In November 2010 I found 4 hosts I have not reviewed before on webhostingstuff.com. The first two hosts I found had me wondering if webhostingstuff was so desperate to get new hosts that they are willing to allow storage sites. Further review showed that these were indeed hosts but hosting companies. I suspect that only three of these new hosts are paying for the WHS “advertising”. Webhostingstuff.com is still blocking me after only a few clicks.
Webhostingstuff.com November 2010 pre-review video
First new host on Webhostingstuff.com’s top 25 list is Hostinglocker.com at number 11
hostinglocker.com – Creation is all that is needed to be a top host
Per usual I looked at the whois of the domain for this host. I have to say I was surprised to find that this host was not even a month old when I took a snap shot of webhostingstuff.com’s top 25. I am all for giving new hosts a shot. But it should take awhile for host to get some level of creditability right? They also had a testimonials which I have to say is a little surprising considering that one of them was Sony.
It seems the way they get around the whole less then a month old is this statement “HostingLocker – established in 2001 as parent company, iNetdog. ”
I have to say that I don’t care for the whole argument that just because they have another company that becomes the start date regardless if its a hosting company or not. The date a hosting company starts is the day it goes live, and by live I don’t mean the creation of the domain. iNetdog is almost 10 years old. Perhaps you might be thinking oh they host Sony’s site on that companies servers. iNetdog is a Godaddy wildwest reseller, given the speed of support and servers I doubt that Sony would ever use a Godaddy account.
Second new host on Webhostingstuff.com’s top 25 list is Aquarius Storage at number 12
Aquariusstorage.com – Will they share your information with a 3rd party?
Another site that seems like it should be a place to store files, and not hosting. But clearly it is a hosting service. Unlike the previous host they are actually 2 years old, meaning they have some time under their belt.
But what I found intresting
Use of Non-Personally Identifiable Information
We may share aggregate statistical data about our customers with third parties, such as advertisers or suppliers. This aggregate statistical data will not identify you personally.
Also as of last month despite having one 5 star review thats almost 2 years old, their customer seems to have chosen to migrate last month.
Third new host on Webhostingstuff.com’s top 25 list is Siteground at number 13
Siteground.com – Will they surprise bill you?
This is perhaps the first time in 2010 that a high level site appear on webhostingstuff.com. But I have to wonder why. At this time I suspect the only reason hostgator.com appears in the top 10 is because webhostingstuff.com has an affiliate link set up. But siteground does not have a huge pay out, and in my opnion has a fair payout. So I have to wonder why they appear in the top 25.
But there not exactly a innocent company. One thing I find is complaints about the billing. With their holiday special over 6 months if you choose all 5 so called “freebies” you will be billed $262.20 with 4 billings over the coarse of 6 months. After the first year you will be billed $344.20 4 times over the coarse of 6 months after the first year. The sales operative told me that they send notices to remind you before you are billed.
I also have to wonder if the owner of besthostdirectory.com is owned by siteground since it has whois privacy protection, keeps siteground in the first position, and is hosted with siteground.com
Forth new host on Webhostingstuff.com’s top 25 list is Wooservers at number 19
Wooservers.com – A BurstNET reseller
On the surface the only thing that caught my attention was that the whois said that this site was a year old, and for some reason they had 7 positive reviews. Further review of those reviews had me skepitcal, as none of them pointed to wooservers dns. But three of them pointed one network that wooservers was on that raises all kinds of red flags. That would be a company called BurstNET. I can not stress enough that if something involves BurstNET it should be avoided. When it comes to BurstNET you can count on outages, equipment failure, and untimely support or lack there of.