Why should you put a limit on the number of FTP and POP3 email accounts you offer. Why not just give them unlimited with every package? What difference does it make?

the use of email and FTP facilities uses bandwidth which you obviously need to keep tight control of as a host - if somebody regularly updates their site with many large files, they would use a lot more bandwidth than just that which is used by visitors to their site.

also, by placing such limits on some hosting packages, its another incentive for prospective customers to opt for a more expensive package ;)

Okay so lets say someone has 200POP3 email accounts going. Yes they are taking up bandwidth but aren't they using up the bandwidth set limit on the account?

yes, but it could get eaten up quicker, so by setting limits, it helps the client stop their bandwidth being eaten up as quickly. there are many others on this forum with much much more experience than me, i'm sure they could give a better explanation than me :)

like i said in my first post, its also a way to differentiate between hosting packages, and provide an incentive for clients to choose a higher package.

Okay so lets say someone has 200POP3 email accounts going. Yes they are taking up bandwidth but aren't they using up the bandwidth set limit on the account? It's part of the overselling formula. Transfer limits are set with the assumption that most customers won't reach them. Steps such as limiting the number of email accounts are barriers to reaching those limits, making overselling a little bit safer.

Originally posted by netsolutions
Okay so lets say someone has 200POP3 email accounts going. Yes they are taking up bandwidth but aren't they using up the bandwidth set limit on the account?

We offer unlimited FTP and Email accounts on some of our plans - the total amount of data transfer the client purchases for the month includes http://, FTP and Email data transfer. Fairest way to do it, IMO.

Yeah, we offer unlimited FTP and e-mails. Don't seem to have a problem. We offer quite a bit of bandwidth and don't use up a whole lot. Of course we have a ton to use since we have our servers from RackShack (300GB/month)

The only way I can think of to offer "unlimited email" is to include some heavy duty restrictions in the terms of service to go with it --- Does HOTMAIL ring a bell to anyone?

As far as "unlimited FTP" you may want to check your FTP software license to see how many connections are permitted at any one time. They all have limits and the last thing you need is an over zealous site owner taking up all of your FTP connections therefore not allowing another site owner to login. This is another case of what's possible and what isn't. Your server will melt if too many try to login at once and your software wont let that many do it. So to be fair to your paying customers always ensure they have access to their accounts by not allowing an unfair customer to lock them out.

I also agree with just about everything mentioned above concerning incentives and managed resource usage...

inoverse mentions 300GB/month being "a lot of bandwidth" and for us I couldn't imagine only using that much...it's been a long time since a T-1 would cut it ... be prepared to grow ... if that's your intention. When you do grow be prepared to get a rude awakening as to why limits are important....

Heh I remember when we had 6 T-1s to work with and we thought we had too much bandwidth...there was no way it would all get used... at the time we offered *gasp* unlimited bandwidth *gasp* just like everyone else (this was in a land far far away during a time long long ago) .. at any rate..because we offered a great service... we got handed a harsh lesson. A couple of DS-3s later we certainly understand the need for managed resources and I do believe our clients appreciate it as it means their sites are functioning properly w/o near as much concern for "out of control neighbors" sharing the servers with them.

<EDIT>
RE: The FTP part -- I probably should have said "configuration" rather than software license. As it does depend on what you are using and how you set it up... and it is wise to set these limits to something realistic....

It's all a matter of how you slice the pie and I wouldn't imagine you want most of the pie going to FTP connections over other important functions... Under normal usage it shouldn't but if you have an out-of-control user on the servers *gulp*
</edit>

Also in a sales and "profit" view of things would you rather have someone buying package 1) for 19.99 with unlimited stuff or stagger the amounts so clients are more likely to upgrade?

Upsell! Upsell! Upsell!!

word of the day ;)

-- Brad

Well, for us 300GB is way more than enough. In 4 days we are getting a second server so we will have a total of 600GB bandwidth. We are only using about 30GB of bandwidth per month on the first server and that server is filled. I know this really didn't have anything to do with the main topic of this post but I thought I'd just throw that in.

Thanks Deb

What you have said was very true. I will look out for those. You seem very wise and experienced in this era. Good to have you around!

It's also impossible to do unlimited pop since pop email's use the quota of the account. If your quota is 10 MB, you obviously cannot have 500 pop accounts. You can say each pop account will roughly use 500 KB at any given time.

Originally posted by Deb
... at the time we offered *gasp* unlimited bandwidth *gasp* just like everyone else (this was in a land far far away during a time long long ago) ..

Say it ain't so... heh. A bit of futurequest trivia I didn't know. I almost signed up for Futurequest years ago.

A bit of futurequest trivia I didn't know. LOL I'm sure there's quite a bit of FutureQuest over the years that people have forgotten about or missed along the way but when it comes to "lessons learned" we're full of them ;)

Our "unlimited days" didn't last long. FutureQuest had (and has) a "no small print" foundation so with our "Unlimited Bandwidth" we failed to include any hidden restrictions. That was one of the hardest lessons we had to deal with... and it hurt .. hurt bad. I think that's why I feel so strongly about the conversations about "starting off by giving away the farm and then changing prices/plans later" as I know the trials that come with having to change things mid-stream and they are not easy to survive...