– 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.

Hosting Reviews Exposed – March 2011 top 25 list

For March 2011 there will not be any new hosting reviews there are no hosts that I have not reviewed on’s top 25 for this month.  Which works to my advantage as I have had issues with Dell and Eset that have delayed me from posting this month, not to mention several other projects in the works (2 of which are just for .  But that does not mean there is nothing to look at with this top 25 hosting reviews list.  Unlike last month, there are actually 25 hosts.   For this months post while it will only be one post, its more of a re-review of hosts that have contacted me or have had frequent updates on my previous posts. is blocking me from looking at their hosting reviews

Its gotten really hard finding a friend some where around the world that is not being blocked after only one or two page clicks.  Still that does not mean that I am not able to look at’s hosting reviews.   While I do enjoy encouraging paranoia with this company I am no longer going to mention where people are doing screen shots for me.  But if they are blocking me and many others, those that paid for so called advertising fees are not getting what they paid for.   But lets face it, if was honest about their hosting reviews there would be no reason to block me or anyone.  They would not be afraid to let me and anyone else put their system to the test.

Hosting reviews for March 2011 on 1 – 10 number one host for March 2011 with

When I first did a review about this company I did a short review because I found a disturbing trend where they were trolling any place that had negative hosting reviews from customers.  I tend to believe they were trolling my blog because of the person who wrote: “I’m not Arvand, and I’m not a fan of Arvixe”, despite the criticism of Arvand, there seemed to be alot of harsh critisim of the client complaint I highlighted.  I love how people that claim they are no way associated with this company, go on the attack of whatever negatively effects the company they are not part of.   Perhaps they would be willing to buy my Ocean front property here in Arizona.

One comment I missed with hosting reviews:


I’m sorry that you feel we are a scam. Your site was attacked through a DDoS by your own visitors. We suggested that you identify the cause of this and remedy it through proper website management and you refused to work with us and blamed our systems for the fact that your site was getting attacked.

Our job is to protect our systems and make sure that all users on the server have a positive experience.

Therefore, your account was suspended and a full refund was sent back. … — representative

Here are my thought on that:

1. How do they know it was the Visitors?
2. If it was the customers fault, why did they issue a refund?

It seems like they have discontinued their responses to negative feedback on hosting reviews after my first post.  But amazingly is the only place to not have any negative hosting reviews. number two host for March 2011

For some bizzare reason I have been accused of aiding this host for “google bombing with fake websites and prolifically self-aggrandizing” ( )with my first post on this company.  The author  does not respond to my emails, nor apparently did they bother to read my post.  I did not give Hostgator any positive hosting reviews.  If there ever was a host that I would not like, it would be this host.

Amazingly this month they have a negative hosting review to go with the rest of the hosting reviews on this month.

Granted it only took a little more then a year to get a review on  But alot seems to be changing with since I started doing monthly my own  hosting reviews. number three host for March 2011

This site is back on the so called top 25 hosting reviews list.  Despite this its still averaging 3 out of 5 star approval on

At this time I have received no responses on this host. number four host for March 2011

At this time I have no feed back from anyone on this site, unlike this site appears to get regular hosting reviews. number five host for March 2011

This is a bit of an oddity.  The choose to contact me in regards to my review, and for some reason wordpress marked their comment as spam.  They later contacted me via email and I posted their comment as well as my response.  I made it clear that the reason that I only reviewed their company because they were dealing with one of many hosting reviews sites, in particular whom I have a vested interest in exposing. The strange part is that for some time they had not been on the top 25 list, and when they had contacted me they were not on the list.  But a month after their comment and my response clearly indicating I only reviewed them because they bought advertising by  I have to wonder why they are back on this fake hosting reviews site. number six host for March 2011

At this time I have no feed back from anyone on this site, unlike this site appears to get regular hosting reviews. number seven host for March 2011

When I first reviewed this host I have to say I was filled with a bit of disgust when I read one customer review that was later countered by someone at decided to attack the customer by using their relgion against them.  At this point I have seen not postive feed back on my site.  But for that matter even though the negative feed back is strangly absent unlike other review sites like

Where there is a disclaimer hidden far enough to still get affilate commisions:

Updated: Due to the more recent negative comments and feedbacks from our visitors, we are now also recommending an alternative hosting plan See below for their custom-fit packages priced from only $4.84 monthly! You pay for what you need and all packages come with cPanel and eCommerce-ready support. Our MyHosting review is as good, if not better than about the above webhost. If you have any doubt at all about the above web hosting service, get MyHosting instead. If you are asking for another webhost recommendation, is your answer. number eight host for March 2011

I think the exchange on that post explains their philosophy on hosting reviews.  My satisfaction is that they remove the “since 1996” because of that post. number nine host for March 2011

At this time I have no feed back from anyone on this site, unlike this site appears to get regular hosting reviews. number ten host for March 2011

There have been no comments up this month.  Though I am not sure how “the claim of a website being deleted that might just have been a bad luck.” helps their case.

Hosting reviews for March 2011 on 11 – 20 number eleven host for March 2011

2 months online yet no reviews anywhere.  You would think a host that has been deemed a top host would have some validity to its ranking. number twelve host for March 2011

Another host that amazingly has been online for just a few months.  While they do not have alot of hosting reviews……. well they actually just had one review this month. number thirteen host for March 2011

Ok there are reviews on my site, but the problem is the pro hosting reviews did not leave valid contact emails or websites.  sites behind them don’t exist. number fourteen host for March 2011

While there is one comment, it had not postive or negative feed back for this host. number fifteen host for March 2011

No comments at this time. number sixteen host for March 2011

This burstnet reseller was not too happy with me as you can read in the comments.  For some strange reason they expected me to delete, change, or not allow them to post comments.  But the one thing they did not do was explain the advertising fees that allows them to be at the top of a fake hosting reviews website. number seventeen host for March 2011

Here is a host that thinks I have no right to write a review about them just because I never used them.  I doubt that has used them.  Even with that said the reviews at clearly do not back this host being a top 25 host when it has a 2 out of 5 star rating.   Honestly if I was, I would stop paying for advertising atleast until I got the 2 star rating up to atleast 4 or 5. number eighteen host for March 2011

No comments at this time, other in relation to their use of number nineteen host for March 2011

No comments at this time. number twenty host for March 2011

Unfortunatly at this point just a question on how to cancel their account.  I had hoped to get more comments then I have right now.

Hosting reviews for March 2011 on 11 – 20 number twenty one host for March 2011

Another host that does not have alot of hosting reviews, for that matter they only have one.  Interestingly enough it comes from a site thats 4 days younger then the review.

The host contacted me the same day I was working on their review.  But they never responded to my email to clarify any part of my review. number twenty two host for March 2011

While I have no comments I thought it might be intresting if they have improved on their seo score since I did my review.  Its some what up it went from 3,871,793 to 1,538,214.  While there supposed seo expert site was at 1,936,294 and now its at 1,289,075.  You would think after 2.5 months with a claim of “rash is all about the white hat SEO and we’re pretty damn good at getting web presence for businesses. With 16 billion online searches every month, you need a bit of Brash about you.” they would have made some drastic climbs in their search engine ranking.  Not to mention not to buy advertising to get ranking in a fake hosting reviews website.  Still no reviews with number twenty three host for March 2011

No comments at this time, and only one hosting review on a fake hosting reviews site. number twenty four host for March 2011

No comments at this time, and only one hosting review on a fake hosting reviews site. number twenty five host for March 2011

No comments at this time, and only one hosting review on a fake hosting reviews site.

There may not be any new hosts this month, but there is still little reasoning to why many of these hosts are in the top 25 based on their hosting reviews alone.

Review Arvixe. Is a bad host? Arvixe Sucks? Complaints?

Back in the early years of my self-employment, my business partner and I would brain storm with domains. Though I think it was more of a war of philosophies. Alot of the time I would buy the domains I thought had value, though admittedly I have close 500 domains that are doing nothing, over 10 years.  He never would have bought a domain like or I would, I like that they are unique yet easy to spell, and not to mention stick in your mind. My philosophy had always been to make it memorable, not always short, and make sure it can be spelled with out much thought.. His would be some sort of business philosophy he picked up from forums and other so called “gurus”. But I think we can both agree this is not a domain either of us would have picked. While it fits my desire of short, I doubt people that first see the domain are going to remember how to spell it on the fly. After all what is a arvixe? It seems that they have the monopoly on the term and its probable made up.

But before I go any further into how I think a domain should be, that’s really not something in relation to bad hosts.   They have an affiliate program like the first three, but they are not on commission junction. Which means they are another high payout, that encourages tons of crap when you try to look for information on a webhost.

What I found in regards to search engine results about arvixe is disturbing.

In a nut shell customer tried to order service from a site that promises 24 / 7 tech support and prompt set up of order. After not receiving the order the customer tried to contact the company during a day and could not reach anyone. I can’t say I would not be alarmed after giving my credit card information to a company that had no one to contact. So customer went to to complain. Arvixe choose to to counter response, and apparently their response to their customer was so inappropriate deleted it. For the most part the other reviewers were with the person who posted the complaint. When someone brought up complaining to the BBB, Arvixe was quick to state the person was not a customer because they did not take their money. Not to mention argued the point that they never signed up. As far as I can tell they never addressed the inability to be contacted. Perhaps this person is lying, but there is nothing that indicates that they were. But as far as I am concerned, until you tell someone their order was declined after taking their credit card the person is a customer. Simply not responding to their emails or phone calls…….. hiding from them is not an indicator that someone is not a customer. I wonder what their merchant would think of this philosophy.

Then on their own forum.

One of their customers found complaints about dos (Denial of Service) attacks. The customer wanted clarification. Arvand who seems to appear where ever there is a complaint did not treat this person like a customer, but more of an attacker. Ever where I see Arvixe complaints that allow for posting, I find Arvand attacking the negative feed back. I wonder if the customer signed up for 2 years, I know I would not. It it was me I would have stated when the last dos attack was, and what we do to prevent them and if in the rare case they get through what we do to fix it. Because this post and every post Arvand has gone against only add more fuel in not buying from them. This was defiantly not a place to be defensive, this was a time to give a customer cool and calm response.

My question is when do they have problems do they take responsibility for them, or are they going to attack the customer that asks what the cause of the problem is. I have said things in the heat of the moment I wish I had not said, but I can count on one hand the amount of times over 11 years. But that is not the case for this company. Instead its a policy of attacking the customer, and I don’t see much point in reviewing a company that engages in such a philosophy any further.

Bottom line, I don’t recommend this host. Even if they were not using over the top affiliate payouts and sites like (Traffic Popularity: #77 of 10,293 companies) to get a position that was not earned. Their responses to problems is not acceptable, and I tend to wonder what problems are going on behind the scenes when every response is a defense mode. I don’t see much point in further review of this company, or future reviews unless they change their philosophy of attacking the messenger.  There is no point in hosting with a company like this.