We've been entertaining the thought of "splitting" our company into 2 distinct brands and 2 distinct websites. One to serve our shared hosting client base and another to serve our virtual server and multiple domain hosting customers. It seems like they're really 2 different customer types and may well be better served with their own seperate websites with information more targeted to their needs. In addition, we think it may help biz to seperate things in such a way. I am wondering if any of you have done such a thing, if so was it worthwhile? Also any other comments in favor or against the "split" would be apperciated.

Doesn't anyone have an opinion on this?:eek:

I think it's sort of a good idea....they are a different type of customer with different needs. It makes the whole situation confusing for both types of clients when they see so many numbers, plan types and features being thrown at them I think. Two sites will let you seperate the parts and make a bigger whole I think ;-)

I'm for it. I'm thinking on doing the same thing myself. Basically having a brand for Colocation and one for just shared hosting.


Sometimes customers could be overwhelmed with too much information.

When we started offering Windows hosting, we did it under another name. There was too much different information, FAQs, etc, and I felt it was best to split the Linux from the Windows customers.

Also, when we sold off our Windows division (*yay*) it was easier to finalize everything. We just gave the buyer the whole package.

--Tina

We've been entertaining the thought of "splitting" our company into 2 distinct brands and 2 distinct websites. It certainly would be entertaining... since you're called "1Host.com" :). On a more professional reply, I think you should just keep it as one website, one company, but make it more clear which sections are for which customers.

Alan

I would have to agree with Alan. It seems to me that perhaps your main page could direct the potential (or existing) clients to either the shared or multiple site section of the site rather than having two totally separate pages. There should definitely be some type of connection between the two sites. One benefit of having two sites would be the additional exposure (personally don’t think it’s worth the trouble). However, if you do choose this route, at least link the pages together; thereby allowing existing shared hosting clients to expand their sites with your alternate page.

That's what we'll most likely do. We'll have a link on our hosting site pointing to the virtual server and multiple domain hosting site. Thanks!

IMHO.. go for it!
Thats what I would do. Just make sure that you make reference to the other sites prominently on each other (i.e. advertise yourself) and make sure that the information that the two are one and the same behind the scenes is not hidden, and if a client was looking could figure that out. This could be as simple as a having the same copyright notice at the bottom of the pafe, etc.

Just an idea.

Go for three sites...

Your corporate site and then the two specialized sites.
You can cross link and use banner ads to bring them all
together. It's a bit over the top but you've got me thinking
now.

Thanks,
Rob

.

Hello
Go for multiple brands.
If each gets a small loyal following they will all add up.
Also, starting a new brand isolates any problems from your main brand.

This is central to our business plan.
Our brnads reflect different countries with services tailored to those countries (e.g. servers in that country)
Also when we wanted to do cheap web hosting it made sense to offer it under another name to prevent confusion over the TOS which is different.

Gordon

Originally posted by netfido
Your corporate site and then the two specialized sites.
You can cross link and use banner ads to bring them all
together.If you do take that kind of approach -- and really the same is true if you just use two sites -- make sure that you supplement that crosslinking with other incoming links to each of the sites. Otherwise you're creating a "closed circle" in the view of search engines and risking being tagged as faking link pop.

Link popularity, in fact, might be one reason to think about not splitting to two sites -- it'll almost certainly result in dillution. Granted, many small hosts have few incoming links anyway (and have the resulting weak positioning) but it's a consideration.