No matter how hard I try, I just cannot find a company that can come anywhere near the the $99 300gb transfer/month RAQ's that RackShack offer. Just how do they do it?

In theory it's because they're an ISP and the bandwidth they're using for hosting is essentially surplus. The idea works like this:

Any big ISP (or web host for that matter) buys their connectivity in terms of bits per second. That is they set up a connection between their shop and their upstream provider that can handle a certain number of bits per second. That bandwidth is bi-directional - it can send just as fast up to the upstream as it can down to the ISP customer/web server.

Now most of the ISP's traffic is down from the net. That is ISP users get more bits from the net than they send. This means an ISP's usage of their available bandwidth is asymetrical. A web host's traffic is also asymetrical but in the other direction. A web server typically sends more bits than it receives. So Rackshack/EV1 has all this excess capacity for sending bits that's going unused and is already paid for. Therefore they can setup a bunch of web servers and give away huge amounts of bandwidth for really low prices.

That's all fine in theory and maybe it works for a while. They'll need to maintain the right balance between ISP customers and web hosts to keep the traffic balanced in both directions. Personally I have this "if it looks too good be true" warning going off but they seem to be doing fine so far.

And probably massive overselling. I wonder how many customers even come near 100 GB per month, not to mention 300 GB.

Well it's obvious they oversell, I don't know a host that doesn't...

far as why they offer so much I sorta remember reading a post by headsurfer (the rackshack guy) that one of the reasons they offer so much is because they know it's rare to see anyone use 100 but they didn't like to have to charge people for when they go over 100 so they just upped to 300...

Actually any reputable host does not oversell. We for instance have a SLA where we always have 2x as much bandwidth just sitting around as our users pay for. Overselling, is simply bad business, you wont ever see the big boys (tier 1) doing it, theres a reason why.

Overselling, is simply bad business, you wont ever see the big boys (tier 1) doing it, theres a reason why.

I think this is more due to the fact the big boys can't fill up their big boy NOC's. However, Level (3) is Tier 1 and notorious for oversubscribing.

I think the RS issue is simply based of the fact they bought 700 RAQ servers and need to sell before they are worthless. RAQs depreciate quickly. You need to unload them somehow. Also, if you do a search on this, you will see a long discussion about this already. (Sorry, I couldn't find it. :bawling: )

Either way you look at it overselling is bad business, and there is no justification for it. Level3 has no overselling issues, they have a huge built out network, and continue to expand to accomodate new customers.

What I am so baffled by is hardware. Those little blue machines do cost money, and the monthly fee doesnt even cover the full purchase price of one. Everything with them the bandwidth.. the servers.. all seems not profitable.

Every ISP oversells. You can oversell as long as you do not saturate your bandwidth.


Edit: Every ISP except Tier 1 (UUnet...)

Man you people dont listen again, NOT every ISP oversells, almost non of the tier 1 isps oversell, WE dont oversell, any large repuatable company doesnt oversell. Bad business practice to sell more of anything then you have regardless of what it is.

I agree, for instance you dont buy 2 subs at subway and pay for both but only get one, cause they didnt expect you to eat the other one.. That didnt go far, but its true overselling is bad!

I have a dedicated in Rack Shack. I'm getting POOR transfer rates. I doubt I'll be able to use 300 gig as posted.

my point is proven

Originally posted by TheRealDeal
I have a dedicated in Rack Shack. I'm getting POOR transfer rates. I doubt I'll be able to use 300 gig as posted.

There's a whole thread about transfer speeds on their support forums. It seems that some people have been having problems lately. I have noticed that they are using Cogent for a lot of their outgoing traffic (you can tell from the MRTG graphs they have on their site). I wonder if that has anything to do with their problems (which appeared relatively recently, and the Cogent line is relatively new).
Personally I get good transfer speeds from machines at RackShack. Usually over 100Kb/sec from both home and work.

-Joe

I'm not so sure about even the bigger boys not overselling. I don't think they have the capacity for all of the lines they sell if they were all used fully at the same time. I can't speak from any real experience, just that I rather doubt it. Also it seems at some point, overselling doesn't apply, as what is the actual 'cost' of an OC3? I mean, laying nationwide fiber isn't cheap, and no matter what you aren't paying near what it would cost for your part I'm sure. Anywhooo, I'm talking out my buttocks, but I'm fairly certain most of it applies.

Hotels, airlines (errr.. well maybe it isn't as much of a problem now), etc., all oversell and most often it works and sometimes it screws the hell out of someone, but it helps to keep costs down. Adult hosting prices are a good example of what you'd be paying if hosts didn't oversell.

Chicken the providers we use have in the sla they give to us that if at anytime their average usage breaches 50% of their capacity then they add additional bandwidth, fiber, whatever.... THis in effect keeps them from overselling.

Im not saying people dont oversell, of course theres alot of companys who do. What i am saying is that in my opinion it is bad business, i would never do it to my customers.

Again i cant speak for every single company, but I do know for a fact that every carrier we use does not oversell intentionally. We dont go with providers whos sla does not confront this point, as again overselling in my opinion is bad business. You should never sell something you dont have.

Originally posted by cbaker17
the providers we use have in the sla they give to us that if at anytime their average usage breaches 50% of their capacity then they add additional bandwidth, fiber, whatever.... THis in effect keeps them from overselling.


That is proof that they do oversell. If they had the capacity for all of their customers to run their lines 100% saturated (or even 90% for that matter) they would never need to add additional bandwidth. What you are saying is what most hosting companies do, they allow for more transfer than they have, then if people start using it they will add more bandwidth as needed.

Originally posted by jw



That is proof that they do oversell. If they had the capacity for all of their customers to run their lines 100% saturated (or even 90% for that matter) they would never need to add additional bandwidth. What you are saying is what most hosting companies do, they allow for more transfer than they have, then if people start using it they will add more bandwidth as needed.

Good point. I like it a lot when people understand what they read :pimp:

I just love how Mr. Baker goes after Rackshack and EV1. It simply means that we are having a negative impact on his business.

It's not anything that we are not used to seeing. I could name several dedicated hosts that have trashed our service. Their all in the same place now, with the same view of the leader. You know what they say..... if you;re not the lead dog, the view never changes!!!!!!!!!!

Be careful of anyone doing business based upon trashing another's business. That, my friends, is not good business.

And this will be all I have to say on this matter.

Robert Marsh
Head Surfer Rackshack.net

Umm no i said, if you read it, that if at any time they come even close to 50% capacity they upgrade, if they are always upgrading before they get to 50% capacity they are not overselling. Now if every single one of their tier 1 customers used 10% - 40% then yes i suppose they could oversell without ever upgrading, but tier 1 providers arent cheap, isps do not normally buy more than they are going to need in most cases.

What im trying to get across here in its simplest form is that, when you oversell, someday it will bite you in the butt because, when you oversell you have a very low reoccuring revenue and a very high customer base. Now to begin with yes youll be fine overselling but eventually it will bite you in the ass, because someday the percentage of customers who use alot of bandwidth is going to catch up with how much bandwidth you have available, and when you have low reoccuring revenue from selling below cost, well then you dont have money at the point to upgrade.

I think everyone agrees that its people who request for dirt cheap prices are the reason some hosts oversell. And when these customers who want dirt cheap pricing go with a host who oversells and get poor service and transfer rates eventually, well they really dont have any right to complain.

Theres def. a market for hosts to oversell and hosts can make money and stay in business and oversell. But i think youll agree that the less you oversell the better it is for your customers.

And really a hosts sole business objective should be WHATS best for for his/her customer....

rob,

Ive never trashed your business sir, in fact ive recommended several people who wanted dirt cheap hosting your way. Your in a seperate market then us. If your offending with me commenting on yours and others business models then thats simply too bad. But i certainly have never attacked your company. If you have a issue with me or my company feel free to contact me at charles@webworkscorp.com ill be more then happy to disguss it otherwise please do not go off on a completly off the wall rant.

Sorry

Headsurfer I will have to go against you here. I dont think you are directly hurting my business actually you have helped because of the lack there off. I have had at least about 50 accounts in the last month that have come from your services that said they were just fed up and understood the philosphy off you get what you pay for.

Most of the small business dont want cogent bandwidth or problems with speed and what not. I think a simple fact is this.. Bandwidth at rackshack is oversold to the highest degree. Other then cogent Tier 1 providers dont sell bandwidth as cheap as you do. I also dont consider Rackshack a leader in the industry.

A company that sells dirt cheap services and no support is not a leader.

You keep doing what your doing, and my business will grow even faster, so keep at it

Joe

Headsurfer, your post doesn't seem to professional..

I don't think cbaker mean't any harm.

Regards,
HostEXP

hey headsurfer.....


we need to talk, its very important....


Email me with a direct email address or pm me or give me a phone number....its about your new packages

Jim

Some quick math regarding RackShack.

You can go on their site and check out how much they "oversell". The connections are not saturated.

Right now, they have about 1500Mbps of bandwidth. They are maxing out at around 350Mbps of traffic.

That leaves about 1150Mbps of bandwidth "just sitting around". I think thats a little more than 2X of used bandwidth :)

I know someone spoke about slow speeds lately, and that seemed to prove a point to someone. But RS has a lot of customers, and one slow box isn't good, but it's not the end of the world, and it proves no point whatsoever. There's lots of reasons for a slow connection, and I don't think you can jump to any conclusions about their network. I can think of many reasons for a slow box, other than network speeds.

I have 2 raqs with them, and I get excellent speeds on both, so does that prove any points?

By the way, I use abut 150GB on one, and about 3GB on the other. Am I getting ripped off somehow? I think I'm getting an excellent deal.

I probably sound like a cheerleader for RS. I'm just happy my serach for a reliable host was quick and ended with RackShack.

Be careful of anyone doing business based upon trashing another's business. That, my friends, is not good business.

There are a few people here who should learn this. Anyone who promotes the bashing of other host has no clue about business.

More power to you Robert. You show us a little man can make waves.

Not sure who was bashing RS, and whether those graphs are acurate on their site is entirely debateable. But i dont believe ive ever said anything about rackshack being slow. Ive sent some people rackshacks way because i simply wont sell bandwidth for below cost. If rackshack wants to so be it.

THis is all i have to say on the issue, umbillycord, im sure will ahve something else to say to try to start another fight, i have yet to see a constructive post from him.... feel free to rant and rave alone in your thread, should you wish to talk in a constructive manner you know how to contact me.

Whats wrong with budgeting calculated averages of use rather than calculating on total consumption by everyone. It is a very viable business practice because you know for a fact that at any give time, nobody will ever use 100% at the same time....it will never happen. There will be those that use more or less, no matter what you are dealing with, bandwidth or what have you.

It is going to fluctuate and as long as you budget for a % over the average to cover times of high use you are ok. Also you have to consider growth, as you grow the average is going to slowly move up as more people are using the service.

Budgeting is very calculated and is done in every industry, a good budgeter will realize what will most likely be used and what will not. (This of course does not apply to governmental budgeting as they use everything no matter what)

Charles, I didn't say you posted that RackShack is slow. Someone else posted about slow speeds at RackShack and you said "my point is proven".

Maybe I missed your point.

I thought your point is that RackShack is disreputable and their bandwidth is oversold. If there was a different point, please share.

As for their bandwidth graphs being "debatable", are you talking about some anamolies in the MRTG code, or are you suggesting that they are providing false statistics?

THis is all i have to say on the issue, umbillycord, im sure will ahve something else to say to try to start another fight, i have yet to see a constructive post from him.... feel free to rant and rave alone in your thread, should you wish to talk in a constructive manner you know how to contact me.

Last time I contacted you in a constructive manner was our last posting together, you had no replies. Remember? Remember when you were bashing Host2Own/Carinet? I guess now it is Rack Shack.

You dig yourself in holes <edit>. Also, read this thread, you contradict yourself over and over. jw summed it up.

Budgeting is very calculated and is done in every industry, a good budgeter will realize what will most likely be used and what will not. (This of course does not apply to governmental budgeting as they use everything no matter what)

Absolutely correct. Including the Tier 1's. Any *businessperson* knows this.

<<MOD NOTE>>
Grade school namecalling will not be permitted. Disagree with the views of the person, no problem.
<</MOD NOTE>>

What a unprofessional business person you are umbillycord. Feel free to call you all the names you want, makes you only look bad, i ceased discussing anything with you in this thread and the last thread because you cant discuss things in a adult manner....

If you feel you wish too discuss things in a adult manner id be more then happy to talk to you over the phone or email, but i can tell you must be a kid, who hides behind a screen.

Please grow up for the sake of your business....

haha... jeez...

<<MOD NOTE: Name has been edited, sorry.>>

What a unprofessional business person you are umbillycord. Feel free to call you all the names you want, makes you only look bad, i ceased discussing anything with you in this thread and the last thread because you cant discuss things in a adult manner....

You are so funny. No, the reason you didn't answer is because all your BS doesn't phase me. I see through it. Wasn't it you who posted this in this thread? -

Man you people dont listen again

Sorry, some people listen, they just know it's BS. Good night Charles. My mom has called me to bed so she can tuck me in. :D

BillyCord, no offence but WHT would never be WHT without you :)

Originally posted by UmBillyCord


Last time I contacted you in a constructive manner was our last posting together, you had no replies. Remember? Remember when you were bashing Host2Own/Carinet? I guess now it is Rack Shack.

You dig yourself in holes <edit>. Also, read this thread, you contradict yourself over and over. jw summed it up.



Absolutely correct. Including the Tier 1's. Any *businessperson* knows this.

Every phone company oversells.
Is every phone company doing bad business?
It all depends on how you are doing it and how carefull and honest you are...

I'm with chicken and jw. If they would already have the amount of bandwidth that they're offering to everyone if everyone was using 100% of their available bandwidth, then there would be no need for adjustments, ever.

Anyway, I wouldn't consider that overselling.

I would consider it overselling if you knew that you didn't have enough bandwidth to meet what was required, but kept selling more accounts anyway.

I wonder if credit card companies have enough money so that each customer can meet their limit?

And just to get back to the connectivity and support points regarding Rackshack I can mention I have a server with both DT Web Works and Rackshack. The connection with both servers are great and so is the support.

I do keep my important sites and hosted people on my server with DT Web Works but that might just be because it's only a Raq server I have with Rackshack.

So in my opinion both companies are great. It's just a bit sad when the hosts start arguments like in this thread.

Originally posted by cbaker17
Actually any reputable host does not oversell. We for instance have a SLA where we always have 2x as much bandwidth just sitting around as our users pay for. Overselling, is simply bad business, you wont ever see the big boys (tier 1) doing it, theres a reason why.

Charles, although you didn't directly say Rackshack isn't a company you should go with, I think Robert was referring to the insinuation that they are not a reputable host, while you are because... blah blah blah, which goes a bit beyond commenting on their business model.

I understand what you mean (and your response to my post, thank you), though I think you started off explaining your position on the matter errrrr... (can I say 'wrong' without you being overly offended?) Your subsequent posts explain things better without insinuating a particular host is, or is not, reputable.

No of course im not offended CHicken, everyone has different views and feelings on issues, if everyione thought the exact same thing then there would be no need for discussion boards. What sets me off is when people feel the need to try to attack any other thinking thats not their own in every post. If you have a difference in opinion then feel free to post it in a constructive manner so it can be debated in this manner.

I also feel like it is unconstructive for someone to particpate in a thread where they are obv. biased, and they dont inform the other people they are discussing a issue with why they may be biased.

As ive posted at least twice on here, since this thread has obv. got out of control I welcomed several people to email, to continue the discussion.

Again, i dont hate cogent, i dont hate rackshack, and i dont hate anyone on here, i simply wont tolerate berating and anything outside of normal discussions.

Wether someone has said this or not, I will say it. I believe that overselling is a good thing, _but_ ONLY in internet industry. We are not dealing with tangible goods. If I was selling XBoxes and 300 people ordered them and I only had 150, half of the people are left without XBoxes for however long it takes me to get them. Bandwidth is different, in that everyone connected does not require enough bandwidth to max out their network card all the time, and that is what makes the internet work for so cheap.

Secondly, I highly doubt Rackshack will ever saturate that 1500Mbit of bandwidth.

Overselling keeps down prices, which benefits everyone. However, if you are overselling on bandwidth that is already filled to, say, 65-70% I would consider that doing bad business. Personally, I would rather have a $99 raq on oversold lines than a $250 raq on non oversold lines.

Charles, thank you for completely ignoring my questions to you. I can see that you'd rather engage in redundant banter with your WHT nemasis, umbillycord, instead of aswering legitimate questions I had regarding your comments. I guess you don't want to back up your posts.

I realize you don't hate RackShack, but I just wanted you to clarify your comments about them. Especially the one about their bandwidth charts.

After reading this thread, it seems ALOT of people don't know the difference between over-selling and under-usage. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that way.

Take this as an example and example only!!!

You buy 100gigs from a company and another 9 people buy 100gigs. That's 1'000gigs total. The company accounts for the full usage in their prices. Overall only 300gigs is used on average per month. So, what's stopping the company from only purchasing 500gigs a month to up their profit and adjusting as needed?

It seems this is what people term "over-selling" Well, it's not. It's not the companies fault that their clients aren't utilizing the full 100gigs (each) that they paid for.


Getting back on topic, I'm surprised headsurfer hasn't replied to the original post.

EDIT: Oh, and over-selling. It's not good. Don't do it. It will catch up to you. You might think otherwise now, but wait until you've been there and done that....

Driver dave i didnt notice any comments address to me, furthermore if you will read my posts youll see im not engaging in these threads anymore, they are filled with childish rants and kids hiding behind monitors. You will notice i stated very clearly that if you have any questions or wish to discuss anything further you are supposed to email, or you may icq me or call me. ANd ill be more than happy to answer any questions as long as their addressed in a adult manner.

Thank You.

Driver dave i didnt notice any comments address to me, furthermore if you will read my posts youll see im not engaging in these threads anymore, they are filled with childish rants and kids hiding behind monitors. You will notice i stated very clearly that if you have any questions or wish to discuss anything further you are supposed to email, or you may icq me or call me. ANd ill be more than happy to answer any questions as long as their addressed in a adult manner.

I guess his PM is down or are you trying to fling mud again? I know you won't answer, you are to mature to keep playing in banter. I value that.

After reading this thread, it seems ALOT of people don't know the difference between over-selling and under-usage. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that way.

I think they do. Over-selling simple. If you have a 10 GB hard drive and you sell 30 1GB plans, you over sold. If an airplane has 100 seats and you sell 110, you over sold (They do this). This is business 101. ISPs have done it since the beginning. What, AOL is like 10:1 over-old.

Charles, this is a public forum. The discussions that take place have a value to people other than those who are participating in it. Thats the whole reason it's here, and thats why people read it.

I find it pointless to take this discussion to email, the phone, or whatever other private channels you have suggested. It was started publically, and it should end publically.



You keep saying that you aren't engaging in this thread anymore, yet you keep posting to it. From the looks of it, you quit "engaging" in this thread almost 4 posts ago. Yet, after you quit the thread, you posted this:

"whether those graphs are acurate on their site is entirely debateable"

That quote was in regards to the bandwidth usage graphs on RackShack.net's website.

I'm just looking for some clarification on that comment, and I believe I'm going about it in an "adult manner", as per your request for discussion.

Not to repeat myself, but my question to you is: Do you find these graphs debatable because of anamolies in the MRTG code, or are you suggesting that RackShack is providing false data?

Hey folks,

Honestly, I don't understand all this hassle...
Every company does have its own business model. Some sell 2xproductX at a high price, earning a lot on these individual items. Others sell 50xproductX at a low price, will earn less per piece but overall they might earn more. That's just plain business.

As for RackShack, I've followed lots of discussions and spoke with a lot of neutral people. And every day I'm more impressed by their services. Their support is good these days, their network is fast. And you get the bandwidth you paid for - if you take it, at least.

The thing is that host one may be leasing expensive T1 and T3 lines and advertising 'high quality bandwidth', while another one, with more customers and needs, will afford some redundant high speed/fibre circuits at a cheaper price. What does this say about the quality of the bandwidth ? Most probably, anyway, the packages from both hosts could well go through the same physical backbone and peering points. So why is the quality of number one better than number two ? Because it's more expensive for them ? Isn't it normal that the price of a circuit drops when the capacity bought raises ?

Also, what's all this hassle about Cogent ? I doubt whether many people have actually used Cogent so far; their speed is good (if, at least, you know how to route parts of the traffic over 'high speed' circuits), their uptime is really nice. At least, sometimes nicer than their more expensive colleagues.

Just wanted to say this after having read all the posts in this topic.

Carl

Hello
We have sent a few customers to Rackshack and not had any complaints.
Does anyone have an IP address on a RAQ at Burst that I can traceroute to, to compare them with other providers.
I could look at rackshack.net itself but not sure if that would be on the same network.

Gordon

I'm in the process of moving two RAQ accounts from tera-byte to Rackshack. I've not had any problems with speed on rackshack's network in fact my community users have complimented us on the speed increase. We've only had one spell of downtime and that was a subnet problem that was fixed within a few minutes.

I'm very impressed with the service i get from RackShack although i havent fully tested there support yet, But everything that has ever been an issue on my RAQ3's has been discussed in great detail on RackShacks forums.

Originally posted by Walter
And probably massive overselling. I wonder how many customers even come near 100 GB per month, not to mention 300 GB.

I used 3GB last month

I'll use about 5GB this month and that's with 28 web hosting customers, 5 ISP customers, and our own web site running on the RaQ.

Originally posted by cbaker17
Chicken the providers we use have in the sla they give to us that if at anytime their average usage breaches 50% of their capacity then they add additional bandwidth, fiber, whatever.... THis in effect keeps them from overselling.

Im not saying people dont oversell, of course theres alot of companys who do. What i am saying is that in my opinion it is bad business, i would never do it to my customers.

Again i cant speak for every single company, but I do know for a fact that every carrier we use does not oversell intentionally. We dont go with providers whos sla does not confront this point, as again overselling in my opinion is bad business. You should never sell something you dont have.

Did you notice that one little word in there?

Chicken the providers we use have in the sla they give to us that if at anytime their average usage breaches 50% of their capacity then they add additional bandwidth

Average usage.

Average usage at my last job: 5.4mbits

So using your formula, we only should buy 10-11mbits? Wrong. We'd have been down every night, our PEAK usage was 14-19Mbits, if we had "twice as much as our average" we'd have been WOEFULLY oversold. To be safe we needed _4 times_ our average just to COVER our peak! What we had was a 100mbit line at Exodus and we paid by your typical peak usage plan, I forget the exact formula (someone else actually kept up with the contract I just kept up with bandwidth and tried to find out why at 5 am we were peaking at 14-16 mbits so often) but we paid by what our peak was and what our average was, some formula that is beyond me (I never really asked what it was either).

Gotta keep a close eye on the language. Average usage is not at all how I would purchase my bandwidth!

We're talking "average bandwidth" and "peak bandwidth bursts" if you buy using "average bandwidth" as your ruler then you're (especially in the web/isp world) gonna have a bad time of it, you've gotta buy looking at PEAK usage and then buy a little bit more than that! I always used the 60% rule, when my peaks hit 60% of my absolute maximum bandwidth, then I started the ball rolling on getting a higher max bandwidth.

Cbaker17 you keep going on and on about how you don't oversell, that's great. The problem is, your uplink does :) Qwest is known for their lousy ping times and oversaturation. It's not surprising that gblx, one of the few bandwidth providers that do rack space that are GOOD, are over twice as much in price as Qwest.

RackShack sells service that including transfers UP TO 300GB/month. There are a lot of other costs involved: machine, electricity, support, but the deal is $99 + up to 300GB. Whether you use 0 GB or 300 GB, you pay the same.

As long as their network is not saturated, this is not an oversale. Right now, they are using < 50%.

Look at cell phone companies, they give you unlimited night and weekend minutes. That does not mean their network can handle every subscriber talking all night long on their cellphones.

Of course i stoppped posting to this thread, so everyone would stop ranting and raving over this post. But it seems like some pople have nothing better to do but to rant and rave.

Dixiesys, i dont have tim to even try to decipher what the heck your talking about but ill bookmark it and get out my decoder ring later tonight.

Leif, In our dallas market where were putting current customers, we dont use qwestm we use mainly uunet and level3 of course customers can choose who ever they want but our alla carte network option is uunet/level 3. UUNET is considered cream of the crop, and level3 has a fast network, whether level3 oversells i have no idea, i know for a fact UUNET does not.

In addition i love how you guys throw out things like qwest oversells, level3 oversells, i would love for their reps to come in here and address this. As i dont believe either one of them oversells. Of course i dont work there so for me to say they dont for absolutly sure is wrong.

But for you people to say they absolutly do is also ignorant and wrong. At least post evidence if your going to attack a company that has no means of defending your airy statements.

Qwest does have a rep here...

Originally posted by cbaker17

Dixiesys, i dont have tim to even try to decipher what the heck your talking about but ill bookmark it and get out my decoder ring later tonight.


Average usage is nearly as loaded a bill of goods as unlimited transfer.

Here I'll type slowly :)

Our average usage was 5.4 mbits.

Our PEAK usage was 19mbits.

If I bought 2X my average usage (like your SLA claims it does) then I would have been fired.

If I had bought 3X my average usage, I would have been fired.

We peaked (please god don't tell me I have to explain what peak usage is) at nearly 20mbits, yet we averaged about 5. If I were your SLA and only had enough bandwidth for 200% of our average, you'd have left my service.

I'm not saying your SLA over or undersells, it sounds like you're very happy with them, that is GOOD, that is what it is all about, but I'm just saying "average" usage don't mean squat to me. Peak bandwidth is all I care about, if my provider can't cover the peaks I don't care what the average is now or ever.

Surely you can understand that. I wasn't trying to inflame you or argue with or against, I'm just saying "look at what you're told and analyze it for what might be slightly misleading info". It's called marketing, your sales reps probably have degrees in it.

Regards

Charles, you're embarrassing yourself. With every post you make, you claim to have quit posting to this thread. I've lost count of how many times you've quit :)

I don't think anyone is ranting and raving. We're having a discussion and you left the room, or so I thought.

You posted this below "At least post evidence if your going to attack a company that has no means of defending your airy statements."

Well, Charles, you said "whether those graphs are acurate on their site is entirely debateable"

That quote was in regards to the bandwidth usage graphs on RackShack.net's website.

So I would say, to you Charles, at least POST EVIDENCE if your going to attack a company that has no means of defending your airy statements.

This thread is heating up and I don't see it going anywhere. But its fun to read :)

Driverdave is driving himself into a wall, i said whether those graphs are real is debateable as you said. I didnt say "those graphs arent real" hence i dont have to provide proof as im saying its debateable, to debate in case you dont know means to discuss an issue. You cant have a debate if the issue has already been proved wrong or right.

You Driverdave make yourself look bad, as you keep trying to bring up something and start stuff, which is why ill continue to make you happy and post to this thread to correct your ignorant comments, otherwise im not going to escalate a thread that is apparantly already out of control, as you seem bent on doing. Although i must agree as dherman76 says it is rather funny. Resembles monkeys running around in their cages, hooting and hollaring and banging on the windows at the sxpectators :)

Good Day

**MUNKEES are a copyright of the Pwebtech corporation and their affiliate amihairyornot.com all proceeds from this thread go to them :)

Well, Charles, I've been trying to open a debate about the RackShack graphs with you about 3 or 4 times. By the tone of your posts it seems you can't read previous questions people pose to you about your comments. I won't bother to repeat them again, but maybe your browser is broken?

This thread is about how RackShack can offer such great deals. You hop on and say they oversell, and that any reputable host doesn't do that. Where is your proof of this? I don't see any.

When I offer proof to you that proves the opposite is true, you say my proof is debateable. Whats to debate?

Why would you send clients to a host that provides data of which the validity of that data you find debateable?

I'm not trying to start anything with you. But you hop on here, make comments that you can't/won't back up, and then act like you never made them.

And there's no need to call me a monkey again, at least in this thread. It's OT. If you'd like to discuss my monkey-like virtues, please start a new thread.

Ive just moved to RaqShack from Terrabyte, and a long line of other hosts.

And all I have to say to Mr. Headsurfer, is you are a God, you are my saviour.

See when it comes to none profit websites, that kill bandwidth, theres simply no other, IMO.

I run a website which kills well over 2G a day, and the users all comment on how much better the service is nowadays since ive moved from the others. Ive been with hosts that provide unlimited bandwidth, and send a bill at the end of the month for everything over 20GB, I wont mention any names.

Anyways, before I start going on a tangent, I just wanted to voice my personal experiences with Rackshack. They are elito, imo, the money I now save because of being with them is great, there speeds are tremendous, ive seen up to 400K/S when requesting files from other sites, to the box.

My only grudge that I now have against Rackshack, is they do an even more amazing deal than I first purchased, that being these new 1GHz processor boxes, but hopefully they will allow me to swap over from my Raq, ill have to wait and see. And not being able to run an IRCD is annoying, but theres so many more pros than there are cons, there deals are simply amazing, you wont find anything better, anywhere, and boy have I looked hard!

And I complete agree with Driver Dave with your arguments, I would definatly say that you are attempting to pass off the usage charts as someway 'not true', and think you should backup this statement, but thats just my opinion anyhow!

Is rackshack profitable yet? How many months of cash is left to satisfy the burn rate if they are not?

This may be a key indicator - if they are profitable - and able to have this kind of prcing - we should all be buying management consulting services from them.

Rackshack and Everyones Internet have been EBITDA positive since March 2000 and actually profitable (net income) since December 2000. We have remained profitable on a quarterly basis since that time. Our monthly run rate is just over $2.3 million and we have around 240 employees.

We no longer burn cash but rather make cash. How else could we have paid cash for the data facility that we just purchased?

Our financials are audited by Deloitte and Touche and have been since our inception.

Our credit rating is also quite excellent. Doubts? You can purchase our D&B report online from aol.telebase.com for a nominal fee. You can actually purchase a report on any company although D&B does not track most small companies. I am unsure if our latest annual audited financials have been reported to D&B as yet. Our fiscal year end is 8/31.

I hope that I have answered the question without overstepping the bounds of what is permitted in this forum.

Robert Marsh
Head Surfer Rackshack.net

congrats - that is strong - call me sometime - we also are profitable at the net level - but would love to trade stories. As you know - it is a brutal world out there. JH

Rackshack is my fav. host ... they do not oversell data-transfer ... they have good technical support ... they are honest ... if your cobalt is slow .. that is because of your internet connection .. or you are overselling your services on your cobalt ... cobalts are not build to be used for massive hosting or massive use.

http://www.rackshack.net .. check out their network page .. it shows you there line usage ... i also believe they will be adding MORE connections .. to improve there speed and % of bandwidth free ....

PS : Keep up the good work , 9/10 service.

Originally posted by C-F-2500
Rackshack is my fav. host ... they do not oversell data-transfer ... they have good technical support ... they are honest ... if your cobalt is slow .. that is because of your internet connection .. or you are overselling your services on your cobalt ... cobalts are not build to be used for massive hosting or massive use.

http://www.rackshack.net .. check out their network page .. it shows you there line usage ... i also believe they will be adding MORE connections .. to improve there speed and % of bandwidth free ....

PS : Keep up the good work , 9/10 service.

HeadSurfer openly admitted that RackShack oversell bandwidth in a post he made here some time back, I believe.

Lol, the raq's can be slowed down due to a number of reasons, it can be your net connection, but this actually doesn't slow the raq down..., it just takes longer for you to access it.

Originally posted by M@tt


HeadSurfer openly admitted that RackShack oversell bandwidth in a post he made here some time back, I believe.

Lol, the raq's can be slowed down due to a number of reasons, it can be your net connection, but this actually doesn't slow the raq down..., it just takes longer for you to access it.

Rackshack do not oversell data-transfer.

Rackshack do not oversell data-transfer.

Listen. They do. All* host do. (* = If you come to attack the word 'all', please name the company that doesn't)

If every single RS and EV1 customer used *ALL* the transfer they are allowed, then their pipes would be filled. That is over selling. Host do this with web space too. That is the way many businesses are run. Internet Access Providers, Hotels, Airlines, etc.. This is not bad business or dishonest. It is understanding your business plan and the market and making educated guesses toward *real* use.

PS- Good sig. :D

Originally posted by C-F-2500


Rackshack do not oversell data-transfer.


It is sort of like an "all you can eat buffet", if you will. In the hosting arena, the bandwidth is the buffet.


Originally posted by HeadSurfer
Very few Raqs take that kind of bandwidth as it is the exception and not the rule. In our offer of 300 Gb of transfer, we know by experience that most of our customers will not use it. A few will, but not many. The law of averages works out well in this perspective. We want to make it easy to host with us and not worry about getting nailed with a lot of extra bandwidth charges. That's the point of offering such an outrageous max transfer.

Taken from this thead:
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17688

There is more stuff, I only got that from the first couple of pages, but I have proved my point, eh? :)

Matt

That was then .. this is now ... they will soon have 2 x 1gbit connections .. adding to over 500mbit bandwidth ... i'm sure they are not overselling.

Originally posted by UmBillyCord


Listen. They do. All* host do. (* = If you come to attack the word 'all', please name the company that doesn't)

If every single RS and EV1 customer used *ALL* the transfer they are allowed, then their pipes would be filled. That is over selling. Host do this with web space too. That is the way many businesses are run. Internet Access Providers, Hotels, Airlines, etc.. This is not bad business or dishonest. It is understanding your business plan and the market and making educated guesses toward *real* use.

PS- Good sig. :D

Good sig eh :D

Its true .. our network is down .. cos we havn't finished testing.
Our cp isn't finished
Our site url will be printed there soon.

Originally posted by C-F-2500
That was then .. this is now ... they will soon have 2 x 1gbit connections .. adding to over 500mbit bandwidth ... i'm sure they are not overselling.

That's an impressive network, but remember all these extra Linux machines they are now selling.... which they weren't at the time of those posts.

Originally posted by M@tt


That's an impressive network, but remember all these extra Linux machines they are now selling.... which they weren't at the time of those posts.

Well lets put it this way .. i will be offering 10 GB per reseller at $30 per month .. with 1 GB of webspace .. is that overselling :rolleyes:

Remember .. my cage has a 2 x 100Mbit connections to LinX and 2 x 100Mbit connections to the main telehouse swich network.

Every server has 2 x 10Mbit ethernet connections... so max data-transfer possible is 3600GB per server ( 10mbit @ full all the time ) ... 10 Resellers per server.

ADD >> the data-transfer quoted is not correct but i'm not advertising my company ... its a thiery.