– Is anyone home?

Yeah I know is not a host, for that matter they are not even a review site.  This post is more of away to try and get their attention.  This is even a site that I can honestly say I respect.  But and the author of one of their posts have ignored my emails:

To be percise this is the exact reason I am trying to get their attention, they accuse me of:

Here is a list of Host gator google bombing with fake websites and prolifically self-aggrandizing sponsored conversations to bury negative reviews:

Based off one of my first posts: hostgator bad web host read honest hostgator review

In short he pastes part of my post: [sic] likes to brag about numbers”, “Even though Hostgator has their own building, it does not appear they have their own server center, and they to [sic] like the first three companies I reviewed that are also using”, “Even though is only in number 5th position, they probable [sic] should be in the top position at

That is not an exact quote from my site.  For that matter the miss over the details that prove I am not “google bombing“, nor am I “prolifically self-aggrandizing sponsored conversations to bury negative reviews“.  Hostgator is not paying me to write about themTo be honest yes I was copying what those so called Google bombers have done, and those Google bombers have even accused me of such.  Over time though I have not done it so much as it gets a bit boring. While I do enjoy a good link, I would be happier if it was in a proper context.  I honestly really love it when some one is trashing me for what I am really doing.  But calling my site fake? Not so much.  This author did not do his research. – I am not “google bombing

First off let me explain I claim to be no expert at blogging, and this site is not making me a income to live off of.  I started this because back in Oct 2007 I found a site called that thought it was a good idea to remove my positive feed back given to my company by customers.  In short when I confronted this so called review site he blocked me from further communications. Long story short, was born.

Which lead to the creation of this video.

 So do I need to show further proof?

A little after that post on, I got spammed from hostgator’s affiliates:

Which I am sure I will see happen again before November, and have friends that have promised to send me Hostgator’s advance warning to so I can do an advance broad cast next time.

So how about issuing a correction?

I can respect not liking hostgator, after all they used to be one of my competitors.   Not to mention they fuel fake review sites like  The person who choose to post their rant on did not read my post in full before grouping me with others.

You would think they could at least beat Arvand.  Perhaps hostgator paid in advance for their “advertising” on for that 5th spot. I would suggest contacting to get a push up on those rankings, perhaps hostgator can get in a bidding war with iPage for that number 1 spot …… sorry I meant advertising does not “sell” rankings *eye roll*. Did I forget to mention the mysterious disappearing negative fee back.”

Perhaps my sarcasm was not evident?  I am still wetting my feet, and I make no claims at being a professional blogger. But I make it a point to read before I post links.  What I find interesting, that the only mention of (who is doing the damage your writer was worried about) was mentioned by me.  Yet this is absent on the post.

Come on Seclists, everyone makes a mistake so please issue a correction.

Webhostingstuff top 25 or is it 24 or is it 19

This month I am schedule to finish my review of the new hosts on   As I have stated in the past I am being blocked from looking at their site.  So often I have to rely on either Google cache or friends to do screen shots for me.  This time around I had two people sends me a screen shots of the top 25 list for this month.  One sent me only 2 screen shots because it appears that there were only 19 hosts,  maybe it might have something to do with it being an iPad. Then another snap shot of the top 25 revieled 2 hosts in the 10th and 11th spot.  A re-review of the top 19 from an iPad revealed that a different host in the top 10 was also in the top 11 spot.  But I tend to doubt that its an iPad issue (and I am no fan of Apple).  Over the coarse of 8 days this has not changed.  There have been two hosts in the 10th and 11th spot.  Maybe less people are paying for advertising or…………’s  human editors fell asleep at the switch

Perhaps my favorite page at Michael Low’s site is:

What I love about is that with in less then 100 words the page contradicts itself:

To build a fair and honest ranking system, ranking is always performed automatically by the system – free of human interference.

However just below that is the very sentence that tears apart that very statement:

Human editors are also needed to maintain the high level of integrity of our trusted reviews. Webmasters and system administrators are needed for the smooth running of this large site.

I pasted that after I did my first review of’s top 25 for May 2010.   It took me a while to figure out what I was looking for, granted I still have a lot to learn.

How do they pay for those human editors?

We reach a highly targeted audience of webmasters, site owners, and web professionals.

You can advertise from as little as $100.

When I wrote my first closing review for May 2010, I found the little tidbit where they failed at explaining how they were fair and balanced.    Just as they failed to explain how they reach webmaster, site owners, and web professionals without using the top 25.  I have yet to see where it is, and none of the hosts that have fest up to me about buying “advertising” could tell me where the advertising was.

Webhostingstuff from a iPad

Considering my friend was only able to send me 2 pages of what amounts to 19 hosts, though it 18 because Scala Hosting gets listed twice as its both in the 10th and 11th spot.   I sort of thought it might be a problem with iPad.  Yet the copy I got from a friend on PC had another host that I plan to add to my reviews for February 2011 which on the 3 screen shots appears in the 10th and 11th spot just like the ipad version so there are only 24 hosts in what used to be a 25 positions.  The only diference between the two sets of screen shots besides taken less then 8 hours from each other is that the iPad screen shots had 2gb hosting.  A host I reviewed back in August 2010.  They still do not offer any thing better then a 7 day guarantee, and I suggest going with a host with no less then 30 days. from a PC

Here you can see part of the mock up for this months reviews.  Three hosts total (Appears twice)

Not to mention why I choose to do a second review of  After the owner claimed he was going to stop using the “Advertising”.

I plan to do the write up for this once my new pc comes in.  After 4 years I think its time to get something more capable of doing videos.  The joys of a machine with 2 video cards.

How can Webhostingstuff be free of the human editors that it needs? – January 2011 top 25 list in review

For January 2011 added 5 hosts I have not reviewed before.  Unlike normal I will finish the new hosts I find in the same month I reviewed them.  Though I have to admit its pretty close as this is the last day of the month.  Most of the reviews were pretty easy to write, with the  exception of just one host.  Sometimes I find myself struggling to find what it was that makes a host not a top host.  Digging up the dirt so to speak.  Its not uncommon for me to be stuck with a host that is not spectacular.  By that I mean it may be dull as a rusty nail, but there is little to offend.  Like some hosts that are pretty easy to spot the flaws (like mochahost), some are not.  This is the point where I am hoping to get customers of the host in question to give me their take.  My review may give little or no reason to not choose a host  In some cases customers tell me how wrong and terrible I am.  But I have to ask if they are not so bad why are they using a fake review site?

For the first time ever a host that is on my review list has contacted me prior to my post, perhaps because they saw the video or post on my initial write up of January 2011.

Here is the video of my intial write up:

5 New hosts for January 2011 on’s top 25 list

While an still manage to be the top 25 list.  The list has hosts that don’t seem to be on the same level as them in some cases no where near them. number 4 out of 25 for’s top 25 list – Another Host that Pays for Service

The first thing that comes to mind with is  I suspect sometime I will be doing a review of as soon as I get enough people telling me that their reviews on are not showing up.  Despite there not being negative reviews on the paid system  and  both have negative reviews. number 15 out of 25 for’s top 25 list – Home of the $5 Reinstatement Fees is the host that was not spectacular.  Asides for no proof of being a top 25 host with  There was not much proof that they were a bad host.  One complaint was taken care of and the complainer withdrew their complaint.  Though I have to say their last positive review was in August 2008.  Their last only valid complaint was December 2010.

The only interesting thing i found was a claim of being formed in 1998, but that was only by going through the way back machine and I can find no mention of having formed in 1998 on the present site. number 22 out of 25 for’s top 25 list – When you don’t need 24 / 7 tech support’s main focus it seems is web design.  A look at the support page, which you have to know where to look to find it.  Its rather annoying for their not be a clearly visible support portal. But also what has my concern is the comments located on that support page thats not easy to find.

Business Hours: 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday, excluding bank holidays

customers using this service without the appropriate support agreement will be charged £125 per hour, pro-rata to a minimum billing period of 15 minutes if an urgent response is required before the beginning of the next working day.

Meaning their cheapest host package could become their most expensive.

Its not clear that support is available all 365 days out of a year. number 24 out of 25 for’s top 25 list – A New Host, and Only a 7 Day Guarantee

As I write my wrap up for January 2011,  I am sure that has either emailed me (again) or responded to my post.  I have to congratulate them on being the first to try and minimize the damage before hand.  Asides for some tweeks on thedesign, stopping the advertising with, and offering 30 day over a 7 day guarantee they could very well be off to a good start.    In short here is the three things I told them my post was about:

1. Making it clear I have no problem with hosts not being new.
2. I basically cover how you have nothing to prove that you have reason to be on webhostingstuffs top 25.
3. You have a 7 day guarantee that can only be found in the terms of service. Its not on the main page or the package pages  Which I make a point of telling my readers they should settle for no less then 30.

I also told them they are welcome to respond to the post I will neither delete it or edit it.  But then again neither will I delete their responses if they ask me to later. number 25 out of 25 for’s top 25 list – When 2 out of 5 Star support is all you need

Despite questionable awards they have a weird way of claiming to be green.  They just buy off set credits, thats it.  They give you some weird facts that I am not sure are correct.  Though I am sure the last one is just an opinion.

  • Datacenters take 4% of the world’s electricity.
  • Global warming is a concern for 90% of people.
  • Only 3% of web hosting companies are going green.
  • Going green costs 31% more than using dirty electricity.
  • Being socially responsible is cool.

But there are those awards one of which is

The overall support rating alone is a reason not choose this host.

Just 5 more reasons not to trust the top 25 on Webhostingstuff. – A New Host, and Only a 7 Day Guarantee is my Forth  host review of 5 hosts for January 2011’s top 25.  Before I go off into my little ramble here, I want to make clear that I have no problems with new hosts.  Every company had to start some where.  There is also that chance that a new host could take the industry by storm, in this market thats always a possibility.   This is a post that is about a new host that is paying for “advertising” with

I am not sure why a host that claims “True Canadian hosting, Solid Support”, has choosen to purchase “advertising” from who primarily is U.S. focused hosting (well it was, but it seems there are more UK hosts lately). This host had my attention because while they had no reviews, they had the highest “Traffic Popularity” score which Webhostingstuff assigns to the some 14,289. That number is 13,597.  Keep in mind that is 5 of 14,289 companies and Yahoo was number 1.  I was guessing by the no reviews and a score of 13,597 this was a new host.

This is not the first host I have found on the webhostingstuff top 25 to be new, In November 2010 I found hosting locker was one of the .

Did just launch?

I don’t have much proof of it, but I am guessing that just recently launched and not on the creation of the domain date.  By that I mean over the last 30 days.  I say that because the Alexa score was 11,732,342 when I first found them on webhostingstuff’s top 25 list, and now they are 6,717,734.  Its been my experience it takes little effort to move that far when your score is above ten million.  Most of my sites that have a score around ten million and above have nothing going on them.  I am willing to bet by the time I finish up January 2011 they will be down to five million. Alexa score January 20, 2010 Alexa score January 28, 2010 offers only a 7 day guarantee?

Since their a new host there is not much out there.  But I found that paticular site intresting because:

Money back guarantee: 7 day guarantee but you can pay monthly

My recommendation is to alway avoid a host that does not offer any thing 30 days or more.  I have indeed found that this host only offers a 7 day guarantee:

If for any reason the Account Holder is not entirely satisfied with their hosting Account they may request that their Account be closed within an initial 7 day period of their order being placed. A full refund of any fees paid will then be issued. Beyond that initial 7 day period, all payments for hosting are non-refundable and service is provisioned for the period paid for.

This is not on the main page, hosting package pages, or the faq however this is:

Solid Support – timely, responsive and technically adept support is guaranteed.”

Techie Support Guaranteed

I am not sure why the “7 day period” is hidden away in the terms of service.  But this is coming from a company that says “For ten bucks a month or less, at least 90% of our customers ought to be able to get what they need.“.  If your a customer I hope you do not fall under the 10% they don’t think should get what they need. is on my watch list. – Home of the $5 Reinstatement Fees is my Second host review of 5 hosts for January 2011’s top 25.  On the surface it appears that they have 12 – 5 star reviews with   The problem of coarse is that last review was April 2, 2008, before that it was December 2, 2007.  There is nothing available to show why this host should be in the top 25 for this month.   By the way the sites that were under those two reviews are hosting with other companies now. is with is with

There is only one place I can find a review done in the last 12 months for

December 12, 2010

Having only used two hosts in my life, I cannot say with authority that eVerity is the WORST host out there. But I can say from over 5 yrs experience that are the worst host that I have ever dealt with, that their customer service is nonexistent, that their support is a joke, that their security is akin to an old hound dog that might occasionally muster up a bark or two but certainly is past his prime, and that choosing eVerity as my hosting company was the worst and most expensive decision that I have ever made in relation to my web presence.

Thats is the only review that web-hosting-top has.  After that I can only find reviews in 2009 at

There is another negative review there, but apparently they fixed it and the reviewer retracted it.  So basically only that one I quoted is their only negative feed back.

So what do I think of the design?

Of coarse you know I am going to complain about the design if you have read my previous posts.  It appears outdated.  But what I find odd is if you navigate enough the links start becoming strange with long parts of code in the url.

I know that this site is on Theplanets servers, however I suspect this may be a part of reseller program. has been helping customers since 1998 or 2002?

The age thing is a curious thing.  I proable would not have brought it up if I was not been looking at the way back machine.  Here is what the whois says:

Though the whois shows that this domain has a history back to 2001 with the way back machine.  I tend to wonder if that is because they let the domain expire, or did the domain belong to someone else?

eVerity has been helping companies create profitable online marketing since July 1998.

They are currently stating:

eVerity was formed by James Hold on July 4, 2000. Originally named SmarttBiz, eVerity began by offering merchant services and web design services to both online-only and established brick-and-mortar companies. Shortly after opening, eVerity began offering web hosting and domain registration services as well. In February 2002, merchant services were phased out so that the web hosting division could be given priority. To this day, we have continually provided a top-rated product, as demonstrated by having one of the lowest turnover rates in the industry.

So what was the domain for SmarttBiz? does not exist anymore.  So I can’t tell when it existed and why it was abandoned.   Not to mention was bought until June 11, 2002.  Though there is a history on the way back machine in 2001. Here is perhaps the explantion where they got 1998: “James Hold, eVerity’s President and Founder, began developing web sites in 1998 while attending University.“.  Though I have to admit I would like to see the numbers they have to prove they have one of the lowest turnover rates in the industry.  As I stated earlier they only have one valid negative review, but they have had so few reviews in the last 12 months (1 to be exact).

One finale thought about

Here is a reason to read the terms of service:

However, we do charge a reinstatement fee of $5.00 if your account has to be suspended for non-payment and you want it restored for any reason

I have to ask how else is eVerity on the top 25 for webhostingstuff if not by “Advertising”? – The owner of is my forth and last host review of 4 hosts for December 2010’s top 25.  The thing that stuck out to me most was that this was a host with a 3 star rating, or 60% approval / a grade school grade of D.  In the last 6 months they have only one review which is 2 stars, a 40% approval / failing grade.  There is nothing to justify this host being in the top 25, unless of coarse you take into account the “advertising” fees.

The design is a contender for the worst up December.  Its almost as if this design was just thrown up.  There is no direct support link.  The chat is hidden at the bottom of a few pages.  The faq is troubling:


Q: Why my site is Suspended?
Q: Has My Domain Expired? Content is changed.
Q: How do I login to billing account? Password is not accepted.

The terms of service can not be found on every page, I had to ask a tech that took 10 minutes on chat to get me the link. has awards or do they?

Going to their about page I find “reasons” to pick them as a host.  It should be no suprise as to why they are not linking to webhostingstuff.

Despite paying “advertising” fees their rankings leave little to be desired. is top pick at

You can tell when a hosting company owns a hosting “review” site when that one host is always number 1.*/

But most hosts are smart enough to have whois privacy protection to cover up their ownership of their “top” host sites.

In case you have not clicked on the picture to enlarge it, its a snap shot of the whois for

It belongs to one:

Registrant Contact:
   Daniel Hart ()

   PO Box. 2353
   Houston, TX 77074

Avahost trys to tell you:

You can find it in Google but it would be better if you entrust the professional’s opinion. Our cheap web hosting review site will help you to get information about all the features you need. Each hosting provider is rated and reviewed by customers who already used this web hosting.”
So where are the customer reviews? – /

The problem with this site is they really do not tell you on what merits a host won.  They do allow you to vote a host in.  I have to wonder how rigged that system is.  After all what if I got on and hired someone to fake abunch of votes? –

This is the only thing I can find in relation to Avahost.  Which has to do with nothing more then them adding VPS hosting. – Alexa

I am not sure the point in including their Alexa score, its alot like the one site that decided to include a site grader which has nothing to do on the service of a site.  Alexa does nothing more then measure traffic popularity.  The lower your score the better your traffic.  I have seen sites that are in the millions on their Alexa score yet offer excellent service and make a lot of money.  However on a side note Alexa does offer the ability to leave a review of a website.

One finale thought on Avahost, avoid their domain registration because if you should ever forget to renew you will have to pay a $250 fee to get it back.  Having a domain with Avahost could be costly. – So what is wrong with this host? is my Second host review of 4 hosts for December 2010’s top 25.  Off the top of my head I am going to say that I have a feeling that this may be a hosting company thats not aware that the “advertising” they are paying for is placing them at number 21 postion of 25 so called “top hosts”, on webhostingstuff’s so called hosting review site.   The design of this site is not terrible, but its not great either.  They have a link to the Better Business Bureua where they have no negative complaints.  However they have only been an a credited business with the BBB since March 2010.  I don’t deny that this is a 10 year old host.  Despite the sparse reviews (all of which are good) I can find some as far back as 2006.  I can only guess that last year decided that they no longer wanted to be an obscure webhost. has a really long terms of service

The definition section of the site does not in the very least encourage me to read through the terms of service for this site. For a simple hosting solution the terms of service are really way too long. If you don’t beleive me just take the section on “Definitions” which is section 1 – 1.20.

The definitions section alone is almost 3 pages long, has 820 words / 5020 characters.

In all honesty I think that section alone is not necessary in the a terms of service.  Terms such as bandwidth, content, customer service, fee, fee schedule, and so many other terms can be found in a faq section as opposed to the terms of service.  That section alone would deter me from signing up, as it seems like more of an attempt to make a longer then necessary terms of service to get the average person not to read it the whole way through. reviews

On there is a only one review by, back in January 13, 2008 which was more then three years ago.  However this site redirects to a site that belongs to:

Domain name:

Administrative Contact:
   Infuseweb LLC
   Anthony Wilko ([email protected])
   Fax: +1.2105682649
   9901 IH10 West, Suite 800
   San Antonio, TX 78230

I am going to give the benefit of the doubt on this one.  As the domain belongs to someone else.   In three years especially with a bad economy circumstances can change.  I can’t tell you how many old accounts were shut down on my companies just because people had to choose between trying to get something online going and keeping a roof of their head.

Towards the bottom of the main page you can find three testimonials from customers of  I can tell you now that those sites on the testimonials are indeed active websites that are under’s dns. domain registration fees

The domain registration involves 2.2 (2.2.1 – 2.2.6) of the terms of service which is 746 words  / 4472 characters.

The domain fees are not exactly expensive but they are not cheap.   Then again I have alot of domains and I consider anything over $7 too expensive,   but I own my own register.  While my register acts as a income source to me, I have to say that the transfer fee seem to high.  I try to make transfers the cheapest, even cheaper then registering a new domain.  Its my own opinion that paying $13.95 is pretty high for domain registration when there are many places that charge far less.  Frankly there is little service required when it comes to domains.  Unless you get into some highly technical stuff like where name servers are versus email locations.   You would think with the cost of the domain name they would refrain from using your domain for their own uses.


You acknowledge and agree that Infuseweb or its agents, assignees or licensees may associate any data of any kind, in Infuseweb’s sole discretion, with the domain name registered in association with Your Web Site or any URL incorporating said Domain Name until you replace such data with Your Web Site, at such times as Your Web Site is no longer available, and upon termination for any reason, for as long as Infuseweb or Infuseweb’s agent, assignee or licensee continue to be listed as the hosting entity with the domain name registry used to register such Domain Name. This paragraph shall apply to any and all web pages generated by Infuseweb or its affiliates, including but not limited to 404 error pages.

This may be the case with which while not pointing to a domain redirects to which seems to belong to the owner of  However does not seem to be a commercial site but a religious site.

In the end Infuseweb may not be a bad host, but I have to wonder why they used webhostingstuff. – November 2010 top 25 list in review

In November 2010 I found 4 hosts I have not reviewed before on   The first two hosts I found had me wondering if webhostingstuff was so desperate to get new hosts that they are willing to allow storage sites.  Further review showed that these were indeed hosts but hosting companies.  I suspect that only three of these new hosts are paying for the WHS “advertising”. is still blocking me after only a few clicks. November 2010 pre-review video

First new host on’s top 25 list is at number 11 – Creation is all that is needed to be a top host

Per usual I looked at the whois of the domain for this host.  I have to say I was surprised to find that this host was not even a month old when I took a snap shot of’s top 25.   I am all for giving new hosts a shot.  But it should take awhile for host to get some level of creditability right?  They also had a testimonials which I have to say is a little surprising considering that one of them was Sony.

It seems the way they get around the whole less then a month old is this statement “HostingLocker – established in 2001 as parent company, iNetdog. ”

I have to say that I don’t care for the whole argument that just because they have another company that becomes the start date regardless if its a hosting company or not.  The date a hosting company starts is the day it goes live, and by live I don’t mean the creation of the domain.  iNetdog is almost 10 years old.  Perhaps you might be thinking oh they host Sony’s site on that companies servers.  iNetdog is a Godaddy wildwest reseller, given the speed of support and servers I doubt that Sony would ever use a Godaddy account.

Second new host on’s top 25 list is Aquarius Storage at number 12 – Will they share your information with a 3rd party?

Another site that seems like it should be a place to store files, and not hosting.  But clearly it is a hosting service.  Unlike the previous host they are actually 2 years old, meaning they have some time under their belt.

But what I found intresting

Use of Non-Personally Identifiable Information

We may share aggregate statistical data about our customers with third parties, such as advertisers or suppliers. This aggregate statistical data will not identify you personally.

Also as of last month despite having one 5 star review thats almost 2 years old, their customer seems to have chosen to migrate last month.

Third new host on’s top 25 list is Siteground at number 13 – Will they surprise bill you?

This is perhaps the first time in 2010 that a high level site appear on  But I have to wonder why.   At this time I suspect the only reason appears in the top 10 is because has an affiliate link set up.  But siteground does not have a huge pay out, and in my opnion has a fair payout.  So I have to wonder why they appear in the top 25.

But there not exactly a innocent company.  One thing I find is complaints about the billing.  With their holiday special over 6 months if you choose all 5 so called “freebies” you will be billed $262.20 with 4 billings over the coarse of 6 months.  After the first year you will be billed $344.20 4 times over the coarse of 6 months after the first year.  The sales operative told me that they send notices to remind you before you are billed.

I also have to wonder if the owner of is owned by siteground since it has whois privacy protection, keeps siteground in the first position, and is hosted with

Forth new host on’s top 25 list is Wooservers at number 19 – A BurstNET reseller

On the surface the only thing that caught my attention was that the whois said that this site was a year old, and for some reason they had 7 positive reviews.   Further review of those reviews had me skepitcal, as none of them pointed to wooservers dns.  But three of them pointed one network that wooservers was on that raises all kinds of red flags.  That would be a company called BurstNET.  I can not stress enough that if something involves BurstNET it should be avoided.  When it comes to BurstNET you can count on outages, equipment failure, and untimely support or lack there of.

And this is the last month that webhostingstuff has i7net in the top 25 – A BurstNET reseller is my forth and last host review of 4 hosts for November 2010’s top 25.  What I find interesting when I saw this site is its a little over a year old, yet they have 7 reviews with webhostingstuff.

Those 7 reviews came over a 5 month period of time (August – December 2010).  I can tell you right now that only 3 of the those 7 reviews are on the same network as Wooservers.  One of the reviews may very will be a fake, as the domain for the review does not exist.  Even though they are only a year old they have a rather impressive Alexa score of 70,193.  Its taken me 3 years to get down to 241,000.  Keep in mind I am no SEO expert, my skills in the hosting industry are primarily customer service, dealing with suppliers, and staffing.

Despite having reviews that leave me skeptical about this company, thats not the biggest concern I have about  My problem is I see BurstNET as the  network provider.

The – BurstNET connection

I had to wonder why I was seeing burstnet network behind 3 of the reviews.  Honestly I had thought all of the reviews may have been fake.  But then I found this:

It appears that is a reseller for Burstnet.  Normally I would not make it a point that someone is a reseller, unless I thought there were a hosting reseller on a shared hosting account or abusing a system that they are using.   But this is different, this is simply one of the worst companies that I have ever dealt with.  Back in the early part of the last decade they were my third attempt at finding a viable cPanel provider.  Viable is not a word that is fitting for BurstNET.  The first time I was with them it was like pulling teeth to get support.  After three months I had canceled the two servers I had with them after it took them 7 days to restore a server.  I am also not sure if they had caller id or what but most of my calls met with an answering machine, some times it was full.  Despite my objections my business partner decided to try them for a second time 2 years later.  That lasted 2 weeks, as the server we got with them had 2 consecutive defective hard drives.   My business partner got to find out first hand what I had to go through to get someone on the phone and agreed with me that this company needed to be on a permanent ban list.

My own history with BurstNET is a blog post in itself.  I am honestly surprised to see that they are still in business, it boggles the mind how anyone that practices business like they do can stay in business for almost 10 years.  If you doubt that I know what I am talking about I suggest going to any search engine and enter “burstnet sucks” or any other combination of a negative word with Burstnet because you will find tons of reasons why you should avoid anything that involves Burstnet.

Despite being at least 5 years since I have been with BurstNET it does not appear that they have changed at all.  For that matter the site seems to look like it did when I first signed up.  I don’t know the full details of the relationship between BurstNET and  It safe to say that if is reselling any BurstNET service your not going to get timely support.

But there were those reviews…….

Despite having burstnet on 3 of the 7 reviews, there are 4 reviews that also leave me skepitacal of this company. – appears to have moved 03-dec-2010  – appears to have never been on Bustnet – no one owns that domain –  appears to have never been on Bustnet

Due to the relationship WooServers has with BurstNET I have to recommend avoiding them like the plague.