% of the hosts listed to be on lists of recommend hosts.

My experience in the hosting reviews industry

Long before I started this site, I was a hosting provider.  Sites that provided hosting reviews were not all that common back when I started. I believe at the time most hosts did not offer affiliate programs. Though there were sites that’s very profit was generated from affiliate income from non-hosting related sites.  My first successful hosting company had an affiliate program. Not to mention the one secret till now that I have yet to reveal is how exactly we brought in so many customers in when we started up. We made an agreement with some so called marketing gurus or multi-level marketing gurus (those that claim they can tell you how to get rich…… just buy their book,,,, tapes….. and other materials…..). Months after we started our agreement I come to view this as a proverbial deal with the devil.  At the time I was naive about the nature of such operations, but these days I believe they are parasitic. The biggest problem was at the time we offered them reoccurring commissions, something I do not advise any company to do. After all, all they had to do was convince people to sign up with my company. After that keeping them was the responsibility of my company, and the MLM affiliates were sitting back collecting commissions.  Many of them eventually stopped sending us new customers as someone else came along and offered bigger payments up front (though not reoccurring) which gave us a good reason to stop sending them payments.

Despite the deal with the devil, there were other deals we made that were symbiotic in nature which benefited the referring company and my own company. Like a deal with a software company that would offer free hosting with our company whenever anyone bought their product.  They got something free to offer their customers, and we got a supply of new customers.

2003 was the time I noticed top 10 sites. My business partners and I assumed that these were owned by other hosts.  After all private registration was not as common back then (though I am not sure it was offered at all back then). One ever lasting example of this is, where sits at the top.  Has been at the top since it came on to try and scavenge the customers from a company called featured price. Looking at the whois for both domains provides you with the name of Fathi Said.

By 2007 I started to see a problem when decided that I had one too many positive reviews for a host that did not give them money.  Which in short led to the creation of this site, a tale I have told one too many times.

Hosting reviews (bogus reviews): motivation and techniques

For this post I wanted to make a guide to the various types of false hosting  reviews, and by no means is this post done. My intention for this post is to help consumers make an informed decision when dealing with review sites. I will modify it over time and re-releasing it as a new post as time goes on.

Hosting reviews – Data, or lack there of

I am not saying that all review sites are dishonest, or that you can’t get informed information from the data they provide. Generally hosting review sites provide little to no data backing their claims that a host is good (or bad). They want you to assume just because they have a site they are experts on the hosting industry.  One of the funny things that I have found is hosting reviews sites that are not hosted on any of the hosts they recommend.

If the data is not made up or data is provided, they are unclear about how exactly they came to the conclusion the hosts they display are worthy.

  • No data just claims
  • Copy and paste product specs
  • Uptime – hosting server not customer server(s)
  • Customer rating only (no customer information for validation)
  • Customer reviews – no domain
  • Customer reviews – domain

Ideally the last one should be the bare minimum that any hosting review site offers.

Types of Hosting reviews strategies and gimmicks

  • Top 10 (or other number)
  • Hosting Directories
  • Award sites
  • Single page / multi page one hosting company focus review site
  • Search engine key word targeting review sites
  • Customer based hosting reviews
  • Cookie stuffer
  • Coupons
  • Customer reviews
  • Gimmick reviews
  • Spam

Hosting review sites may have more than one strategy. Like take for example had a top 25 list, and yet is also a directory, awards, and has customer reviews.

Top 10 (or other number) hosting reviews


There is not a lot to explain here, but generally these hosting reviews focus on web hosts with high payout, but not always.  As long as the site is strictly about hosting, I have yet to see the top list not appear on the main page for a site.

Hosting reviews Directories

Examples:,, and

In short hosting review directories are a list of hosts. The most effective of these sites are those that cover not a handful of sites, but thousands. This gives them and advantaged of numbers when it comes to search engine indexing. Add customer reviews on there and you have another reason for search engines like Google and Bing to place a hosting directory on the first page first result for “(host name) review”.  This strategy can be damaging to small, new, and hosts that don’t compensate the hosting review site.  One example of this was, which used its hosting directory to divert traffic to their top 25 list. When a non-paying host got too much positive feedback it was deleted to motivate visitors to view the top 25 list.

Award Sites


The best examples of awards sites can be found on’s list of awards.

When I first started reviewing the hosts that appeared on, I found awards for other review sites. At first I thought that the award sites were either affiliates or getting paid under the table. But last year I come to realize that award sites may have a more parasitic relationship with the hosts they award. Mainly because got an award from had done little to be an Editors choice of 2012 with ½ a month of down time.  The down time was not a red flag for me, as this is not the first time I have found a host down yet being promoted by  a review site . What had my attention was the low payments that someone got if they referred visitors to . is by default a top 10 site. Top ten sites generally focus on high payouts by commonly known brands.  The main page for does just that.

Now why would I call an award site a parasitic relationship? As I stated back when I was looking at hosts that appeared on’s top 25 I noticed a lot of them had awards from other review sites. At the time I thought it was bad when a host did not link back to the hosting review site that awarded them.  Turns out they may have knew what I was too slow to grasp.  For those hosts like that linked back to there were two possible outcomes:

  1. Get paid a small commission by if the visitor goes back to and orders. (least favorable outcome)
  2. The visitor explores the site and picks a host on a top 10 list. (most favorable outcome)

In short award sites are traffic thieves.

Single page / multi page one hosting company focus review site

There are a ton of examples, most of which are too low on search engine ranking to mention.  These sites focus on one hosting company.  Like one I saw for which seemed to just copy and paste everything from FAQ section, blog entries, and whatever else may have. I have yet to see one that does not focus on large payout companies.

Search engine key word targeting review sites


While sites like could be considered search engine experts, they only get top rankings in search engines because of their directories and customer reviews.

Hosting review sites that focus on key words concentrate on specific key terms.

An example of a reviews site that relies on key words is In short they focus on the following search engine result “(hostname) sucks”.  This may seem an unusual strategy. But they use it to draw people in, and then try to prove that the host does not suck. For review sites like, there is an advantage of focusing on new and small hosts as they have less competition. Regardless of the payment being small, minimal work is required to get into small and new hosts’ sucks search results. All they have to do is one post on their blog.

Many of these key word targeting review sites focus on “*host name* review(s)”

Customer based Hosting Reviews.


There are many hosting reviews  that have customer based reviews. Though the question is are they real? A good sign that they are fake is when they are 100% positive. The same can be true for 100% negative reviews. As there are some review sites that do purposely try to make a host look bad. This can happen because a hosting company pulled their affiliate program from the review site, or other reasons relating to pay. Like this example here:

IxWebHosting Poor Service (1)

In some cases hosting companies will post their own fake positive reviews to counter the negatives. A good example of this can be seen here:

An example of sites that I think have no merit in their reviews is because they don’t show a domain that was hosted with the companies they recommend.  Domains allow you to see some details like how long the person might have hosted with the company. Not to mention a look at their site can tell you how much they might know about webhosting. A site that just started with a host has no long term experience. Not to mention a site that still has a “coming soon” page is not going to be someone who has experience with the host they recommend.

Customer reviews, especially when frequent are great for search engine results.

Cookie stuffing


A few years back I learned what this term meant. In short the moment you go to a site like it loads your computer with affiliate cookies. So even if the hosting review site was not your cause for signing up with a host, they still get paid.

Cookie stuffing is generally considered black hat. It’s a great way to lose your search engine rankings should Google or any other search engine provider find you doing it. was caught by Mike of

To date this is the only review site that I have found doing this. Also as a side note, Endurance International Group hosts don’t seem concerned about cookie stuffing. Yet they also require annual or better terms to get a payout.

Gimmick reviews

There are two sites that I cannot find that server as perfect examples of gimmicks that are used to draw people in.

The first which had an awesomely honest disclaimer ( I truly love the disclaimer link that followed you), brought people in by telling you who someone was hosted with. For which they had an affiliate link for some of the sites I tried.

However they also offered reviews and the first hosts to pop on the list were the high payouts.

The second review site used twitter feed to tell you if a host was good or bad. What pretty much proved this to be a gimmick was looking at the actually results that made a host good or bad. For example take, over the past few years they have had problems with Bob Parson shooting an elephant, their support behind PIPA/SOPA, and not to mention commercials that degrade women. All of which are bad public relations, however not an indicator of poor service. On the other hand you have, I think her name is Dana Patrick(race car driver?) tweets that have nothing to do with hosting at all. All of which were used to indicate if was good or bad. The worst of it was that bad service tweets were used to indicate that was good, and vice versa on good tweets. Even so a tweet does not prove someone actually hosted with, like those that protested their bad public relations.


Hosts that I have found that benefit from review spammers:

I have refrained with good reason for mentioning sites as a whole as not all hosting reviews are done on the review’s website. As many reviews can be in the form of comment or email spam by affiliates that troll sites or use automated scripts. Many of them lead directly to a host with an affiliate link. Though the link they provide may lead to a review site. Most of the spam I have seen has an affiliate link that takes you to the host in question. If there is any host that has benefited the most from spam and done very little to curb the spam that would be However that may change since Endurance International Group purchased Last year did not send out its usual pre-black Friday penny hosting notification.

Here is an example of comment spam I was receiving in regards to

hostgator affiliate spam

I find it funny the guy who decided to post his site twice came back later to have his comments removed.

Hosting Review Payments

Generally Hosting review sites focus on one form of compensation; however there are exceptions like which while having hosts bid for spots, was also an affiliate of (at the time they were the number 1 host) and advertising adsense.

  • High Hosting Affiliate payouts only (example:
  • Any Hosting affiliate program (example:
  • Any affiliate program (example:
  • Paid per unit/bid per position (example:
  • Main focus is not to be paid by out siders, yet subscribes to other hosting companies affiliate programs (example:

Paid per unit / bid per position. Or what I like to refer to as under the table. Sites like that allow you to buy your spot in a 1 – 25 position, or take for example, which wrote posts for a fee.

Main focus is not to be paid by outsiders are generally owned by the hosting companies that appear in the number 1 position.

A few examples of review sites that are owned by hosts

  • – (though as of late they did drop to the # 2 spot)
  • – (they also own the second host on the list
  • –
  • –

A good sign that a review site is owned by a host is when the host constantly shows up as the # 1 host.

The waybackmachine is a great tool for looking at a sites history:

This post on Hosting Reviews is still under construction.

As I stated before this is a post that is in process, it is by no means complete on how fake hosting review sites operate.

My Top Ten Host……. tips – How to pick a shared host – UPDATED!

While it’s not my most ask question, from time to time I get asked if I have a top 10 host list. The most common question is who I recommend. To be honest I have not really looked for a provider better than the ones I use, not because I am happy with whom I am with. I have not looked because I really have not had the time to find a better host. After all the last few months my posts have been rare, much to the joy of my critics. If you’re a critic I would like to remind you, this is not my main source of income, and this is something I do in my spare time. I can assure you I am not done, and I have a lot of content sitting on the back burner waiting for my spare time.

Since I can’t recommend any one, and I don’t have a top ten host list, I will give you my top ten tips when picking out a host. This will also be the start of my top ten. No, I am not going to tell you ten hosts that I think are super-duper, and get paid a nice sum for every new customer I bring in through an affiliate link. I can’t promise that I will ever recommend a host. This is the start of a monthly post I plan to do where I post my own personal top 10 suggestions, advice, and maybe something totally off topic all of which will not tell you which host I recommend. Hopefully this post and the future top ten posts will help you find a good host and perhaps help you keep your sanity.

My Top Ten is based off my 11 years of experience running 4 hosting companies, and the last year reviewing hosts that appeared on, that spammed me, or appeared on other hosting review sites.

1. Have a plan

Honestly this is probable the weakest of my advice, as I scrambled to come up with a 10thsuggestion, which becomes point number 1. After all you should know what you want and need before you actually get service. It’s not something that applies to most people; most know what they are going to do and how they are going to do it. However I have had people contact me after they bought a domain and hosting, sometimes months after they purchased service to ask what they should do. No idea of what they were going to do, just the idea in their head that having a website means lots of money. It’s not that simple. One particular customer thought that his account did not start till he used it, and was a bit angry to receive a bill 365 days after he purchased service. I have yet to find a host that starts the clock once you start using your account. To be honest if you have no plan, and don’t know how you’re going to implement your plan you should avoid buying a hosting account.

If you have read my previous posts, you will know my first hosting company was a bust, granted it was not due to a lack of a plan. But a greedy business partner, a point I had not calculated for. Too many of the details were left in his control, and he decided to lock me and another partner out. Despite which he had no sales experience, technical experience, or any form of an idea of how to run the company as he was learning off me and the other business partner. For which he lacked a plan on how to keep what he had stolen. The host that finally took off and made it easy to start up other operations took months, and lots of capital. It took practically a year before I started to get a income off it for both me and the business partner that got kicked out of the first operation. Never mind the new business partner for the start of this operation turned out to be a mistake, there was a plan in place to replace him having learned from the mistakes of the first host. Needless to say that host is going on year 13, and almost 2 years without me.

2. Read the terms of service

If there is anything I cannot say enough, it is to read the terms of services. Often when doing my reviews it’s the first thing I go after. I can’t say it was the part of the reviews I was looking forward to. But it often served me well to read the competitor terms of service when a customer threatens to leave me for them.

Any host worth your business is going to have a link to the terms of service on every page of their site, most commonly found on the bottom of every page. Sometimes called terms of use. If you cannot locate the terms from the main page you should avoid that company, or contact them to get a link to where the terms service is. Personally I would not bother with a host that does not have an easy to find term of service.

Yes I know its long and it’s boring. Plus these days it comes in multiple parts such as user agreement, privacy policy, acceptable use policy,…… There are a lot of good reasons for reading this long and rarely entertaining jumble of words such as hidden fees, what is and is not covered by the terms of service, what may close your account, and / or if there is actually any level of guarantee. Not to mention the process one would take if a company offered a 30 day guarantee.

I have found a lot of hosts that offer a 30 day refund guarantee on the front of their site, yet on the terms of service it will state there are no refunds.

3. Don’t sign up for service with any company that offers anything less than a 30 day guarantee on their shared hosting services

When it came to selling hosting services I can tell you I preferred shared hosting, versus dedicated or vps with good reason there was a much higher profit margin and a lower amount of financial risk with shared hosting. Dedicated servers always carry a risk of finical lose as you only have one client per machine. Not to mention there was always some customer that did not know how to maintain their dedicated server. Because of the very nature shared hosting being a multiple customer setup and high income are the very reasons I don’t think anyone should go with a host without a 30 day guarantee on their shared hosting service. Granted I think the same should apply with VPS and cloud accounts as well as lot of time has passed since these services became available.

Per number 2 I recommend reading the terms service to make sure whatever shared plan you choose has a thirty day guarantee or better and is not limited to certain plans or certain purchased time periods. I approve of hosts that only allow the 30 day guarantee once per customer, also limits on the guarantee that only cover the hosting unless the host is responsible for the account being closed by offering poor service.

4. Buy what you need – don’t be too cheap or overwhelm your finances

Often I have encountered customers that bought more than they could afford, or bought a plan that was super cheap but could not handle their site. From the more then needed I had a customer that threw all his money into one of my most expensive plans at $1400 + a month. After 2 years and a project that never took off, his site maxed out his American Express card. When I had a tech look into the site, we found he could have easily kept his account on a shared environment under $50 a month plan.

I had another customer that was probable the worst of cheap skates Which is funny because I was recently contacted by one of the people that bought my share in a hosting company to find why I had black listed this individual. I banned him because he was a serious risk of crashing a server. He had made this popular free screen saver, which he used to collect email addresses with. Which was an honest way to collect email addresses. However the problem was he migrated from one hosting provider to me for my cheapest plan at the time was $14.99 a month, and thought he could use that account to mail out to his list of over 100,000 people. I believe there should be some reasonable % income that should be set aside for a business web presence especially when the site is the main source for getting customers. Naturally his account was shut down for exceeding his resources. He was also denied a refund, as crashing a server violated the terms of service. The part I thought was the kicker was he complained about losing thousands of dollars every hour that the site was down. A year before I sold my the company he signed up under another cheap plan, and he tried the same thing. Which was why I banned him from ever getting service.

5. Don’t buy an unlimited space plan

First let me point out quantity is not a quality indicator. For years I have had customers that thought just because a competitor offering more of a resource then I was for less than they were a better host. Only to come back later, sometimes because they found out that the extras cost more than just upgrading their account with one of my companies. As time went on unlimited plans came into play. Keep in mind there is nothing true about an account being an unlimited account, its merely a commercial gimmick. Not to mention the cheaper the service is the more people that are going to be crammed on to a server to make it profitable. After all the whole point of having a hosting company is to make a profit.

If a company tries to tell you that unlimited hosting is not overselling, they really should be avoided. Overselling is selling more then you actually have, where commonly no one ever uses all of what is available. So if a host tells you this they are either dishonest or idiots.

In most cases the terms of service will tell you that the so called unlimited plans are not unlimited. Most will tell you what you can have on your account, such as not using it to back up your computer onto. Some only allow domains that belong to you, or in other words no reselling. In rarer cases they will tell you what the limits are that will get your account shut down. Such as processor usage. None of them will tell you exactly how much space you get to have before they shut your account down.

What I consider the biggest nightmare is unlimited reseller plans. I had a few customers that were on such plans with other providers, only to have their accounts shut down. One such reseller caused quite a mess as he refused to respond to his customers. He also refused to respond to my phone calls and emails until weeks after his site was shut down. So his customers did a dns check and found my company. They ignored the fact that the dns was recently changed. I did a further check to find the original host that offered unlimited reseller plan. These unlimited space customers under an unlimited reseller plan came in by chat, email, and by phone. I think over all it was about 200 people who were taking time away from paying customers. So his site was disabled, and a special notice was put up on the site of which host he had come from and who to deal with.

6. Don’t sign up for 1 or 5 years for the first time, sign up for a month

If your happy after a 30 day period of time sign up for longer terms for maximum savings. Even go so far as to see if the host will credit back the difference on the first month for going to an annual plan or cheaper per month plan. It’s something I did, and it was a great way for me to get skeptical customers to sign up, and often they did pay for a longer term. I am not saying that other hosts will do it, but it never hurts to ask. Are you 100% certain your plan has a 30 day guarantee? This is why I say to read the terms of service, many companies have it in there terms of service that they do not offer any refunds after 30 days. So you may be stuck with a company, or worse out of money and a host. But if you pay for a month and find you do not like the host you will only lose a month. Not to mention while you may consider doing a charge back, I don’t recommend it. The only time I ever won a charge back against a client was when they did too many charge backs. A charge back should be used only as a last resort. If its $20 or so, don’t bother you may have to do a dispute at a later date for a much higher amount, and you don’t want a $20 charge to be the reason you lose a charge back against another company for a much higher amount.

7. Avoid “free” domains, and other freebies

Chances are if you do not like the host keeping the domain is going to cost you more than getting it from a third party. Not to mention the issues you may have in getting the domain transferred to a different register. One of which most hosts will not allow a transfer until 2 months or longer after the domain is purchased or renewed due to the possibility of a charge back. This is why I recommend going with a domain register independent of your host. Often it can be a lot cheaper than what it would cost to retain the domain with a host. Especially since there are a lot of hosts out there that only give you one year on the domain only to charge more than independent register would.

As for the other freebies back in December 2010, I took a look at They had this offer of free services for “x” amount of months. What it was not clear on was when they would bill customers, or how much they would be billed. made it to clear to me after I contacted them by chat that the services would indeed be billed after the “free” time was up, and they would be billed for the full amount, not a prorated amount to match up for the hosting renewal. Which meant 4 different individual billing date through a year for the same account. They also indicated that they would send notices out, but I have had people contact me and tell me they did not receive the notices.

But if you must have the freebies, be prepared what it may cost at a later date.

Point 8 is being re-written as it has been brou

8. Contact them by chat, phone, email, and whatever else

Before signing up with any host I would suggest contacting them. The main purpose of this is to make sure you get a response in a reasonable amount of time. Not to mention see if you will get a professional response.  Now I am not saying that this is an indicator of how well support will work, or even that you will get a chance to test drive support. Which is why I suggest making sure a company offers a true 30 day or greater guarantee (can’t say it enough read the terms of service). However what is the point of having a really good sales person, if a hosting company is not willing to invest in support as well?

24/7 cut and paste support versus 12 – 16 hours true tech support

So which would you prefer technical support that may only be available 12 – 16 hours of the day, or ready cut and paste support? By cut and paste support I mean someone that has no experience that may rely on a FAQ database. Worse they may be working from a binder.

When I first wrote these hosting recommendations they were intended for the budget conscience hosting consumer. I made the mistake and took into consideration my own hosting needs.

Previously this point outlined that I would not use a host that does not offer 24/7 support. However there are several reasons behind that, and those reasons may not work for every person. Especially if you’re on a tight budget, My own hosting fees exceed  three thousand a month. I answer to international cliental as well as domestic these days, and there is no telling when I may have to contact a provider.

However back when I started I did design work for customers in my county, I could literally bike to meet my customers (and often I did) and I ran what would be at best called banker hours (8 am to 5pm). I did not work weekends, and I often took Friday off. My hours worked for my clients; rarely ever did they call me on my off hours. I also can’t seriously remember if Virtualis offered tech support 24/7 back when I started. But this was back in the day when hosting companies like Virtualis guaranteed 90% uptime.

I miss the old days.

New and small hosts have a lot of motivation to make sure a customer is taken care of. Seriously giants like  literally consider you a number (no really you’re a number with Godaddy, as they issue you one  when you sign up).  If new and small hosts don’t choose to outsource their support to a third party, or someone that does not have the first clue what FTP or MySQL is that means they have to invest in a serious tech. They don’t come cheap. Maybe like some of my business partners the owner partakes in support, people who actually know what they are doing (well one of them didn’t). Yet instead of waiting for someone to “research” your issue, you will have someone that knows what to do.

Generally when it comes to shared hosting and cheap, corners are cut. When quantity and not quality is a business practice, Tech support is among the cuts. In order to compete with other cheap hosts, theses hosts have to offer so called 24/7 support. Many hosting companies like mega giant Endurance International Group (owners of,,, and many other companies) get around that by outsourcing their support. Many outsource companies don’t even provide actual techs, just readily available copy and paste answers or a binder to refer to.

I have done the same when my business partners decided that we should compete in the cheap market. The problem with that is we had to train them from the ground up. Turnover was high and they didn’t exactly train each other. In order to keep on top of it I had to literally install a monitor on any pc I worked on that allowed me to see all incoming chats. I also had random audits.. But I doubt that is the case with most cheap hosting that outsource.

Given the choice between a host that offers 24/7 cut and paste answers to a host that is not open 24 hours a day but has an actual technician I think the choice is clear. If you should choose the route of a hosting company that does not offer 24 hour support I suggest choosing a host whose active when you are active. But keep in mind that depending on the importance of your issue you may not get a immediate response. Like say you want to know how to set up an email account (low importance), versus your account is offline (critical).

In addition I would check to make sure there are no additional fees for off hours support. Not something I often find when looking over the terms of service for hosts but it’s another good reason to read the terms of service.

9. Understand your relationship with your host

There is a good chance that whoever read this is not looking to pay more than $10 a month for hosting. I could be wrong, but most people that ask me what host I recommend, ask for a cheap host. In most cases this is what your host is not:

Your webmaster

Your business planner

Your web designer

Your programmer

Your business partner

Your teacher

11 years in the business I have encountered a lot of people that thought this was part of their hosting service. Yes some thought I was their business partner. Granted in some cases some of these points were offered, but it was at an extra cost, which I can tell you it was rare for anyone to purchase a $10 a month plan and to add that on to their service. I am going to repeat myself here, your hosting provider is in this to make money. This was the point of them starting a hosting operation. Ask yourself how much are you willing to offer for what you paid? Would you and could you offer what you are asking for at the amount you are paying? Your host’s chief responsibility is to provide uninterrupted hosting service, timely support, and to make sure the server is kept up to date. If you buy a script from a third party, its not your hosts responsibility to make sure that it works as its not their responsibility to make sure your graphics are in the proper folder to show up on your website unless that is what the package says it offers.

I am actually borrowing my train of thought on this from Michael of :

The hosting provider is usually not your webmaster or designer and if you find yourself submitting tickets asking your host how to do things with your site then chances are that you are in over your head and you may want to look for a webmaster.

10. Be skeptical of reviews

If you decide to see what other people have to say about a company use caution. Keep in mind some sites are purely created for the purpose of making a commission, and not giving an unbiased review of a host. No I am not saying that affiliate programs are bad, as I am often accused of. Regardless if the affiliate program was there or not, I am sure these people would find a way to make a buck rather if it was unethical or not. Many of these so called reviews never actually use the hosts they recommend. Like take for example and, none of these “review sites” have ever actually use any of the top hosts they recommend.

One way of looking to see who they use is a tool I like to use:

From there you can find out were a site is located, not to mention how long they have been at their current location, and better yet how old the site is. So if a host tells you they have been in business for 10 years, you can see if the domain has been around for that long from the creation date. But you might want to contact them to see if they had another domain, or are using another company as the start date.

Another tell-tale sign is that they if  the review site is in it for a commission is if they offer a coupon. Which is one of the gimmicks these affiliates use, to get people to click on a link and have a affiliate cookie placed on your machine to get a commission. Granted not all of these special offers are legit as some review sites like have links to sites that do not have any special offers.

Then there are sites like, which work on the basis of trying to prove to you a site does not suck based on the word “(host name) sucks”, which would work if not for the fact that sucks is not the only negative word in the English language that could be applied to a company. In some cases this was a paid spot by new hosts like zyma,com. Which does not bother to disclose the reason for the lack of “sucks” results is that the company just came online. Not to mention I have often found more results off the first page for “(hosting name) sucks” in search engines then they claim are in all results.

I am not saying all the reviews that you see out there are fake, I am saying that you should be cautious. If someone tells you they just signed up and they love the host, it’s not giving you what you need which is a long term view. If all they tell you is the features, you should wonder if that is not the host creating a review.

Not to mention some review sites are owned by the very hosting company that appears on top all the time.  One example is being the owner of


On a side note a new company is not a bad thing; we all have to start somewhere. This is why I recommend that on the initial sign up that you do no more than 30 days the first time around, and sign up for more time later on. Also a new company may be more eager to work to keep your business, where as a large establishment may consider you more of a number. Top 10 questions for a review site and both lack data to back up claims for what hosts are good hosts. Yet only one site recommends hosts and gets paid, the other site is more so about ethics and business practices and not rather a host is a good service provider  (rarely if a host is a bad service provider). One site puts the affiliate disclaimer at the very end of their sales spill, while the other site places it before reasons for buying. One hints that there might be a payment; the other clearly states if a visitor clicks on a link and buys the owner of said site gets paid. Not to mention one has a donation page, the other does not.’s latest response to my response shows how much the owner may read or worse choose to fabricate.’s owner claims to answer things I was unsure on. Truth is I am not unsure on anything, sure I have questions. But my questions only play into my speculations.’s owner is not ready to answer the questions I have anyway, just the questions the imaginary Benjamin in the owner’s mind has. As to why had affiliate links to companies throughout their post trashing It should have been very clear to the owner since I drew attention to those links under “Point 4: What left out”. Something I will get to with the finale point of this post.

For the most part most of this post is based off of's reply rant to


My prior post:

Previous posts links about can be found in that post.

Like, I get frequently asked who to choose for hosting. I could have taken the path of putting up a list where 89% of the hosts I recommend have affiliate programs. As I may have used more hosts in the last three years than has in a life time.  But I failed to keep the very records I think all hosting reviews should have. Not to mention if I ever did do hosting recommendations I would have to live to a standard higher than what I think review sites should go by.  So for now the best I can do is provided advice for what to look for when looking for a host.

10 questions for

Since is interested in haphazardly answering what I ask, here are 10 questions for the owner of I am going to keep them short and provide my mentality behind them.

1. Does have any proof they use the hosts they recommend other than

The very thing that could have given the rights to declare “The Digital FAQ = Vindicated” (insert some smiley face like the kiddies do) was data. Providing proof of use would have given me little ground to even bother writing a post. Yet what was provided was selectively edited extractions from my posts, insults, false claims of my experience, and at what can be best described as an ego trip.

When it came to discussing who pays the claim was “Some have affiliate programs, some don’t”.  Out of 27 hosts, 3 might not have an affiliate program. So at best 3 of 27 (11% may not, 89% do pay a commision). has a problem with disclosure. Yet he is begging me to go through and figure out the averages of payments “Most shared hosting pays about $20, and the few that we get each month go to pay for this site.” with this little pity party. Especially when it was a $10-$15 average a few weeks ago prior to my write up affiliate payments.

digitalfaq old disclaimer

Also in regards to “And unlike the author of the blog, I know the owners of these companies — I’m not guessing.

No’s owner is really assuming here.

2. What was it that did from 1977 – 1993?

I realize I am asking a question that was already answered. But I have my reasons.

The business has been around since 1977, when the blogger/author was crapping his Huggies.” Despite the assumption of what my age is, there was no internet back then. But still they give better detail on their about page where I got that quote.

What began in Dallas, Texas in 1977 as a part-time typesetting/layout operation, has slowly morphed as technology developed. By the late 1980s, computers entered our daily operations, and desktop publishing, graphics and advanced layout services were added. ”.

Texas a red state, what a lovely state to hold this view:

It reminds me of those political kook blogs you can find online – mostly Republicans/conservatives these days, but it infects every political spectrum. Or conspiracy sites (9/11, JFK, the moon landing, etc). 

The late 80’s is the best number they can give you for when they were using a computer.  Even though I got a head start with Timex, Texas Instruments, Apple, and Commodore computers from the early to late 80’s. Yet like some hosting companies out there I have encountered they use the start date of a company that had nothing to do with webhosting, and in this case  a company that did not start out using computers. The true web experience for does not start until 1993. But they did not have a website till 2002, which brings us to question 3.

3. Why did wait till 2002 to get a website, and what was the original domain.

Since wants to provide trivia, I had my first site in 1998 with Virtualis.

4. Why did abandon that website in 2004?

Even though I did not keep my first site up, I do keep a redirect up having the domain redirect. The value in this is I have gotten back design clients I had a decade ago. Did just abandon their original domain?

5. Does count all the hosts with EIG as 1 or more hosts?

According to a host with a fairly new domain name gets to count the company they are part of for a start date, not the date when the site actually started.  Does count that as one host or by the amount of hosting sites own by a particular group? I ask because many of the providers I have used were bought out, so if I ever do get around to counting how many hosts I have been with I will know that EV1, Fastservers, and Softlayer count as 3 or 1.

6. Where did suddenly get unlimited hosting experience from?

Considering last month was against unlimited hosting, how did get enough experience over a few weeks to judge an unlimited host as good?

Time machine?  (Sorry had a sarcasm leak)

7. What hosting companies actually employee kids? made the following claim “A bad host, or “kiddie host”, is often run by minors (children, teenagers) from their bedroom, or even colleges kids from their dorm room.” If this is true could name the companies that do this. Otherwise, needs to reconsider labeling anybody a conspiracy nut.

Considering that many countries have child labor laws it would be a great way to put “kiddie” hosts out of business if the owner would share this information.

8. Is there anyone else that is biased against?

So far it appears that anyone younger than the owner of,  female, and with the Republican Party. Never mind that some of the owners of the companies he thinks are good are younger than me. But here is a little sample of his bigotry.

  • The site is essentially random online rants by one person. It reminds me of those political kook blogs you can find online — mostly Republicans/conservatives these days, but it infects every political spectrum. Or conspiracy sites (9/11, JFK, the moon landing, etc).
  • Females is not the demographic for hosting.”  Him caveman, Him bang chest.
  •  “The biggest problems with teenagers, or even college aged adults, is they move on. That’s why so many hosts fail, sell out, or disappear in under 2 years. We don’t have the time or patience for that.

That last line gets interesting when you pair it with this thought. is the current online presence for a family-owned media business that started in 1977.

Things that make you say hmmmm. has already alienated a large part of the population, why stop there?

9. So, what exactly is the conspiracy that has?

Generally, when you make a claim you at least back it up.

10. Why is it ok for to profit off of hosts their site blacklist?

The last question is less so a question than a chance for some level of redemption. At the end April if I see affiliate links to companies that openly blacklists, I will contact said companies and see how they feel about’s membership in their affiliate programs.

As a man that I am sure is much older than the owner of (and defiantly far wiser) once taught me as a kid, two wrongs don’t make a right. Of course, the owner of can insult my grandfather. But my grandfather had some wisdom behind that as well which I have been employing.

I may very well agree with the owner of on reasons for blacklisting all of these hosts like Endurance International Group. But the spirit of an affiliate program is to pay those that advertise or recommend their business. Not to reward people for failing to convince someone not to sign up for service.  Being a business owner I would be looking to retrieve any payments made to any individual that did that to my company. I defiantly would not continue to allow a review site like to continue to profit off my program. Especially when they say:

First, it allows us to track (or attempt to track) those who ignore our advice and sign up with one of those hosts anyway. It would mean that our advice is falling on deaf ears, and we’ve not said what was needed — the misleading marketing is winning out over our unbiased information that exposes companies like EIG. That’s unfortunate.

Second, if somebody is stubborn, and going to sign up with one of those hosts anyway — likely due to the lure of cheap “unlimited” — then yes, we’ll take the affiliate commission for it.

So a choice of a post at the end of next month, or can wait until next year for my re-review when they can set things right. Intermission – To the Readers of has told their readers I am a conspiracy nut. So if you came here from, this post is for you.

First off I am not asking you to trust me (far from it). After all and I may have our own agenda, or worse I have my own agenda. Instead I am asking you to rely on your better judgment. This is my argument about what claims I said.

This started out because I had been sent an email by someone who though I should reference Because they thought we had the same mind set. However I found them being hypocritical of hosting review sites, while doing the same thing as many review sites without providing any proof that they use the companies they recommend,  so far there are only two sites that I can’t confirm have an affiliate program. Not to mention is misinforming people on the very nature of the dark side of hosting reviews (in short they are not always a blog, they are not always about huge affiliate payments, they are not always about affiliate payments, they are not always done on a site they own by, and/or not always about a payment).  I plan to cover the taxonomy of review sites in an upcoming post. But for now I am going to attempt to dissect what was said on

The counter argument by, did not reference specific posts.

So as an example I am going to point to five links that I am referring to:

The first of which is their top 2013 host list, which started the first three posts on

Here is the snap shot I took of their post.'s rant

The second is the response to the first two posts (maybe three) of

Asides for not referencing specific posts, the owner of decided to modify my posts, without leaving sentences intact, or leaving the full context of a thought out.

The next three links are posts I made about

Ground work for my argument against trusting

This is where I take apart’s guidelines on what makes a good host:

Last I dig into rather or not makes money off the hosts they recommend:

In short only 2 hosts don’t reference an affiliate program, one site has an affiliate login area, while the other cannot be entirely ruled out because they have  WHMCS ( Which has affiliate capabilities).

I am breaking this post into points, as there is a lot to take apart, and I am going to probable miss something. But I made it a point to do this in two hours.

Point 1. Where I might have went wrong

I might have been wrong about on data server ownership. As what I had typed was when I first looked at their top 2013 criteria for a good host seemed to indicate that hosts ownership of a data center. However I made a dumb mistake and failed to make a screen shot of the post when I was reviewing it the first time around. For that matter I failed to take a screen shop the second time as well. It was not until the third time around and the addition of unlimited hosts was added.   Upon my first and second review, they clearly were against unlimited hosting, and original argument against unlimited hosting is still there.

·  good host manages their resources (bandwidth, RAM, storage space), and creates plans that balance intelligent limits with actual costs.

  • ·  A bad host promises ridiculous limits — or no limits at all! Unlimited! Yeehaw!


A bad host tries to hide “gotchas” in their often-buried documents, which are written in butchered “legalese” English, and hide limits such as SQL connections, inodes, email I/O, and file usage that turn so-called “unlimited” accounts into highly limited near-worthless web accounts. Many times, these documents are buried on their site, and thrown in the face of customers as the basis by which to charge them fees or outright deny service or tech support.

Breaking away from what I thought was good advice was what fueled my interest.

Point 2: Where was right

Poor grammar and misspellings aside, the sole author would ramble about all kinds of companies, both hosting and non-hosting: anti-virus software,,, Cyberhost Pro, 3essentials, Wooservers, BurstNET, Site5, LayeredTech, MediaTemple, etc.

Yes I have spelling errors, at times poor grammar, and yeah I do ramble when I suffer writers block. It also does not help to write on my iPhone, and even on iPad since I have these big hands. Not to mention I try to put a time limit as I have done with this post. I would like to think that I have gotten better. Not to mention I am not above correction. But I plan to correct past posts after I get my new house, unless any one knows a good editor. However I don’t apologize for going off topic, this is after all my time and my money (and it’s not like I ask for donations, or tell people how they can support this site). However I am starting my own personal blog soon and will stick to hosting reviews based on unethical gains, and hosting related issues like PIPA, spam, fake seo companies, and other items dealing with websites.

Point 3: Where was half right

If you look closely at’s Facebook “Likes” box, you may notice it has lots of pretty girls. Further scrutiny of these accounts show them to be new accounts, and/or having little use with thin content. 

  • Not using accounts is not the demographic of Facebook. (Especially under-30 females.)
  • Females is not the demographic for hosting.
  • However pretty girls that never use their Facebook account is the modus operandi of fake Fiverr users

Yes I did purchase likes on Facebook. As I could have done this with my Google + and my Twitter account. I did it more so for research on this and three other sites. Before I started I had 260 + fans by my own merits.  I purchased 1,000 likes on this site, and clearly if I wanted to fake it I would have spent far more than what I did (it’s not like I am asking people to donate to me).  My goal was to track how long it took for the seller to respond and enact, how fast the likes came in, where the likes where coming from, general makeup of the likes, and if any activity was generated by the likes (the answer to that is none). Not to mention a decay rate. After all I was at 1,300+ a month ago, and it decayed down to 740 yesterday. Today it is 695 last I checked (so I am literally losing likes as you read this). Though that’s not taking in that I get about 2 likes a week.  I suspect that overtime my likes will return back to a valid number in less than a month as decay appears to be a direct result of frequency of activity on Facebook. But that is a post for a later another date. Though it will probable reveal my inner data crunching geekery.

Now for where is wrong,

The first bullet point makes no sense (spelling/grammar?).

The second bullet point is false all on its own, and I am really trying to refrain from being sarcastic. If you understood my nature I am being very reserved here.

Based on my previous hosting companies’ customer records, females are a demographic.  They were 35% of the client base. Granted even if they were a fraction of a percent, they would be a demographic. Which has always had me wondering what % of customers are female. Either way gender has never been a determining factor of defining who I will take money from.

Bullet Point 3 assumes that I bought my likes off and that all of the accounts are always controlled by a single user.  In which case is wrong on both. Though it can be the case for both points.  As for pretty girls, is just trying to use derogatory comments to compensate, for what I have no idea. Either way I would love to see how thought bought likes work.

Point 4: What left out

I find it interesting instead of directing people to my posts to discredit me, has links to their affiliate programs throughout their anti post. Interestingly enough to some hosts they think are bad.

Breakdown is Company / Affiliate ID / Commission

1&1 PID=3235990 / Earn up to $300 isc=cjcmsc001t / payment varies 30% commissions on nearly all products / digitalfaq-20 / 4 – 8% commission / aff=2993 / 15 – 25% commission / id=246 / £10.00 – £40.00 (based on number of sales) / aid=21e7151b $70 – $135 / aid=4fb618fb27a17 $80 –  $230 based off sales/product

LayeredTech  just redirects to’s main page. (linked despite the claim of being removed as a sponsor) unable to determine the affiliate id, however payments range $50 – $125.

There also many they list in their top 2013 hosts that redirect to their affiliate programs.

But that’s not the only page with affiliate links, like for example:

I find this ID 3235990 interesting when clicking on, despite being listed as a comment spammer, you would not think I could click on a link to black listed host. By the way has a deeper history in fake reviews than knows. Details on in another upcoming post.

I am sure they are going to explain affiliate links embedded though out their attempt to trash me and other posts in a similar fashion as this Hostgator sponsored banner.


But when it came to being a sponsor of, the owner choose this part of my blog “Plus since loves so much why does and other companies get a far bigger banner.
Note: (a host that offers unlimited hosting) is a sponsor of

To explain this away, explains: ”This is false. On about 3/5 the site’s sponsor chose not to renew, and the site ads reverted to filler from a year or two ago — way before HostGator was sold by Brent Oxley to EIG. At that time, it was still pretty good, and was suggested. In addition to that, it was in rotation with several other filler ads for Meritline and, so this criticism is exaggerated at best. It was removed when caught. As of 3/19, we have a new sponsor anyway.

This does not really address why gets the short banner.  Did cancel’s affiliate membership?  Up till March 19th which was after my three posts, enjoyed the possible free traffic was pushing their way. As for choosing not to renew with affiliates after EIG bought, I don’t buy it. I have actually been signed up with them through Commission Junction ( so that I could get a copy of FCC compliance and Black Friday emails. In almost 2 years has not canceled my affiliate membership and continues to send me emails.

In short yes may need charity/ donations because the very owner/admin(s) that give advice on websites are too sloppy or done have the time to clean up rotating banners and remove companies not paying for referrals / advertising. Which makes me wondering if they are also failing to update critical areas of their site. So they have this page to tell you how you can support, which has not declared non-profit status.

Nothing stops hosts that were recommend to be avoid from being advertised so long as no one points to the hypocrisy.

So it’s somewhat aggravating to have to take time out of my day, in order to respond to nonsense that was posted on the blog at It’s time I could put to better use working, or helping others.

Yet I inspired to remove an Endurance International Group host off their sponsors. To them I say “Your Welcome”. No telling how many people clicked on the banner taking them somewhere does not recommend.  Though it’s not really clear that removed as an advertiser. But I suppose that is coincidental in’s opinion.   The moment felt was a poor option, they should have removed them from their rotating banner (though they may appear in Adsense but that they can be addressed as well).  Not to mention whatever they are using to high light specific word(s) with affiliate links.

Now here is the point where either haphazardly reads my blog, and selectively picks to highlight what I wrote.

I honestly would not have a problem with doing their own recommended hosts if they actually validated their recommendations with facts, not to mention disclosure upfront that they make money if you sign up with a host they recommend. responded with:

Unlike other sites, we rank hosts based on their merit: uptime, support, server hardware quality, etc. It’s in no way biased by payouts like those fake lists that suggest Godaddy, 1&1, Yahoo, and EIG brands. If the pay commissions, great! We use those funds for the site. If not, that’s fine, they still get our recommendation!

While adding affiliate links to and 1&1 hosting.

After hatcheting my sentence (that should have been two): “I honestly would not have a problem with doing their own recommended hosts if they actually validated their recommendations with facts”.

He also gives the kind of advice you’d expect from a know-nothing consumer: (1) Use Godaddy, or (2) use Rackspace. The former is terrible, and the latter is overpriced and honestly not that much better these days. (Rackspace is so 1990s!) From 2007-2010, the “site” was nothing more than a one-page rant hosted at Godaddy, and an amateur video on YouTube. In fact, from what I could tell, those are two of the only three main hosts this person has ever used, with Media Temple being the third. Most of the “exposed” posts are completely without merit. 

I don’t actually full out recommend, I did a review and had an affiliate link (until Bob Parson shot an elephant), and at best recommend them for a starter/ single page website. The full review can be found at:

Even when I had the affiliate links up, I made no money. it proable would helped if I didn’t say things like “Sometimes getting a hosting solution with is a roll of the dice” But when they were up I did disclose I made a commission at the start of the review. Not well past the place where people click and are brought to a host.

Rackspace I will get to, as it has been pointed to – incorrectly I only dealt with 3 major hosts, and knows it.

Which brings us back to this “Poor grammar and misspellings aside, the sole author would ramble about all kinds of companies, both hosting and non-hosting: anti-virus software,,, Cyberhost Pro, 3essentials, Wooservers, BurstNET, Site5, LayeredTech, MediaTemple, etc.

A post was a brought into this because a host that I found on’s fake top 25 was a customer of Burstnet (wooservers).

That and it turns out I was once a customer. I guess that means thinks days to get a server rebooted and being unable to contact said company for many days after  were not worth noting.

Which brings us to Layered Tech. I started out with, than some how I became a client, and last  Though I am a bit confused about how I transitioned from a to a customer as I got a roundabout response on that. I have to ask, can I count that as 3 hosts or just 1? But that’s not the only provider I was with that got bought out. The issues I had with Layered Tech (and its counter parts) had to deal with Hurricane Electric among many other things.

And while we are on the subject of hosts that were bought out that I was with there was Virtualis, Dialtone, Server Beach, EV1/ which was bought out by Theplanet who was later bought out by Softlayer,  OChosting (which had been absorbed into a name I forget), and honestly more than that in names that I have forgotten over the last 1.5 decades. We have gone past the number three mark, but really there are more.

Which brings us to Pingdom, Rackspace, Mediatemple,  and another dumb comment:

He also makes the novice mistake of relying on Pingdom to blame hosts (i.e. Media Temple) for downtime that may not have actually happened. As I frequently explain to others, Pingdom can give false results. To truly check uptime, you need to have at least three monitors, and at least two of them should agree before you bother checking it. I don’t mean free services either, but monitoring tools run from your own VPS, such as Nagios. That’s the only way you can know if a sever is up!

There is a good reason that this site is on and not, and it does not have to do with Pingdom. Pingdom only validates the down time I experienced. However It does not validate my service complaints (like moving my databases, and leaving them inoperable). Nor at times what felt like dealing with as would probable call them “teenagers”.

Also Pingdom does not run out of my house. So if I get a message that says my site is down, and when I check and see it is down that probable means my site is offline. But really my reason for leaving can be found here:

Which brings us to “He also gives the kind of advice you’d expect from a know-nothing consumer: (1) Use Godaddy, or (2) use Rackspace. The former is terrible, and the latter is overpriced and honestly not that much better these days. (Rackspace is so 1990s!) From 2007-2010, the “site” was nothing more than a one-page rant hosted at Godaddy, and an amateur video on YouTube. In fact, from what I could tell, those are two of the only three main hosts this person has ever used, with Media Temple being the third. Most of the “exposed” posts are completely without merit.”.

I have my doubts knows what this site looked like from 2007 – 2010.  But as far as goes further to say “By contrast, since 1993, the admins/mods/owner of The Digital FAQ have used at least 100 hosts.”. forgot to tell you I don’t make my living off (if I did I would have to have beg for charity, and write more than I do), I am a web designer. I don’t I always get to pick where the client hosts. Not to mention if you read this blog you will find that I complain about transfer rates whenever I do design work for a customer that just has to have one of the EIG hosts.  I am often told I charge and arm and a leg, and yet those that are willing to bear what I ask can some times make the mistake of thinking $5 a month host will work. I have been on prior to it being bought by EIG, and as of today I am on their servers for another client. I am currently using and in addition to

The reason is on, is I don’t have the time to fuss around with it being down. If it needs more resources I get billed. I can evaluate why it needed the resources at my convenience. Downtime has been minimal, and what I have experienced is well below 99.9%. Not to mention Since January 2012, I have not had a reason to put a support ticket in for any issues. What I pay really does not bother me, and gives me piece of mind that did not give me. Not to mention is far more Word Press friendly.

Oh and he forgot to mention I used to own 5 companies (1 failure (described in the first and other posts), and 4 hosts that still live on), and before that I was a web designer. He completely forgot to mention the origin story of how was the inspiration behind But why be bothered with details?

Point 5: What got wrong (or made up)

The site is essentially random online rants by one person. It reminds me of those political kook blogs you can find online — mostly Republicans/conservatives these days, but it infects every political spectrum. Or conspiracy sites (9/11, JFK, the moon landing, etc).

The main focus of this site is hosting reviews done solely on the basis of profit in an unethical manner. There are probable better people out there to do the job, and if I meet them I will happily hand the keys over. But for now you got me.

I take pride in being called weird, and I make it a point to make fun of myself before I do others. But this comes from a person that believes “Females is not the demographic for hosting.”, “The biggest problems with teenagers, or even college aged adults, is they move on. That’s why so many hosts fail, sell out, or disappear in under 2 years. We don’t have the time or patience for that.”. Yet as I stated before, no one really has any idea of the age of the person they are communicating with, but skill and professionalism are very apparent. Not to mention if you want to see that wisdom does not come with age, you have my personal invitation to view the three big retirement communities outside of Phoenix, Arizona.

So if you’re female, child, teenager, college age adult, and/or Republican/Conservative does not respect you. Might as well throw in Yin to the Republican/Conservative Yang; Democrat/Liberal as the Youth and Female votes these days are leaning that way based off the last polling data. But why bother with polling data, I should be outside yelling at kids to stay off my lawn (well I am in Arizona so I should say gravel). Sorry it really is hard to refrain from sarcasm.

In fact, probably half of the blog (or more) has nothing to do with “exposing” others. And that’s a shame, given how fake affiliate blogs pop up almost daily.

Note the word probable, meaning did not actually check.  There is a reason I don’t cover every review site that is out there, and that can reason can be found by reviewing the traffic scores. I got after sites with traffic, not to mention I try to compose posts that can advise people about how to shop for hosting. Yet he is not the first review site to tell me how to run my site. = Pro Kiddie Host

The biggest proof of editing of what I can be found with’s piecemeal extraction of several lines of my posts.

The first two seem to be a knock against the young. Despite all of my years doing business online …

I got started in webhosting at a young age…

Putting that aside there are a lot of teenagers out there that have contributed to the internet, so before you go knocking them make sure you are not using any of their creations. Age does not equal wisdom. If anything has alienated a demographic….

What seems to neglect here is that a new company may be eager to bring in new customers….

Never mind that last line had nothing to do with kids/teenagers/ or as I have now learned college aged adults. It was in response to framing new hosts in a bad light. But they really don’t just have a problem with new hosts.

And unfortunately, probably 80% or more of the industry is comprised of bad hosts.  — You have to be careful who you use!

Probably once again = assumption. Like when assumed (or lied) about me only having used 3 major hosts.

I still would like to see proof that there is a web host using kids. After all it was that accused me of conspiracies, the very least they could do is prove what hosts actually use children.

Point 6: What ignored

When it came to reading the terms of service of any company that chooses to refer to this comment by me:

If you think this is the point where you don’t have to read the TOS because read it for you, think again.’s response “This is false. In fact, there are companies NOT being suggested because we disagree with what’s written. The example that comes to mind most is (Namecheap-owned) and, because of the odd “WordPress modules” clauses. We warned folks about that back in December 2011. SiteGround’s ToS is fine.

I did say that wants you take their word for it, after all “SiteGround’s ToS is fine.”. I don’t care who tells you they read the terms of service for you, read it yourself. Besides has a financial interest in, $50 – $150 per sign up to be exact.

When it came to new companies this is what had to say:

Successful longevity.

  • good host has been around for 5+ years, and is a true test of running a successful hosting business. This business isn’t kind to the ignorant.
  • A bad host usually fails within 1-2 years, if they even make it that long.”

In short claims a host is good if it has been around for 5 years or more. You would think if there were any exceptions those would be addressed in advance, and a valid reason given as to why. After attempting to unravel’s claims about 5 year or older hosts,, chooses to selectively use only part of how I mentioned how to determine the age of a host.

Based off the whois info I can often find out how old a company might be.

However my explanation is much longer than that and more than I care to paste in what is already becoming a very long post. But can be read at

The excuse given for the age of some companies is that they are part of another company, which is at best weak. As I am betting despite this company being part of another company, counts by domain name, not hosting group how many hosts they have been with. Like say Endurance International Group with some 40 + sites.  Yet shows that not all the hosts are within the good host limit: has been around since August 2009, though it did not operate a public site. It’s a good enough host that ~4 years has been enough to prove themselves.

What I had on, while created in August 9, 2009, does not appear to have an actually hosting page till August 22, 2010. is another exception, having been around for ~4 years now. Not just that, but it’s a young-run host! More on that another day. Very impressive!

So what domain for exist under prior to August 2010?

Perhaps in a later post I will dig into the other hosts that claims to not be less than five years old. These are the two hosts that didn’t have a straight forward affiliate program I mentioned earlier. However as I mentioned, not all hosting review site do reviews for just high affiliate payments.

But here is the kicker

Trivia: If you look up the domain name for, you’ll find that it was only registered in 2004. But we’ve been online since 2002. The business has been around since 1977, when the blogger/author was crapping his Huggies.

Classy, I guess. Assuming that I was a toddler during 1977 despite the fact I am not very forth coming with my age as addressed when I did my post dispelling their claims of what makes a good host. Either way they have mad internet skills from the disco era.

And my two hours are up, on this post.

If or anyone else tells you to trust them without backing their claims with data, that’s the point you find someone that will.