Digitalfaq.com: Intermission – To the Readers of Digitalfaq.com

March 26, 2013

Digitalfaq.com has told their readers I am a conspiracy nut. So if you came here from Digtalfaq.com, this post is for you.

First off I am not asking you to trust me (far from it). After all Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com claims I said.

This started out because I had been sent an email by someone who though I should reference Digitalfaq.com. 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 Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com.

The counter argument by Digitalfaq.com, 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 Digitalfaq.com:

http://www.Digitalfaq.com/forum/web-hosting/4432-top-hosts-2013-a.html

Here is the snap shot I took of their post.

The second is the response to the first two posts (maybe three) of Digitalfaq.com:

http://www.Digitalfaq.com/forum/myths/5061-hosting-reviews-exposedcom.html

Asides for not referencing specific posts, the owner of digtalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com:

Ground work for my argument against trusting Digitalfaq.com:
https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/review-sites-exposed/digitalfaq-com-hypocrite-doing-what-other-hosting-review-sites-do-part-1.html

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

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/review-sites-exposed/digitalfaq-com.html

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

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/review-sites-exposed/digitalfaq-com-whinny.html

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 Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com, they clearly were against unlimited hosting, and original argument against unlimited hosting is still there.

“· A 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!”

And

“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 Digtalfaq.com 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, Amazon.com, WebHostingTalk.com, 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 hosting-reviews-exposed.com 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 Digtalfaq.com was half right

“If you look closely at hosting-reviews-exposed.com’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 Digitalfaq.com 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 Godaddy.com 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 Fivver.com and that all of the accounts are always controlled by a single user. In which case Digitalfaq.com is wrong on both. Though it can be the case for both points. As for pretty girls, Digitalfaq.com is just trying to use derogatory comments to compensate, for what I have no idea. Either way I would love to see how Digitalfaq.com thought bought likes work.

Point 4: What Digtalfaq.com left out

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

Breakdown is Company / Affiliate ID / Commission

1&1 PID=3235990 / Earn up to $300
Godaddy.com isc=cjcmsc001t / payment varies 30% commissions on nearly all products
Amazon.com / digitalfaq-20 / 4 – 8% commission
Burst.net / aff=2993 / 15 – 25% commission
Cyberhostpro.com / id=246 / £10.00 – £40.00 (based on number of sales)
3essentials.com / aid=21e7151b $70 – $135
Mediatemple.net / aid=4fb618fb27a17 $80 – $230 based off sales/product

LayeredTech just redirects to Digitalfaq.com’s main page.

Hostgator.com (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:

http://www.Digitalfaq.com/forum/web-hosting/4108-web-hosts-caught.html

I find this ID 3235990 interesting when clicking on Ixwebhosting.com, despite being listed as a comment spammer, you would not think I could click on a link to black listed host. By the way Ixwebhosting.com has a deeper history in fake reviews than Digitalfaq.com knows. Details on ixwebhosting.com 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 Hostgator.com being a sponsor of Digitalfaq.com, the owner choose this part of my blog “Plus since Digitalfaq.com loves Eurovps.com so much why does Hostgator.com and other companies get a far bigger banner.
Note: hostgator.com (a host that offers unlimited hosting) is a sponsor of Digitalfaq.com.”.

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

In short yes Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com, which has not declared non-profit status.

http://www.Digitalfaq.com/forum/news/1528-support-digitalfaqcom-site.html

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 hosting-reviews-exposed.com. It’s time I could put to better use working, or helping others.”

Yet I inspired Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com does not recommend. Though it’s not really clear that Hostgator.com removed Digitalfaq.com as an advertiser. But I suppose that is coincidental in Digitalfaq.com’s opinion. The moment Digtalfaq.com felt Hostgator.com 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 Digitalfaq.com either haphazardly reads my blog, and selectively picks to highlight what I wrote.

“I honestly would not have a problem with Digitalfaq.com 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.“

Digitalfaq.com 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 Godaddy.com and 1&1 hosting.

After hatcheting my sentence (that should have been two): “I honestly would not have a problem with Digitalfaq.com 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 Godaddy.com, 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:

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/my-hosting-history/godaddy-com-its-where-this-site-is-hosted.html

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 GoDaddy.com 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 Digitalfaq.com 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, Amazon.com, WebHostingTalk.com, Cyberhost Pro, 3essentials, Wooservers, BurstNET, Site5, LayeredTech, MediaTemple, etc.”

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

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/my-hosting-history/burstnet.html

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

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/my-hosting-history/layeredtech.html

Which brings us to Layered Tech. I started out with Powersurge.com, than some how I became a Fastservers.net client, and last Layerdtech.com. Though I am a bit confused about how I transitioned from a Powersurge.com to a FastServers.net customer as I got a roundabout response on that. I have to ask Digitalfaq.com, 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 Rackspace.com and not Mediatemple.net, 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 Digitalfaq.com 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 Mediatemple.net can be found here:

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/my-hosting-history/mediatemple-net.html

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 Digitalfaq.com knows what this site looked like from 2007 – 2010. But as far as Digitalfaq.com goes further to say “By contrast, since 1993, the admins/mods/owner of The Digital FAQ have used at least 100 hosts.”.

Digitalfaq.com forgot to tell you I don’t make my living off hosting-reviews-exposed.com (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 Hostgator.com prior to it being bought by EIG, and as of today I am on their servers for another client. I am currently using Hostdime.com and Liquidweb.com in addition to Rackspace.com.

The reason hosting-reviews-exposed.com is on Rackspace.com, 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 Mediatemple.net did not give me. Not to mention Rackspace.com is far more Word Press friendly.

Oh and he forgot to mention I used to own 5 companies (1 failure (described in the first Digitalfaq.com 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 Webhostingstuff.com was the inspiration behind hosting-reviews-exposed.com. But why be bothered with details?

Point 5: What Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com 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.

“hosting-reviews-exposed.com = Pro Kiddie Host”

The biggest proof of editing of what I can be found with Digitalfaq.com’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 Digitalfaq.com has alienated a demographic….

What Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com that accused me of conspiracies, the very least they could do is prove what hosts actually use children.

Point 6: What Digitalfaq.com ignored

When it came to reading the terms of service of any company that Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com read it for you, think again.”

Digitalfaq.com’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 web-hosting.com (Namecheap-owned) and WebHostingBuzz.com, 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 Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com has a financial interest in Siteground.com, $50 – $150 per sign up to be exact.

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

“Successful longevity.

A 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 Digitalfaq.com 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 Digitalfaq.com’s claims about 5 year or older hosts, Digitalfaq.com, 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 https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/review-sites-exposed/digitalfaq-com.html

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, Digitalfaq.com counts by domain name, not hosting group how many hosts they have been with. Like say Endurance International Group with some 40 + sites. Yet Digitalfaq.com shows that not all the hosts are within the good host limit:

“Crocweb.com 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 Crocweb.com

“Crocweb.com, while created in August 9, 2009, does not appear to have an actually hosting page till August 22, 2010.”

“Evolucix.com 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 Evolucix.com exist under prior to August 2010?

Perhaps in a later post I will dig into the other hosts that Digitalfaq.com 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 digitalFAQ.com, 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 Digitalfaq.com post.

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

Digitalfaq.com – Hypocrite – whinny disclaimer / excuses Part 3

March 19, 2013

Digitalfaq.com on my first inspection did not have a disclaimer. But on second review I see this at the bottom of a lengthy fact less sales spill:

“Disclaimer: If one of our suggested hosts has an affiliate program, great, we join it, and the funds are used to support the costs of maintaining this site. If not, oh well, good is good, and they still get our suggestion. A few splog owners have contacted us, crying that we’re hypocrites by having some links that earn small affiliate payments ($10-15 average), yet deriding their spammy sites for doing the same. Sorry, but it’s NOT the same — it’s not even close. Our list is based on quality of hosts, not their payouts. If this list was based on payouts alone, it would recommend high-paying ($100+) lousy operations like Godaddy, IXWebHosting or Bluehost. Notice that our #1 suggestion, EuroVPS, had no affiliate program for years.”

http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/web-hosting/4432-top-hosts-2013-a.html

I am not calling the owner of Digitalfaq.com a hypocrite for having affiliate links. As for EuroVPS having an affiliate program, good for them. But is Digitalfaq.com implying that because Eurovps.com did not have an affiliate program that somehow it’s bad for a host to start out with one? Digitalfaq.com’s disclaimer implies that affiliate program are some how wrong,

I am calling the owner a hypocrite for not providing any data, just stereotypes. After all Digitalfaq.com claims their rankings are based off of server/network performance. That means Digitalfaq.com should have at least data for one of the many measures that determine if a host is good or not. Another detail that would go father is/are domain(s) that were hosted with companies that Digitalfaq.com claims to have used. Which would allow anyone to see if that more than a single web page was put up, or a full working site(s). Data that is far more valuable than just having the uptime of the hosting companies site’s server ( For those not aware an established host is not going to keep their main site on the same server as their customers). The data would be even better if backed by a third party like Pingdom. Instead like all so called review sites Digitalfaq.com wants you to take their word for it. Never mind there are no list of domains hosted currently with the recommended hosts (not even going to start with domains no longer hosted with the recommended), with a detailed history. That was after all one of the criteria, detailed reviews. Instead Digitalfaq.com can’t even offer a up time % for any of the hosts they recommends servers.

Digitalfaq.com is doing the same concept that every review site they want you to avoid does. It would be a cleaver (though dishonest) trick if the fake hosting review industry had not already thought about that one. Webhostingstuff.com one of the oldest of fake review sites says “Unlike some dubious “top 10 hosting sites” that promote web hosts based on affiliate commissions, our fair our fair and honest ranking system helps visitors find the real top web hosting companies.”. Instead webhostingstuff.com (not a blog) had hosts bid on the top 25 positions (the only affiliate program they ever appeared to use was Hostgator.com). The same owner of webhostingstuff.com also owns other sites that does exactly what Michael Low preaches against on webhostingstuff.com on sites like hostaz.com (which runs off affiliate commisions, with so called top 10 format, and no not a blog).

Is Digitalfaq.com the same as all the other so called hosting review sites?

In short yes. What Digitalfaq.com fails to do at the very first in what is a very long post is disclose up front they earn money if you sign up with one of the hosts they recommend. Many so called review sites claim their competitors are being dishonest. Nothing more than a slight of hand trick. Take the obvious and use it for distraction. Instead of providing data like many so called review site, Digitalfaq.com provides stereotypes as a distraction from the lack of facts.The disclaimer reads like one written with a kid caught with his hands in the cookie jar.

“the funds are used to support the costs of maintaining this site”

I can say the same, what Hosting-reviews-exposed.com brings in does not cover the costs of running it. Yet I would be lying if I said I would not like it to make insane profits. Also unlike Digitalfaq.com I disclose that I make a commission up front whenever I have recommend a product (example Kindle Fire). Yet some how Digitalfaqcom, whom I seen nothing declaring they were a non-profit organization, though they take donations seems uncomfortable with making buck.

If Digitalfaq.com had disclosed up front their relationship with the hosts lists, I doubt I would have read any further. Making a commission off a recommendation is not evil. But instead to distract from what they are doing they bring up the behavior of other so called hosting review sites. Yet that alone was not enough from my attention deficit order from distracting me. I was only further inspired when they broke from what was a very good recommendation “A bad host promises ridiculous limits — or no limits at all! Unlimited! Yeehaw!” . This only drove me to want to address the inaccuracies in their claims. Clearly getting $25 – $150 + (by plus I mean bonuses when you sign up a certain number) per sign up was hard for Digitalfaq.com to resist.

Digitalfaq.com’s Top Hosts 2013

As I mentioned in my last post, I notices affiliate links the moment I started clicking on hosts listed. Yet that was not my first clue that they were part of a affiliate program. It was the fact that Digitalfaq.com had coupons. After the addition of unlimited hosts I decided to see who had an affiliate program and how much they paid out. Plus on average what is the payout? Was it really as little as $16? I visited every site and found the least each host had was an affiliate login area. Breakdown is Affiliate page / payout. Those with (NEW) were added after I started, not to imply that they are a new host.

Digitalfaq.com’s Best Web Hosts / Overall Hosts

http://www.eurovps.com/blog/post/affiliate-program 20 Euro = $26
http://www.stablehost.com/affiliates.php $25
http://www.jaguarpc.com/affiliates/ $65 – $110 (based off number of sales)
http://www.hostingzoom.com/affiliate-program.php $65 (NEW)
http://www.downtownhost.com/affiliate-program.php $40 – $100 (based off number of sales)
http://www.mddhosting.com/affiliates.php $15 – $25
https://affiliates.arvixe.com/ $70 – $135 (based off number of sales)
http://www.hawkhost.com/Affiliate 25% Up to $159.87 based off step 1 of shopping cart on highest plan
https://secure.ninjalion.com/index.php?/affiliates/ $30

Removed from the list is:

http://asmallorange.com/affiliate/ 200% of monthly price up to $200

No explanation to the retraction by Digitalfaq.com.

Digitalfaq.com’s Best Unlimited Hosts

http://www.site5.com/affiliates/ $25 – $100 (based off number of sales)
http://www.jaguarpc.com/affiliates/ $65 – $110 (based off number of sales)
https://affiliates.arvixe.com/ $70 – $135 (based off number of sales)
Glowhost.com – http://www.shareasale.com/shareasale.cfm?merchantID=17701 $50 – $125, + bonus at sale 10 of $100, Bonus at Sale 25, $500. (NEW)
http://www.inmotionhosting.com/hosting_affiliate_program.html $50 – $100 (based off number of sales)
http://support.froghost.com/index.php?/Knowledgebase/Article/View/149/25/do-you-have-an-affiliate-program 50% Up to $215.10 based off highest item found on product page
http://www.wirenine.com/affiliates/ $50
http://www.siteground.com/affiliate_program.htm $50 – $150 (based off number of monthly sales).

Digitalfaq.com’s Best Reseller hosts

http://www.mddhosting.com/affiliates.php $15 – $25
http://www.hostdime.com/affiliates/ $40 – $150
http://www.stream101.com/affiliate/ 15% – highest possible is $15 based off order=form.
http://www.site5.com/affiliates/ $25 – $100 (based off number of sales) (new to list)
Geekstorage.com – http://www.geekstorage.com/about-geekstorage/affiliate-program.html $25 – $75 (NEW)
http://www.downtownhost.com/affiliate-program.php $40 – $100 (based off number of sales) (new to list)
http://www.stablehost.com/affiliates.php $25
http://www.eurovps.com/blog/post/affiliate-program 20 Euro = $26
Hostingzoom.com (labeled Reseller Zoom) https://www.hostingzoom.com/affiliate-program.php $65 (NEW)
http://www.jaguarpc.com/affiliates/ $65 – $110 (based off number of sales)
https://www.crocweb.com/clients/affiliates.php no clear info, but affiliate login area present

Digitalfaq.com’s Best VPS Hosts

http://www.eurovps.com/blog/post/affiliate-program 20 Euro = $26
http://fhpp.futurehosting.biz/ 100% – $709.95 based off highest item in shopping cart
Mediatemple
http://www.liquidweb.com/cn/c/refer/index.html One time commission $60 – $5000 or 5% reoccurring monthly
http://www.downtownhost.com/affiliate-program.php $40 – $100 (based off number of sales)
Solarvps.com – http://www.dedicateddollars.com/ Tier 1 ( 0- 9 sales monthly (75% of first bill), Tier 2 (10 – 19 sales monthly) 100% of first bill, Tier 3 (20 + sales monthly). (NEW)
http://www.jaguarpc.com/affiliates/ $65 – $110 (based off number of sales) 125% of first bill.
http://www.knownhost.com/affiliate/ $25
http://www.wiredtree.com/affiliate/ 75% probable $3985.65 based off of highest item
Modvps.com – part of Hostingzoom.com http://www.modvps.com/affiliate-program.php $65 (NEW)
http://www.hostv.com/affiliates.shtml Double the monthly amount, possible $690 based off order page
BuyVM.net not program found, however WHMCS present and has affiliate capabilities. Domain creation April 26, 2010. (NEW)
Evolucix.com, https://www.evolucix.com/clients/affiliates.php no information available however noticeable affiliate login area from the Client area (NEW)

Two new additions are not 5 years old (as Digitalfaq.com recommends) based off domain creation.

Ecolucix.com – Domain Creation October 19, 2011
BuyVM.net – Domain creation April 26, 2010 (though the design looks like it’s over a decade old).

Other than crocweb.com (which seems like a rip-off of hostgator) and Buyvm.net every host has a clear and present affiliate program. Despite the lack of information for an affiliate program for crocweb.com there is a login area for affiliates, and Buyvm.net has WHMCS which has affiliate capabilities. An average is hard to determine without spending more time taking into account of hosts that pay base on percentage, $16 does not appear the average, but many of these companies . Once again no data to validate how each host earned a recommendation.

Its worth noting that only one host offers does not offer payments in the U.S. dollar ($), and that is the host that Digtalfaq.com has gone on the record for hosting with Eurovps.com. Which pays more than $16 per signup.

Either the owner of Digitalfaq.com doesn’t understand that not all hosting review sites work the same, or is neglecting to leave it out.

After all Digitalfaq.com’s disclaimer seems to insist that the FCC is going after blogs(As if all review sites were blogs). That the problem was all about affiliate commissions, yet they signed up for affiliate programs if they were there. That assumption alone tells you that Digitalfaq.com is not a source for facts.

My last Digitalfaq.com post will cover what they don’t understand about review sites.

Digitalfaq.com – Hypocrite – Claims of what makes a great host Part 2

March 17, 2013

Digitalfaq.com’s Top hosts of 2013 post claims to have the magic formula to spot a bad host. Never mind they have their own recommendations on who to host with. But do the hosts Digitalfaq.com recommends stack up against their advice? Not to mention is the advice valid.

There is a site that has their own advice; it’s a review site that does not always focus on who gives the highest payout. Instead this is one of the few “blog” review sites out there that Digitalfaq.com claims the FTC is after.

“I find those sites vulgar and unethical. Affiliate-driven lists are a cancer on the Internet, and to communication in general. In fact, that’s why the FTC has been more involved in blogging since 2009, to combat this nuisance.”

http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/web-hosting/4432-top-hosts-2013-a.html

An inaccurate statement, designed to draw your attention away from digitalfaq.com’s lack of data on the hosts they recommend. But this post is not the only one I have found that does not deal in facts. I’ll cover that in my last post about digitalfaq.com.

Digitalfaq.com’s attempt at distraction, or what they claim makes a great host.

Most review sites I have encountered are not blogs. But hostingsthatsucks.com is one of the few exceptions. Sure they have their own top list of hosts. Yes all of the top hosts featured on the list are high payouts. But their approach is not to just focus on the high payouts, but any payout even if it’s a few bucks. The company focuses on being on the top of search engines for a specific kind of search. This is where the blog comes into play, with a theme of “(Hostname) sucks)”. But seldom do the hosts that show up there actually suck (though that seems to change based on affiliate commissions or their free hosting is shut off). They used to be pretty good at being in the top of that particular search engine result but lately their traffic has been taking a dive. Zyma.com got one of their “reviews”, which was also without fact. Not to mention their site failed to mention that this site was brand new. My counter posts earned me the title of Benjamin the Grumpy blogger because I had addressed why a brand spanking new company had no negative reviews.

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/unlimited-hosting/zyma.html

Sure I was accused of not liking new hosts, but I am more hurt by the fact that this site was not referenced (ok not really). The fact that Zyma.com had no negative reviews (or any reviews) worked perfectly into Hostingsthatsucks.com’s formula. Which is to be on the first page, and better yet first result for when every you searched for “(hostname) sucks”, and than claim that the company has few negative reviews, or few valid negative reviews therefore the hosting company which they happen to be an affiliate for does not suck. Going through the searches myself I often found more than the claimed “few” results. It does not take a lot for them to make a page and spin the concept of less “sucks” results for a host = “good”, “so no need to look further click now, oh and we have coupons”. Hostingsthatsuck.com didn’t follow FTC compliance until I brought it up with Endurance International Group. But they are a blog, yet they don’t always go for the highest payout. But I will get into that with my last post.

Just like Hostingsthatsuck.com, they want you to see a lengthy post and than buy from one of the hosts on the list. But do any of these points have merit and/or do all the hosts live up to these standards?

Digitalfaq.com’s Points: Professional skills./ Wisdom only by age

The first two seem to be a knock against the young. Despite all of my years doing business online I have yet to come to a point where I suspected the person on the other side was a child. Though this may be an interesting point should Hostgator.com manages to find itself on the list. I have to ask is there anyone that knows the exact age of the person they are communicating with? There are times I don’t even know the gender on the other end. Decades of good living have people checking my id and doing a double take whenever I buy over the counter allergy drugs. I hope that they are not just flattering me and that I do look more than a decade younger than I am. Talking to your host generally involves dealing with them by phone, ticket, chat system, email, possible a forum, and maybe if you really like them their social media. You generally do not get to see how old the person is on the other side. While age is not apparent in communications, professionalism and skill are.

I got started in webhosting at a young age, and my current age is one of those facts I don’t care to share as its bad enough by this point I am reminded of my own mortality. My start came about from someone who had found my design work online he had helped me to get more clients and eventually to start 4 hosting companies. He was about 30. However it would be our other business associates that would be the road blocks to success.

If you read my blog earlier you will know about two of my business partners. The first of which was a man (age 52) who had 5 years of technical experience, 20 years’ experience of running his own company. We will call him Bob. However at the greatest hour Bob freaked out. In a mere week we had over 5000 clients. My first business partner and I were ecstatic, especially after months of work and spending our own finances it appeared we were near reaping the fruit of our labors. Not to mention this was miles beyond our expectations. For which everyone but Bob was working on how to adapt. Instead of remaining calm and hiring more people and buying more servers, Bob decided to lock us out. It was sheer lunacy. Talks of hiring more people and buying more equipment despite growing profits had alarmed him. He had never had an influx of customers on this scale before. The first Business partner held control of the domain. Two weeks after the site launched, it died. To this day my first business partner owns the domain, it’s a sad reminder of what might have been.

My first business partner and I went on to form 4 more hosting companies after that, to this day they are still around. Years later after launched a successful company he sent me an email wondering if we had a place for him. I blocked his email.

Due to a non-disclosure agreement I can’t discuss names. But I am not restrained from telling about our second business partner/CTO and how he almost killed our second attempt at a hosting company. We will call him Bruce. Bruce was 48, (64 now) more than double my age. He had 4 years of experience of running his own private hosting company and despite his failures continues to run it to this day. He also had 7 years of hosting tech experience. On top of that he had 7 years of software development experience. Despite all those years of experience, Bruce did not have the wisdom for success. Our CEO and I (CFO) had no idea how bad he was, because he appeared to be doing his part until a month after the launch. Between poor choices of script installment, bullheaded behavior towards hiring more techs despite a huge influx of customers, and apathy when it came to any form of a business meeting it was clear he was not someone you wanted in your company. Not to mention if he had been left unchecked he would have been cramming customers like sardines.

The nail in the partnership was when Bruce claimed to be taking time off for a funeral. Funny thing is his mom sent pictures of him para-sailing to the CEO’s mother

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Ownership and investment

In short the claim is ownership equals a reason to stick around. This may be true for many hosts, however there is no true data available to make a rational grounds for holding against a host not owning their own data center or servers. After all hostgator.com uses softlayer.com (formerly theplanet.com). I have no idea if they lease or own the servers. Note: hostgator.com (a host that offers unlimited hosting) is a sponsor of Digitalfaq.com.

But while we are the subject of companies like hostgator.com that use softlayer.com’s data centers; the following hosts that appear on digitalfaq.com’s top hosting list are also with Softlayer.com.

Asmallorange.com
Hawkhost.com
Site5.com (theplanet network info)
Froghost.com
Futurehosting.com

Furthermore the following hosts that do not appear to have their own data centers:

Downtownhost.com – Delaware U.S. owner, server in Argentina
Ninjalion.com – (belongs to downtownhost.com based off whois info) Delaware U.S. Owner, server in Buenos Aires
Stream101.com – private network info
Knownhost.com – private network info
Hostv.com – Osogrande.com servers

I can’t say with 100% certainty that they don’t own their own data centers. Nor would I know if they are not if they own their own servers.

Needless to say there is one unifying factor that all hosts find a reason to stick around rather they own their servers and data centers, and that is reoccurring income.

On a side note, Hostgator.com is a sponsor of Digitalfaq.com.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Earned reputation

This is where I call bull shit, and yes I used a colorful metaphor. Reviews even with great detail may not tell the whole story. Just as all so called review sites may not be in it for large payouts.

One thing that I personally kills a review no matter how detailed as I have previously mentioned sif a domain is missing from the hosting review it is worthless. I see no data with this list of stereotypes that indicates any sites that are hosted with these “approved hosts” Domains give you a chance to look at the whois to see how old the site is and if they actually are hosted with whom they claim to be hosted with to see how long they have been hosted with the company they claim to be with. Not to mention actually looking at the site gives you some back ground into what kind of customer they may be. A just bought domain name, with a single page website can also make a review worthless. Another part to the domain is if the Whois info tells you that the hosting company owns the domain in the review (something I have caught some hosts doing).

Just as positive reviews are not an end all indicator of service; the same can be said of negative reviews. Happy customers are far less likely to write a review than an unhappy customer when it comes to hosting. A webhost is not going to get the same fandom like say Star Wars. Not to mention who is to say if detailed reviews are not being written by a host, and detailed negative reviews by competitors or customers that no one can please. Over the last few years I have found fivver.com, where surprisingly you can pay people to buy a cheap kindle book and give it 1 or more positive reviews. At the same time there are those that offer to buy your competitors book and write negative reviews. For that matter the amount of likes on Facebook, followers on twitter, or other social media that can be bought as well. I have seen 12,000 likes on Facebook for as little as $5. There are companies out there that specialize in nothing more than providing a false start, many calling themselves Reputation experts/SEO experts.

Speaking of companies that deal in providing reputation some of the companies on Digitalfaq.com’s recommendation list I have caught dealing with one of the worst hosting review sites out there, webhostingstuff.com:

Arivixe.com – the complaints I found by people dealing with them, were bad enough but the damage control was worse than the bad service. https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/hosting-reviews/review-arvixe-is-arvixe-com-bad-host%C2%A0arvixe-sucks-complaints.html
Inmostionhosting.com – to this day they still show case awards from many of these so called review sites like webhostingstuff.com and hostaz.com (belongs to the same guy who owns webhostingstuff.com – Michael Low) https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/uncategorized/are-you-considering-inmotionhosting-com-caution-read-my-review-before-buying.html
Site5.com This is the site I found that tried to change the very meaning of oversold with “It is important to remember that “unlimited” does not always indicate “oversold”, so do not let anyone tell you otherwise!” https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/webhostingstuff-com/site5-sucks.html
Siteground.com, proud owner of besthostdirectory.com and surprisingly always the number one host. https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/webhostingstuff-com/siteground.html
Hostv.com while not on webhostingstuff.com’s so called top 25, appears to belong to citerexhosting.com which did appear on that list https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/webhostingstuff-com/cirtexhosting.html based off arcive.org May 27, 2007 capture. Cirterexhosting.com was a shinnying example of flaws with webhostingstuff.com besides for being a top 25 host; it had an average of 1 out 5 stars rating over 6 months.

These hosts paid not in affiliate commissions, but bid against one another for positions in a top 25 host list on webhostingstuff.com

Digitalfaq.com has no links to any solid reviews.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Successful longevity

As a general rule most businesses are likely to fail in the first 5 years, however that does not mean that a company will stand the test of time after 5 years. In my time hosting has greatly evolved. Social Media, Unlimited, Cloud and VPS hosting was not even a concept when I first started. FrontPage used to be something we highlighted to bring customers in. Making your site compatible for a phone would have been a laughable concept. But here we are.

What Digitalfaq.com seems to neglect here is that a new company may be eager to bring in new customers. They have more at stake than an established company with a steady source of renewals. So ruling a company out because they are less than 5 years old does not make a lot of sense. At the same time reoccurring income is a great motivator for any company to keep going, and eventually get their own data center and servers. I for one was guilty of loving the reoccurring customers more than new customers. Remarkable there are hosts out there that manage to scrape by on 10 year old concepts and terrible service. Like Burst.net.

Digitalfaq.com has another area they failed to disclose, and that is not every host on their list is 5 years +. One method I have to find out how old a site is by reviewing whois info. My preferred site is: http://centralops.net/co/DomainDossier.aspx

I have found many companies in the past that will try to claim they are a certain age. Like a company called mindshark.ca. They claimed that they started in November 2006, despite their domain being registered in 2010.

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/re-review/mindshark-ca-%E2%80%93-in-re-review-part-2-proof-is-in-the-details.html

Based off the whois info I can often find out how old a company might be. There have been a few sites like iweb.com that has removed the start dates from their sites because I have pointed out their creation date was after their “start date”.

The following sites based off whois info did not exist 5 years ago.

Ninjalion.com – created August 26, 2010
Crocweb.com – created August 9, 2009

However domain creation dates do not always equal start date. I have 2000 + domains that clearly did not start when I got them, at best they have ppc page. Sites may start weeks, months, even years after the domain’s creation. Which is where another site called archive.org comes in handy. It gives you snap shots of how a site looked in the past all the way back to 1996. Using this site I found a few interesting points about the following sites.

Froghost.com – Domain creation January 6, 2004. Froghost.com’s Facebook page says they were founded in 2009, they joined Facebook January 2011, first post was March 12, 2011. Their first tweet was on March 11, 2011. However archive,org shows a standard domain registration page launch page till February 18, 2010.
Crocweb.com, while created in August 9, 2009, does not appear to have an actually hosting page till August 22, 2010.
Futurehosting.com – Domain creation July 10, 2001, shows a coming soon page till December 8, 2008.

Froghost.com and Futurehosting.com could be classified as aged domains. Domains that are sometimes purchased for the sake of selling later. But are prized for having long creation date behind them. I have about 2000 domains that I have bought over the last 15 years. All of which I had planned to start something with. About 20 of them are hosting domains, all of which are 10 years or older. Currently I am cleaning house and I put sites up for sale to bring in new design customers. You would be surprised that one of the biggest selling factors is the age of a domain. Aged domains are the reason why archive.org is a very important tool when reviewing a host or any site claiming to have years of experiences, regardless if someone recommends it or not.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: – Knowing the limits

When I first looked at this section digitalfaq.com was clearly anti-unlimited hosting. But now clearly they are not immune to the huge payout to companies like site5, Arivixe, Inmotion, and Siteground.com who I have found buying top spots with webhostuff.com (or what webhostingstuff.com likes to call ppc advertising), Details about the payouts for these companies and their affiliate programs in the next post.

Unlimited resource accounts are not for the serious site owner.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Transparency

If you think this is the point where you don’t have to read the TOS because Digitalfaq.com read it for you, think again. I cannot stress enough that you should read the terms of service with any company. What is really missing here is what to look for in the terms of service.

Since I don’t have a lot of time I am going to deal with one company I know that operates like many hosts that Digitalfaq.com considers the worst offenders. Which brings me to Siteground.com. What was it Digitalfaq.com said?

“A good host has easy-to-understand policies, rules and agreements.

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.“

For starters Siteground.com has 12 web pages in regards to terms of use. That alone makes it harder to understand the company’s policy as the SiteGround Terms of Service web page is lengthy on it’s own (and opens up in a pop up window). This web page is 21 pages long, 15,185 words. The word refund appears 35 times over 11 different sections.

In addition this is what they consider unlimited space for “Unlimited web Space applies to your use of web pages only (html, php, etc.). All other files are considered as premium storage for which our Fair Use policy shall apply..“ The phrase “fair use” appears which translates to unspecified limits. :”Fair use” appears 20 times in 4 sections. Which translates to when you become no longer profitable they can give you the boot.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Upgrade paths

One of the big problems with hosts like many that appear in so called hosting review sites is they are very limited in their offerings. There is no way Endurance International Group (EIG) will allow you to host something on the scale of Google.com or Amazon.com with one of their unlimited plans. Never mind that’s the impression they want you to have as you look over their nutritional mock up on fatcow.com where it uses words like “oodle” and “free”. The sad truth is there are many out there that don’t even know that EIG has 40 + hosts, and leaving one in angst they may go to another expecting better service (never mind this EIG host may be cheaper than the last one). Considering how companies like EIG operate, you may have picked their most expensive host, but may very well be subjected to the same restraints/service as their cheapest hosting plan. The hidden limit at which they kick you off or put a bottleneck on your account is determined by profit. All hosting is about profit (well maybe except when it comes to charities). That is not to say making money is bad, but there is a problem when you don’t know how far you can expand. But if a host tells you they are not concerned about profit, I tell you don’t walk away, run.

With companies like Rackspace.com I know if I exceed my borders I get billed for it. Which to me seems better than wondering at what point I get the boot. I have design deadlines to worry about not rather my site will be up or not. No sorry that’s not a recommendation, as I myself have not prepared or kept enough data to make that recommendation. So no affiliate links, perhaps the stray Rackspace Google ad.

In short Digitalfaq.com’s recommendations fall short of what makes a great host

I don’t fault any one for recommending a host, and getting paid to do it. On other sites that’s how I make money. Making money is not evil, nor the root of all evil. The method used to make money is a different story. Digitalfaq.com uses sterotypes. Teenagers are bad, so they would not know how to operate a server and are dumb. In which case I ask, what hosting companies are employing teenagers, or better yet kids? Hosts that own their data center and servers ” For them, failing is not an option.”. Yet that did not stop companies like Enron and Hostess. Not to mention Blockbuster is just around the corner, seriously they are shutting down all over where I live, being replaced by competitor’s vending machines. Than your supposed to go by reputation, yet some of these companies have bought and paid for it, and some even build their own review sites like siteground.com.

In the end Digitafaq.com offers nothing but hearsay and stereotypes with hosts that fall at the standards that were set. Digitalfaq.com has done nothing to prove the hosts that they recommend are worthy of your patronage, just provide a distraction and affiliate links.

Digitalfaq.com – Hypocrite – Claims of what makes a great host Part 1

March 15, 2013

Digitalfaq.com finds its way here because of an email I got from someone who did not know better but thought Digitalfaq.com was a great resource. The person who emailed me thought I might want to reference digitalfaq.com as an unbiased source. The page on Digitalfaq.com I am referring to claims to be against “affiliate splogs (spam blogs/sites)“. Going further to claim,

“These splogger sites simply list the companies that pay the best commissions, and the top site is always the one with the highest payout.“.

Digtalfaq.com has its own top lists. The idea that a snake oil salesman would warn you against other snake oil salesmen should not surprise anyone. There is no honor among thieves. Just don’t look at who is behind the curtain. It is no surprise, but I see several hosts with an affiliate program. I noticed while clicking on those hosts that I am getting affiliate cookies.

http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/web-hosting/4432-top-hosts-2013-a.html

Once again (because apparently, a few hundred times may still not be enough), I am not against making money or affiliate programs. But I am against what Digitalfaq.com is attempting to do.

I have often been called a hypocrite because I have ads on this site. How does having ads on my site make me the same as someone who gets a payout for hosting commissions? They create false claims about hosts they showcase on their top lists, giving out “awards” or unverified reviews. All for the sake of a payout. Also, the payout for review sites is not always focused on high payments. Some companies like Alreadyhosting.com, hostingsthatsuck.com, and hosting-review.com have ways of profiting off the low. Hostingsthatsuck.com promoted a host that pays out less than $5 per sign-up (zyma.com).

Google is the one picking out the ads for this site, which is not always hosting ads. I don’t endorse the ads on this site (i.e., making false claims about some company being too good to be true). I certainly do not get the payouts that a web hosting sale would make, even if it was $5. Digitalfaq.com is engaging in the hypocrisy that I have often been accused of. On the other hand, I don’t mind anyone being suspicious of me having a personal agenda. I would hope people can come away with some skepticism, take a deeper look, and entertain the idea that maybe the people I cover have their own agenda. If you’re not open to exploring the possibilities of what I am trying to disclose, read no further. Feel free to contact me if I am proven wrong.

I honestly would not have a problem with Digitalfaq.com doing their recommended hosts if they validated their recommendations with facts and disclosed that they make money if you sign up with a host they recommend. Instead, when I first reviewed it, there was no disclaimer; now, there is one at the bottom of their long-winded, data-free sales pitch: “Trust me, just buy from these guys”. I suspect digitalfaq.com has been called out by others who saw “hostname here”/affiliate/(affiliate id) when their browser was redirecting to one of digitalfaq.com’s recommended hosts.

Never mind how much Digitalfaq.com says they have been with Eurovps.com, their domain WHOis information suggests Digitalfaq.com last changed something back on November 14, 2012. Since Digitalfaq.com loves Eurovps.com so much, why do Hostgator.com and other companies get a far bigger banner? A bigger banner means a better chance of the ad being clicked on. From the ads I have been seeing, I suspect they are all affiliate programs.

Over the next few days, I will post a dissection of what Digitalfaq.com is doing, how they are like most hosting review sites, and how they differ.

Hosting-review.com – Opiemarketing.com Advertising Possibilities

January 28, 2013

Hosting-review.com is a site that has been on my back burner for some time. Since the very beginning of this site I have watched Hosting-review.com like the many others claiming to be review sites. After all their site is mentioned in the video that started the traffic for this site. It’s not hard to notice this review site as they appear every time I do a search for “hosting review” on Google, they appear in the ads at the top of the results. Hosting-reviews.com is a review site that uses Google Adsense to bring in traffic to get people to sign up for one of the top 10 hosts that appears on Hosting-review.com. When Endurance International Group (Owner of Ipage.com, Justhost.com, Bluehost.com, and Fatcow.com among 40 or more hosts) in mid-2011 started FTC compliance Hosting-review.com was among the first to apply. FTC compliance meaning that review sites had to disclose they earn money by referring people to hosts.

Before that Hosting-review.com was one of the first to have a terms of use that states “Your use of www.hosting-review.com (“Hosting-Review”) shall be entirely at your own risk. “ in addition “We do not warrant the accuracy or completeness of information contained in external sites, and the inclusion of any information, material, content, or links on Hosting-Review should not be construed as an express nor an implied endorsement of any third-party products or services.”. Somehow a top 10 list and providing such awards as “Editors’ Pick” are not endorsements by Hosting-review.com.

What would lead me to writing this post was back in August 2012 Khuram of Zyma.com contacted me to give coupons to the people who follow this blog. Which lead to a re-review of his site and no I did not provide coupon codes.

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/unlimited-hosting/zyma-same-old-tricks.html

Upon review I found that zyma.com had gotten a “Editors’ Pick 2012” award from Hosting-review.com.

Khuram was not exactly happy to see a third post about Zyma.com. But he wanted to prove to me that things had changed. One of the points of getting change was to tell me how exactly Zyma.com had appeared on Hosting-review.com. Despite giving me information how Hosting-review.com was involved, Khuram wanted me to write a business plan as opposed to addressing the points I laid out for earning redemption.

By September when I had started work on this post my work load had increased to a point that this post any many others were saved as drafts waiting for me to get some free time. While January is not exactly a free time for me I have managed to irk out a few days to try and get a few posts done as well as work on a personal site of mine. Not to mention I have a bit too much caffeine running through my system to go to sleep right now.

But two parts of that email have been in the back of mind since September 2012:

The first part was the explanation of why Zyma.com appears on Hosting-review.com:

“To answer your question about hosting-review.com. They contacted us mid 2011 and were interested in posting our website on their review website. We did not pay them nor provide them with any free hosting. They came to us and decided to post a review about us our service on their own accord.

You can even verify this by contacting the owner of the hosting-review website Dave Price. As a result of speaking to us, they decided to give us an editors pick award and also decided to join our affiliates scheme and place our website on their Editors Pick page.” ~ Khuram – Zyma.com

The second is the email that came from opiemarketing.com (a marketing company) of Hosting-review.com.

—– Sent: 19/09/2011 16:12 From: dave@opiemarketing.com——
Hi Khuram,

I think we have some possibilities for your company, and I have a few questions for you.

Are you available for a call at any of the following times to discuss?:

Wednesday Sept 21st at 2:30pm EST

Wednesday Sept 21st at 4:30pm EST

Thursday Sept 22nd at 9:30am EST

Please let me know what time works best for you and a good number to call you at.

I look forward to the discussion.

Best regards,

Dave

Hosting-review.com / Opiemarketing.com

I have to say after seeing that email I have a lot more questions than I ever thought I would have. The first of which is what other possibilities is Opiemarketing.com offering to other markets other than hosting. There is not a lot I can say about Opiemarketing.com, other than there is a link to Hosting-review.com. SEO wise they don’t have the best traffic stats, for that matter I could register a domain right now and have roughly the same amount of stats in 72 hour period of time. But hosting-review.com clearly has traffic stats that can’t be ignored. A good part of their traffic may very well be related to Google Adsense. But other than this letter from Khuram there are not a whole lot of links to both sites. One particular link I found was both Opiemarketing.com and Hosting-review.com both are hosted on HostPapa.com (yeah hosting-review.com is one of those rare review sites to host with someone in the top 10). Yet they have the same dns to a domain called OMGHP.COM, which happens to belong to the same person as Opiemarketing.com. That alone makes me confident enough to say that both Hosting-review.com belongs to Opiemarketing.com.

I am not exactly sure at what point Hosting-review.com decided to add the marketing strategy of Hostingsthatsuck.com and Alreadyhosting.com. These two sites have a top list, much like Hosting-review.com. But the general strategy is based off of getting their so called reviews in the top of search engine results. Meaning as opposed to just promoting hosts that pay out $100 plus per sign up they can also promote hosts that pay literal peanuts like Zyma.com. A simple example of what hostingsthatsucks.com does is try and get top search engine results for “*host name* sucks”, and than try to convince whom ever came in via search engine results that they did all the work on looking for negative reviews. Alreadyhosting.com tries to get in the top of “*host name* review(s)”. Both sites realized the restrictions of a so called top 10 list in that their options were limited on whom to promote. Apparently Hosting-review.com sees the same thing?

Hosting-review.com, is advertising zyma.com? Or using Zyma.com to migrate traffic to the Hosting-review.com” top 10 list”?

There is another possible reason for Hosting-review.com giving Zyma.com an award. Case in point webhostingstuff.com. Webhostingstuff.com relies on people who pay for “advertising” which somehow appear on the top list (or the whacked out version they have today). Webhostingstuff.com did not have reviews for only 25 hosts, they had thousands. Which gave them the benefit of often being at the top of a review search results any time someone looked up a host. Which leads to the whole reason Webhostingstuff.com deleted my positive feedback, they wanted people to skip signing up with my company and go with one of the hosts that paid for “advertising” that somehow appeared in the top spot. Nothing does better than a host having nothing but negative feedback to get possible customers to sign up with the top payers in advertising.

But before I explain why this may work against zyma.com. There is a reason I bring up that Zyma.com pays peanuts, because it will never appear in the top 10 list at Hosting-review.com. All you have to do is look at the payout for each site that appears on the top 10 list for Hosting-review.com:

HostPapa.com –$40 – $200 per sale
Ipage.com – EIG – $100 – $125
Hostgator.com – $100
1and1.com – $90
Justhost.com – EIG – $100
Godaddy.com – Up to $500 per sale
Yahoo.com – $40
Bluehost.com – EIG – $90
Arvixe.com – $75 – $135
Fatcow.com – EIG – $100

EIG = Hosting company belongs to Endurance International Group

All commission information but Arvixe.com came from CJ.com (Commission Junction), Arvixe.com is not a CJ.com member.

Hosting-review.com makes £8.59 ($13.57) if a Zyma.com customer signed up under the affiliate link buys nothing but a annual hosting package. It’s easy to see why Hosting-review.com is not willing to put Zyma.com on the top 10 for 40% of £1.79 per month. But Zyma.com does not have to be in the top 10 (or whatever number) with Hosting-review.com, to still be able to earn a commission from people who are trying to find out if Zyma.com is a good host or not. Just slap on a “Editors’ Pick 2012” and those that bother to click on that link/award on Zyma.com which takes them to Hosting-review.com where you can see three links to “Top 10 Lists”.

This is where you get to the business philosophy of Webhostingstuff.com with a twist.

Instead of deleting the reviews of a possible competing host that is not being show cased, you get the non-show cased host to place a reward on their site. If you’re a up and coming host, you can see the desirability of a “Editors’ Choice 2012” award.. Placing this award on the site can have the effect of rerouting traffic. Meaning losing a customer to a host on the “top 10 lists”. However in this case Zyma.com did not put the award on the front page of their site. Its located on perhaps one of the least visited pages of a site, the about page.

Hosting-review.com did not bother to vet Zyma.com.

Let’s say that the scenario I have put together is not correct. Something I will probable explore in my next post on Hosting-review.com are those hosts that don’t appear on the top 10 lists.

Maybe Hosting-review.com really feels that Zyma.com deserves a “Editors’ Choice 2012” award. Shouldn’t that mean Hosting-review.com should do some back ground research on that company? Back in 2011 and in to the early part of 2012 Zyma.com had some serious down time. The first outage seemed to be October 1 – October 14, 2011. Mere weeks after Hosting-review.com contacted Zyma.com about “possibilities”.

Never mind other review sites and other promoters ended up validating the down time around January – February 2012. Hostingsthatsuck.com validated after Zyma.com terminated their hosting account. Many promoted just for free hosting, which saw their accounts shut down at the same time. To show how happy these former promoters were they rose in revolt telling everyone to avoid Zyma.com by sharing the emails that were sent to them in regards to down time. Regardless Hosting-review.com has no customer reviews for Zyma.com.

From my own perspective it seemed based on the server names changing (panda, tiger, and cobra servers) and what I really feel was insanely low pricing I think it is safe to say that the server was probable overloaded. Currently the price is £1.79 a month (£21.48 a year/ $33.85) versus the original price of £4.95 a year.

Hosting-review.com has since the beginning of this site been in my sights, and I will continue to monitor.

Manashosting.com Spams again!!!

January 24, 2013

Manashosting.com is not going to be happy with this latest post. Regardless of what anyone at Manashosting.com may have to say about this post, spam is not legal in this country. I don’t care if Manashosting.com put a disclaimer in their email stating I am not supposed to share it. That somehow an email address they were not supposed to have and marketed to I am supposed to respect confidentiality.

By spamming I mean that Manashosting.com was soliciting to an email address that did not opted into Manashosting.com’s mailing list. I seriously have no interest in hosting with any company similar to the nature of Manashosting.com. So I have no intention of giving them my email address. Nor will I give anyone from Manashosting.com the email address for my other personal account they decided to spam. Just to make it that much easier to delete my email address out. As I half suspect they may have deleted every Yahoo.com address. So I am not going to tell them the domain that email address is under. At best I will say that it is with Microsoft. So a few more domains for Manashosting.com to remove out of their list.

If Manashost.com does not want me to do posts on their company than perhaps they should avoid spamming. No requests for removal of this post from Manashosting.com will be honored. But as previously stated they should delete all email lists, and stick strictly to double opted in address.

A short history of my interactions with Manashosting.com

As I first stated I had no interest in this company, for that matter they spammed me a few times before I decided that this blog should take on spam. After all like fake review sites, spam is a form of unethical marketing.

First Manashosting.com spammed my Yahoo. Email account – November 11, 2010

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/scams-to-avoid/manashosting.html

Not long after that someone named Anthony John contacted me for Manashosting.com. Saying that I should have clicked on their unsubscribe link in their spam, as opposed to making blog post about them spamming me. Anthony of Manashosting.com also asked for the email address of the email they had spammed me by. Since they had spammed me I saw no reason to give them my personal email address.

Amazingly after this email, the spamming stopped from Manashosting.com.

Than a second look at Manashosting.com – November 19, 2010

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/scams-to-avoid/manashosting-com-a-second-look.html

Than they decided to spam comment on this very blog – October 16, 2011

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/spammer/manashosting-com.html

Manashosting.com demands I remove my posts on their company – January 15, 2012

https://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/spammer/manashosting-com-fun-and-games-by-email.html

In short Anthony of Manashosting.com decided to point me to the whole law book from India on Internet Law. Without pointing me directly to what exactly law states I cannot post proof of their wrong doing. Never mind that Manashosting.com’s spamming violates U.S. law.

So far it seems that Manashosting.com wants me to do an annual post on their site.

Manashosting.com finds another of my email accounts – January 17, 2013

Normally I don’t use my Microsoft email all that often, I have had it almost as long as my Yahoo address. The bulk of the use of this account was mostly for Windows Live Messenger. But from time to time I use it for other reasons. I mostly use it for companies I don’t pay a lot of attention to their emails. Like Commission Junction, and other companies that like to send a lot of email. One of the companies that I bought a script from had sent me an email with some coding I needed. I could not find it in the main folder so I decided to check the spam folder, where I found the email I was looking for and Manashosting.com’s spam. I tend to think that the company I was looking for email from was marked spam because of the coding they sent me. But I find it most interesting that Microsoft decided to mark this email as spam and that they would delete it within 10 days of being sent. Which means I have no idea how long Manashosting.com has been sending me spam. Because I don’t normally check the spam folder when I do log into my Microsoft email. Generally I only check it when Trillian has a pop up with an email subject I may be interested in. I don’t believe that Trillian will notify me of any email that is marked as spam.

Manashosting.com’s latest spam

Create Unlimited Web Pages just for Re 1‏

From:	Manasahosting.com (g4genuine@in.com)
Sent:	Thu 1/17/13 12:37 PM

Warm Greetings dear customers,

Is your requirement related to Designing a website? Or do you have a requirement of SEO (search engine optimization) for your existing website? Or are you planning to have a high power Hosting Package? Whatever your need is we are here to help you to get the perfect solutions.

Website Designing:

Innovation and creativity is the name, and at Manashosting Designing we master the art of designing. It is absolutely essential for large and small businesses alike to have a web presence. That seems simple enough, but with countless new websites coming up every day, uniqueness can be primal.

Get high quality web sites designing from experts who have more than 30 years of experience in designing at world’s lowest cost.

Limited period offer 100 web pages designing just for Rs 10,000. You get world class high quality design for just Rs 100 per page.

Become a Hosting Company Alliance and make 99% profit over income. To know more click here

Dedicated server plans starting from Rs7000 per month

SEO (Search Engine Optimization):

SEO focuses on bringing your website to the top when someone searches for a product or service using a few keywords. All possible keywords related to your company need to be identified and made a part of the web content to enable ranking your company on top.

Results of a good SEO ranking results in:

Traffic
A good number of quality back links
Increase in Page Rank

Manual working on your SEO to give natural ranking to your web site:

Keyword Rank, Keyword working, Customize Keyword, High Complicated Keyword, Regional Keywords, Web Pages Optimize, Search Engine Submission, Classified adding, Blog, Forum, Article Submission, Directory Submission, SEO related Content Writing, Image Submission, Audio Submission, Video Submission, Back Links and more

All this and more starting just at Rs10000

Low cost Domain Registration: Register domains at world’s lowest price

Call 1800-258-0258

TO KNOW MORE VISIT: MANAS HOSTING (DOT) COM

We also provide low cost VPS, VDS and Dedicated servers.

Thanks and regards,

Sales Team

Toll Free: 1800-258-0258

24518 Harper Avenue

Saint Clair Shores Michigan 48080

USA

Disclaimer: The information contained in this message (including the enclosure(s) or attachment(s) if any) is confidential and may be proprietary or privileged. If you are not the intended recipient or have received it by mistake please notify the sender by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments from your system. Any dissemination, use, review, distribution, disclosure, printing or copying of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to change. Manashosting shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. Manashosting does not guarantee that the integrity or security of this communication has been maintained or that this communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interferences. Anyone communicating with Manashosting by email accepts the risks involved and their consequences. Manashosting accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.

Unsubscribe me from this list

Header information for the Manashosting,.com spam will be posted in the comments area.

From design, affiliate program, SEO, to hosting. Manashosting.com’s offering is all over the map.

Speaking of maps, what I find interesting is that address.

http://www.loopnet.com/Listing/16997272/24518-Harper-Avenue-St-Clair-Shores-MI/

Calling the number that Manashosting.com provides gets me the name of another company once I called: Target Information Management.

The network whois for Manashosting.com tells me:

Comment: Please send abuse complaints to abuse@cybercon.com

CustName: DreamWorx Hosting

Address: PO Box 806332

City: Saint Clair Shores

StateProv: MI

PostalCode: 48080

Country: US

RegDate: 2009-04-20

Updated: 2011-03-19

Interestingly enough the address for DreamWork Hosting (PO box) and the address Manashosting.com provides are 1.2 mile drive from one another.

I will be sending abuse complaints to Manashosting.com’s partners.

Cybercon.com
targetinfo.com
in.com

Once again if anyone at Manashosting.com bothers to read, no I will not remove this post.

Interserver.net – The next top host? Part 1

January 23, 2013

Interserver.net finds its way to my blog not because I found them on a review site. Instead they clearly were shopping around for review sites that will promote them. Originally I had planned to write this post on Interserver.net back in October, which sort of mutated to a full scale write up of all the hosts that had written me in 2012 asking me to write a post about them. That soon fell apart because I don’t always have an abundance of time. So in short I am going to take Interserver.net the second highest on traffic stats to ask me to advertise them. The top host in traffic stats was done last year (ixwebhosting.com). Since I don’t have a lot of time and may only get a few more posts done this month I am going to start with outlining how wrong interserver.net’s email exchange was and plan to do a review of interserver.net (terms of service, affiliate program, ect, ect). If next month is not as busy as the last few months I may come back to the topic of other hosts that thought it was a smart idea to offer to pay for a review. Those reviews will be based off traffic stats from highest to lowest.

How do I know Interserver.net was shopping around for review sites?

Because a rep at Interserver.net sent me this on September 19, 2012 and twice on September 20, 2012 when I did not respond.

“Hello,

You currently promote hosting companies via their affiliate system. We
would love for you to join ours. We are a simple and low priced
hosting company. We offer web hosting and VPS. Our prices start at $6
paid monthly not yearly or more like most hosts.

We are paying $100 per sale. Our EPC is $425.

We are part of the CJ affiliate network.

If you are not a member you can sign up at cj.com. Our merchant id is
3812192 and Interserver is the company.

If you have any feedback please respond back to me. If you do not want
to join our program please let me know why and if there is anything we
can do.

Thank you,”

Okay at best I think it is safe to assume that Mike of Interserver.net glanced over my site. Copied and paste a ready-made response to anyone he thought that might promote his company. Two words attracted him, “hosting” and “reviews”. The third word in this site’s domain was completely ignored which is “exposed”. Michael also ignored my contact form that made it clear I would post his email. So I sent a warning.

“Hello Michael,

No there are no hosting affiliate programs on this site, simply Adsense. Not to mention what you see on for ads depends on what you were looking at in search engines. Clearly you have no idea what hosting-reviews-exposed.com does. The purpose of this site is to expose unethical web host marketing. Like for example a host contacting review sites to get them to promote their company. While that review site does nothing to disclose their relationship with the hosting provider.

I suggest before emailing any other site, especially if you are under the assumption they are a review site you actually read their content before sending them an email.

Please be advised that if I find your site on any so called top 10 lists or other so called review sites I will post this email.

Regards,

Benjamin”

The last response I got from Mike of interserver.net:

“Sorry for the miss understanding. But your right 99% of all review sites are promotions for affiliate programs. Make that all review sites. Add all coupon code sites to the list. When I am looking for information about a product I am looking to purchase lets say a vacuum all the information is garbage. Google will eventually catch on to this and make review sites that are affiliate linking go away. But until then google ads is not enough marketing for a hosting company. So when you do see us on review sites with affiliate links I am accomplishing my objective.

I appreciate your time and keep up the good work.

-mike”

Let’s read between the lines, in short the rest of the industry is doing this, so interserver.net will to for as long as it is feasible. That is why interserver.net went from being on warning to being on my to do list.

Before I go into what is so wrong about this email exchange with interserver.net, about this part of the first 3 emails “Our prices start at $6 paid monthly not yearly or more like most hosts.”. First off that is not true. When I first looked they had more than monthly pricing. I have found annual pricing on interserver.net’s packages as well as monthly terms.

Then they added semi-annual, biannual and 3 year pricing.

I don’t see an issue on what terms a customer pays. I personally made it as flexible as possible and the more a customer paid up front the cheaper per month their account was. The limits of how much time a customer paid were pretty much dictated by my merchant. But to be honest I preferred they paid month to month as to avoid lose income from the discount. Some people prefer to pay more than a month, for reasons not always in relation to the discount. The less billing options you have the less likely someone is going to want to sign up.

As for this nonsense about Google catching on is also just that nonsense. Google can build the proverbial better mouse trap, but the problem is those proverbial mice evolve. Truth be told those proverbial mice seem to evolve faster than Google even thinks about adapting. Over 5 years I have seen auto blogs lose no traction in search engine relevance. Blogs that are ran purely off spun content (ones that would make the people who love to check the grammar on my site go nuts (sorry my typing is not that great on my iPad/iPhone)). When Google attempts to adapt those adaptions are not always well thought out. Like there October implementation that hurt traffic for domains like hosting-reviews-exposed.com because of the dash(es) in the domain. Relevance could very well be the undoing on Google.

The second thing that is stupid about Michael of Interserver.net thoughts on Google is that Google would remove sites with affiliate programs out of search engine results. The only sites that I have made that do not have affiliate programs in them are generally religious and political sites. Not to mention sites that sells their own products, but sometimes they also have ads up for products that complement their own offering. Most sites that I build are made for the purpose of advertising and/or using affiliate programs.

Commission Junction (cj.com) has over 1000 companies that use them to get affiliates (interserver.net among them). Which leads to all of those affiliates with legitimate content. Legitimate content that people search for on Google. Don’t forget that Google has its own advertising program called Adsense. Which you can find Affiliates of CJ.com and other programs vying for desirable keywords. Which leads to the question: how much in advertising fees would Google lose if they kept sites with affiliate programs off their search engine?

Which begs the question how will Interserver.net get customers if search engines don’t show case sites with affiliate programs? After all I Interserver.net can’t find what key words would be ideal to target for a company trying to get in the same ranks as hostgator.com and godaddy.com.

Also the other reason that Michael of Interserver.net does not know what he is talking about; Google has their own affiliate Network. It’s called Google Affiliate Network.

How to write a negative review

December 8, 2012

Since September I have not had a lot of time to maintain this site, let alone write new content. One of the few saving graces for keeping the traffic going on this site was comments. Problem is I deleted over 90% of the negative comments. Keep in mind the more comments this site gets the better. But I am past the point where it’s acceptable to have someone post a short one liner about a host sucking. Yes I approved every single positive comment, so long as it’s on the post about the host. But most of them give me material for a counter response. What would be better for my traffic ranking are detailed and relevant comments.

If you want to see your negative review appear on my site here are my recommendations:

1. Is it really worth writing a review on?

Are you writing a negative review because you have a burning need to get revenge, or do you want to inform the public about issues with a company? Frankly revenge is time consuming, and rarely ever productive. Not to mention unlike other sites, if I feel that a negative review has no merit and is simply written by someone with an axe to grind I will mark it as spam. So if you are not willing to write a meaningful review of a company don’t bother posting on hosting-reviews-exposed.com,

Examples of what justifies a negative review:

Where you do not get what was offered.
Uptime that is below the guarantee.
Mistreatment from a hosting companies employees.
Slow server response times
Longer than 48 hours to get a response on simple issues.
Lack of communication during outages.
Fees not covered in the terms of service.
Billing after a cancelation
Over billing
Shut down without reason or evidence
Account not set up within 24 hours of receiving a payment from you.

2. Keep it professional

Nothing kills creditability like coming across as someone with an axe to grind. Here is what to avoid:

Avoid profanity.
Avoid all caps (This is a personal pet peeve of mine).
Try to maintain some level of correct grammar.
Avoid being aggressive.
Avoid the use of insults.
Avoid words like “lawsuit”, “charge back”, and “scam”.

Reasons for avoiding those words:

First – If you’re still with the host, don’t count on them keeping your site up. Very rarely do I see a terms of service that does not say they will terminate your site for defamation.

Second – If you are on one of those so called unlimited plans that costs less than $5 a month, you are not likely to get thousands, tens of thousands or more. If you were only willing to pay less than $5 a month or less than $100 a year for hosting how likely are you to put down a $1,000.00 or more just to get the ball rolling on a lawsuit?

Third – Based off my own experience lawsuits in the hosting industry are probable rare. But one thing I am sure any host has encountered and that is a charge back. Business wise it is the foulest word that one can utter. Once you decide to go public with a threat or acknowledge that you did a chargeback any hope of working with that company is gone for good.

A note on Chargebacks.: As a former owner of a few hosting companies, the word chargeback is enough to make me grind my teeth still. Never mind I have not had to deal with a merchant in almost three years. These days most of my funds are sent by wire. I had spent hours on each chargeback for anything that would help to get the money back. Don’t think that you get the finale say when it comes to getting your money back. I have won 1/3^rd of the chargebacks back. Which I believe was due to the person on the other end performing one too many chargebacks. One such idiot had done two chargebacks on my company and that was what sealed the deal on my win. The worst of it was his first charge was for less than $20, the second charge was for over $1000.00.

Chargebacks are a last resort, and should only be used when all other measures are exhausted. Even than I would not recommend it if the charge is small, for you don’t want this charge to work against you when you really need to do a charge back.

3. Details

A review that is one line or a few sentences about a host sucking (or being good) are not going to cut it.

The first detail that should be given is the main domain for an account.

The second is a name (first names alone are ok).

Honestly there is not much point to anonymous reviews. Without these details it easy for a host to dismiss and not even bothering at all with dealing with your complaint. In the case of positive reviews its fodder for a rebuttal. The refusal to give the details only adds to the fun.

Other details that should follow:

Copies of emails
Billing History
Chats
Copies of support tickets
Screen shots.

The more details about your problem (or perhaps success) with a host the better.

4. Your first response may not be your last response

All too often someone writes a comment positive or negative and I have questions. Maybe the host has a question(s) for the customer. Sometimes the review is just a start. If a host comes forward to work with you, give them a chance. Seriously any host that is willing to try and work things out and not make you out to be a villain is worth a try. Honestly I think the point of writing a negative review should be bring forward positive change. At the same time it does not in the end work in a hosts favor if they decide to not try.

Hosting-reviews-exposed.com is not a place to get your company profiled

December 7, 2012

The last few months have been a hectic nonstop onslaught of work. As the end of the year comes around my work load starts to lessen, and I find myself looking for content to get me back into the swing of things with hosting-reviews-exposed.com. Inspiration it appears is not far away. All I have to do is look at the email for this site to see tons of requests from companies asking to be profiled, asking for me to write a hosting review. Hosting review is not what I would use to label this site. Sure it is in the title, but so is the word” exposed”. For some reason the third word in this site’s domain is over looked by not just those looking for a hosting provider, but those who will do anything regardless of ethics to make a buck.

Little has been done by me to actually show anything in the way of use. What few hosts I have used and written a hosting review on are less than stellar. Godaddy.com was at best luke warm, and up till the point Bob Parson decided to shoot an elephant I had an affiliate link up. Clearly due to a lack of affiliate commissions between the start of that post to the time Mr. Parson mistakenly thought he could turn a vacation into charity proved I had convinced no one to buy. After all I did not make them look like a long term solution, and probable only best at handling a single page site.

Then there is my hosting review on Mediatemple. Despite two attempts to them to respond to my issues I have yet to get a reply on either post, which makes me think perhaps maybe I will not go back if they are not willing to address issues with their company.

Then there are hosts like Burst.net and Layeredtech.com (formerly Fastservers.net (formally powersurge)), I can only hope that people would take my own problems as a clear reason to avoid those hosts. There are also the hosts that I did not write about like OChosting, serverbeach, dialtone and virtualis all of which have been bought up. Since I had not been with them after they were bought up I did not see a reason to post a hosting review on any of those companies. They may be worse they may be better.

For that matter I had been a customer of another company that merged into ThePlanet. I could give you reasons not to try them under their new ownership Softlayer such as they host webhostingstuff.com. But my relationship with them had little dealings, especially since they have made it a point to stop colocation. My time with ThePlanet and their previous incarnation were less than stellar. The first time I ordered with them I waited 7 days and got nothing, contacted them after seeing I had been billed and had been bullied by a sales rep that insisted I never ordered. Despite in the end proving I was right, the jackass on the other end made it a point to call me and hang up on me at every opportunity. I thought after ThePlanet took over perhaps that would change, clearly the sales rep was gone. But ordering had been a hassle still. I admit they were pretty good at keeping my accounts active, but they were not good at starting accounts. Not to mention there was the matter of a $7,800 they over billed my company, that went unnoticed till we brought on a new accountant. They wanted me to fax them a copy of the billing notices which our accountant got off of their system. It took a whole month before they gave in and did a refund without any apology. Keep in mind this is a company that does not give a lot of slack when it came to paying a bill which I found out after I requested sometime after we had a card that had been compromised. Not the first of the billing issues I had with their company. Not to mention like Mediatemple.net Theplanet has no interest in customers during the holiday season. After two bad mergers and a lack of colocation I see no reason to see if Softlayer was worth staying around with.

At this point perhaps the only company I am willing to give a nod to is Rackspace. Details on that may come at the start of next year. But to be honest I don’t feel all that comfortable to recommending any host on this site.

The original focus of this site has never really been to write hosting reviews. It has been to focus on the hosting review industry. I would like to think that this site is more of a warning.

In short I am writing this to be lazy when responding to hosts when they say something like:

“Hi. This is my second time sending you an email on how we can get our business included on your listing. I understand that you might have a lot of inquiries coming but I will greatly appreciate if you will
answer this email. We would like to add our business Budget VM on your VPS Hosting List. What is the procedure? and what about the price?”

Thanks.” – Budgetvm.com

“We are writing because we are interested to advertise on your website, related to web hosting review niche hosting-reviews-exposed.com. “ – Dailyrazor.com

“You currently promote hosting companies via their affiliate system. We would love for you to join ours.” – Interserver.net

“we would like to tell you our hosting company Cms Best Hosting” – cmsbesthosting.com

Clearly they want me to do a positive hosting review. As some of them indicate either paying me per review or asking me to join their affiliate program. So in short no one bothered to read what my site is about.

Back in August Ixwebhosting.com was unhappy because they thought I did not have a review about their company. Sure they could have looked to see if their host was on my site in the search box up in the top right hand corner, or even used a search engine by typing in their site and hosting-reviews-exposed.com. Since they did not answer my questions I can only assume that they came here because they thought this was a hosting review site. Being what I would call the ashes of featured price hosting, I could not resist doing a second post.

I realize that most of the review sites out there use gimmicks similar to the theme of this site. Like hostingsthatsuck.com their gig is to dominate “*host name* sucks”, and feed a spill about said company not sucking. They claim there are not that many valid search engine results. Which works so long as the reader looks no further.

Then there is this new trend of review sites that are popping up lately where they state something about the industry being rigged, but you should trust them. They provide a lose list of what to look for in a flawed industry. I think the funniest one was:

Check if there are affiliate programs offered with the service you are interested in. Judging by how much they offer, and how it is offered. Keep in mind, that this is a sliding scale and marketers always barter for better rates in return for better reviews.

So I did as they said, and guess what, the very first list on their top list, you could make $75 – 150.

Just to be clear I am not asking people to trust me, but look for themselves. I point to where I find details. Did the company say they were 10 years old? Well than let’s have a look at their domain whois, and after that lets look at http://wayback.archive.org. Did a company advertise they offer a 90 day guarantee, but I read the terms of service that states you had to sign up for a year or more. For that I am going to point people to that part in the terms of service where the loop hole was. Don’t take my word for it, and actually look for yourself.

I would like to think I do more than they do, more than just spew out specifications of a company’s packages. Nor give some ramble about how they are the best at, or such and such companies’ focuses on “fill in the blank”. The point of this site is not to help people find a host, it is to see that review sites don’t always have the consumer’s interests in mind. Generally they are paid by hosting provider, most often by affiliate commissions. In short buyer beware, a little doubt is a good thing.

So that we are clear this really isn’t a site about where to find the best host. Its about of all things a review of hosts who employee hosting reviews.

Over the next few weeks I plan on covering the issues on these sites looking for review sites to endorse them outlining what exactly it is I am looking for.

123...25 Page 2 of 25