After looking around and asking I am drawn ever more to think about the Microsoft Monopolisation of the industry and a similar saga with British Telecom (UK) and BTOpenworld.. for those of you that know about their scenario bare with me...

Anyway, there is alot of speculation that BT works with BTOpenworld and feeds inside information and participates in unfair trading to enable BTOpenWorld to thrive in the industry and do better than others..

Nocster offer cPanel / WHM combo for $19.95 per month, yet the minimum a distributer can get it for is $25 per month. This is then sold on to end users and costs in the region of $65 - 90. It looks like Dark Orb give Nocster an unfair advantage in the business with the low price of cPanel and WHM and I personally find this very unfair towards all the other companies that are trying to make a go in the business but are dampened by the large cPanel monthly prices which overall makes their packages look alot more expensive than those of Nocster.

What do you think? Is this allowed? And what are your comments on the situation?

Why do people consider Microsoft a monopoly? I've been Microsoft free for quite a while, so why can't anyone else?

If you find it unfair, don't use Cpanel. Do you want the government to regulate what people can offer? We have lost enough of our freedom already.

It is well within Burst's right to sell licenses below their cost if they want to.

Originally posted by Webjunkie
It is well within Burst's right to sell licenses below their cost if they want to. I'd have to go along with Webjunkie. They could give it away while they sell it to others as far as I'm concerned.

I have to agree...


Who cares if they are selling Cpanel at cost, I've seen plenty of hosts here offer cpanel for free with a dedicated package, and the prices they are charging are bearly paying for the server costs...

Thats life, thats business :D


BTW: I'm sure the people at Burst know the law, and they have said that they are within guidlines in distrubiting cPanel this way...

Originally posted by BurtonHost


What do you think? Is this allowed? And what are your comments on the situation?

There are perfectly good alternatives to CPANEL out there, so not using CPANEL is not a detriment to a business. I personally prefer Plesk over CPANEL (though others will disagree), and I prefer Webmin over all of the commercial control panels. With the wide range of control panel options available, there is no incentive for hosts to pay a higher price for the CPANEL/WHM license.

Probably since Nick from DarkORB works for BURST.NET which owns NOCSTER.COM - It's possible. :)

Is CPANEL a "Must Have"? I am not a Linux person, but have played around with a few panels and think Plesk and others are so much cleaner/better than CPANEL.

What is the big deal about CPANEL?

CPanel makes it easy first of all for people that don't know too much about Linux itself, etc. (or FreeBSD for that matter) - While also giving the power user a lot of options, etc IMHO

I believe it to be a great program, if I was like everyone e lse paying $100/mo - No.. But, I don't pay that much :) - So I think it's quite worth it - My customers love it, etc.

Plesk seems limited although more stable at times - But CPanel is getting there.

CPanel isn't as professional though either IMHO again.

I think CPanel 4.8 provide more functionalities compare with others (eg. PLESK 2.5).

but still they never create a reverse DNS everytime a new account is created ...

What is the big deal about CPANEL?
In my opinion CPanel is easier to use and offers more options to the site owner than either Plesk or Ensim.

Plesk is so plain, vanilla, and feature lacking it disgusts me sometimes. Although this is an overstatement, it's a very pricey piece of software that doesen't do very much, at least thats the feeling i get when i look at it, then at its pricing sheets :).

I too would have to agree with Webjunkie. As long as they are operating within the law, there's not much you can do about it.

Originally posted by uuallan


There are perfectly good alternatives to CPANEL out there, so not using CPANEL is not a detriment to a business. I personally prefer Plesk over CPANEL (though others will disagree), and I prefer Webmin over all of the commercial control panels. With the wide range of control panel options available, there is no incentive for hosts to pay a higher price for the CPANEL/WHM license.

Thanks for bringing up Webmin. I looked at it again, and more thoroughly this time. Other than not liking the file mgr being in Java, it looks great. I don't see how it could work for resellers or end users though like CPanel/WHM. Is there anything you can add to it to make it work for the end user and/or reseller market?

Originally posted by chrisb
I don't see how it could work for resellers or end users though like CPanel/WHM. Is there anything you can add to it to make it work for the end user and/or reseller market? They have an additional package (addon?) called Usermin. I haven't used it yet, but I'm going to install it when I get around to it.

Originally posted by Abu Mami
They have an additional package (addon?) called Usermin. I haven't used it yet, but I'm going to install it when I get around to it.

Thanks for the info. Let me know how you like Usermin.

Plesk is so plain, vanilla, and feature lacking it disgusts me sometimes. Like which features?

After all the inquiries into Nocster, and all of the comments, and speculations drawn, which are way off base. I will respond to this thread.

After looking around and asking I am drawn ever more to think about the Microsoft Monopolisation of the industry and a similar saga with British Telecom (UK) and BTOpenworld.. for those of you that know about their scenario bare with me...

I fail to see the correlation between the "Microsoft Monopolisation" and Nocster, and wonder if you truly understand the case which was brought again Microsoft. Nobody is forcing you to use cPanel, or run your hosting with it. There are a number of recommended control panels on the market, we do not pre-install our servers with cPanel, but offer them as an added service. If you wanted a different control panel, you have that option open to you. A true monopoly would be if Dark Orb only sold cPanel to BurstNET, and you would be forced to purchase from us if you wished to use the license.


Anyway, there is alot of speculation that BT works with BTOpenworld and feeds inside information and participates in unfair trading to enable BTOpenWorld to thrive in the industry and do better than others..

This may be true, or not, I have not done any research on that particular subject, but will take your word on it.

Nocster offer cPanel / WHM combo for $19.95 per month, yet the minimum a distributer can get it for is $25 per month.

Where did you come up with those figures? Who is your information source, because obviously you are not a distributor, or you would know the pricing structure for cPanel, and would understand that Burst/Nocster is not given any other special consideration that another distributor would also not receive. cPanel is sold on a scaling level offering further discounts in relevance to the quantity of licenses you own. We happen to be the largest cPanel distributor, and as such are entitled to larger discounts, but ANY distributor would receive the same discounts.

[QUOTE]This is then sold on to end users and costs in the region of $65 - 90.

That is each distributor's right to choose the pricing plan for their clients. It is not Darkorb's decision as to what distributor's price (resell) that license for.

It looks like Dark Orb give Nocster an unfair advantage in the business with the low price of cPanel and WHM and I personally find this very unfair towards all the other companies that are trying to make a go in the business but are dampened by the large cPanel monthly prices which overall makes their packages look alot more expensive than those of Nocster.

What "makes their prices" is up to each distributer. We are not given an "unfair advantage" by Dark Orb

IMHO, you have stated that somehow we have taken an advantage of an industry which is fueled by competition. Hasn't the industry shift been leaning towards: lower cost, faster network, better support, bigger uptime guarantees, etc? Perhaps any host offering a lower priced server than your provider, or reseller is giving an unfair advantage? Should we all be regulated to a baseline selling price? Pricing and competition is the nature of every business, is it not? Have not the hosting plans from 5 years ago drastically reduced in price? Do all hosts offer the same price for the same service? The answer we all already know.

That's just my opinion, but I could be wrong (Dennis Miller)

Long night, wrong comedian :D (Thanks UUALLEN)

Lets face it, Burstnet is in a nice cushy spot right now as CPanel/WHM is in high demand, Hostgui looks like vaporware, rackshack has totally monopolized the Plesk market (IMHO), and ensim is cheap but nobody seems to really want it nowdays. I'm sure a lot of us wish we could get Burst's pricing on CPanel, but we cant, and we'll just have to deal with that :(. It's great for Burst that they've got a competitive advantage, i mean hey, thats life, and we just have to wait for them to fade away, clobber some of us, or fumble something up :D (no offense is intended in any way with these statements obviously). Personally, I wish i could get that pricing, and I dare say i am envious :bawling: but everything happens for a reason :).

Originally posted by BurstCSM

That's just my opinion, but I could be wrong (Dennis Leary)


Dennis Miller

(About Webmin)Is there anything you can add to it to make it work for the end user and/or reseller market?

I don't think Usermin will allow you to do that. Basically, Webmin has the functionality to do what you want built in; it just takes a bit more planning and work to set up each user, as you have to set up each user's permissions in every module he uses (Apache, sendmail, user creation, ...).

Webmin allows you to give control only to certain zones in apache for example. User 1 could have zone 1, user 2 could have zone 2, ... 1 user can have more than 1 zone, and a zone can be managed by more than 1 person.

It wasn't designed with a reseller in mind I think, but it can accomplish that very well.

There is a module out there for webmin called isp4you. It will create a user, both in Webmin and Linux, create a webserver for the user in a directory you choose, set up his dns, sendmail accounts, ... and set up all permissions. Even if you plan on doing everything by hand, I suggest you create at least 1 account with isp4you to see how everything gets set up.

In this situation, Burst has done nothing wrong. Unfair? No, businesses do this every day of the week.

Originally posted by BurstCSM
A true monopoly would be if Dark Orb only sold cPanel to BurstNET, and you would be forced to purchase from us if you wished to use the license.

Even that would not be considered a true monopoly... many companies sell their products exclusively through their sole authorized agents or distributors!

That is not considered an unfair means of doing business in any sense whatsover.

Cheers!

Originally posted by Chang Lee


Even that would not be considered a true monopoly... many companies sell their products exclusively through their sole authorized agents or distributors!

That is not considered an unfair means of doing business in any sense whatsover.

Cheers!

It would be a monopoly if cpanel was the ONLY control panel available, and only sold through burstnet.

I didn't want to add my .02 worth but being a partner NOC with Darkorb myself, I know where Burtonhost is coming from.... I just think he used wrong terminology.

I too got irritated when I saw Burst selling Cpanel for $19.95 and I emailed Nick (creator of Cpanel) and expressed my concerns and felt it wasn't fair Bust would get below cost pricing. He assured me that Burst is not getting special pricing. I'm not doubting his word, but like Burtonhost, it's just hard to believe that Burst is not getting special pricing.

Yes it's within their rights to sell it at whatever price they wish... that's not the issue. But from outward appearances it seems like they are getting it cheaper than anyone else and that is what seemingly is not fair. The cheapest anyone can get Cpanel is supposed to be $25. So Burst sells it at a $5 LOSS on a server that is already priced as low as you'll find any of the recent 'wholesale/low priced' servers. So they already sell a server at a price that's hard to reach by most unless running only/mostly Cogent, then they loose $5 on Cpanel on top of that. That makes no sense and it's understandably the reason why Burtonhost and others feel Burst is getting special treatment.

Again, Nick said they are not so I have to believe him.

That was where I was coming from, I know I'm not clear at the best of times.

I too find it hard to believe Nocster would sell cPanel with their servers at a loss to them ?? Where's the business sense in that unless they have a special arrangement and do get it cheaper.

I too would believe the word of the cPanel creator but that's just what it looks like from my angle.

Who says burst is loosing $5 all they would have to do is add $ onto the price of their server and offer cpanel for 19.95 just to get us interested. If some on does not want cpanel on their server then burst makes an extra $5 on the monthly fees

Sean

I think you guys have not checked the Nocster prices closely. There is a huge setup cost that can cover 6 months of cPanel/WHM lower price, or may be 12 :)

So I do not think BurstNet is charging $19.95 :D well, at least I don't see it like that :stickout

I see it more as an advertising catch than a cheaper license. But of course, i don't know how much if anything BurstNET has to pay for the licenses.

Which looks better?

Server1 - $500 - Free CPanel license included!
Server2 - $450 - Additional $50 for Cpanel.

;)

Originally posted by Kiwi
Which looks better?

Server1 - $500 - Free CPanel license included!
Server2 - $450 - Additional $50 for Cpanel.

;)

:D

Server3 - $100 - Additional $400 for Cpanel :D :D :stickout

Originally posted by Kiwi
I see it more as an advertising catch than a cheaper license. But of course, i don't know how much if anything BurstNET has to pay for the licenses.

Which looks better?

Server1 - $500 - Free CPanel license included!
Server2 - $450 - Additional $50 for Cpanel.

;)

Someone comes out with

Server3 - $490 - Additional $10 for Cpanel.

Watches people start bashing it..

"They must be getting it cheaper to sell it at 10$ this sucks!! I would rather whine then try to do something about it! "

Sorry that last part was a little hard, but after reading all the complaints it makes me sick.

They are a company and can sell their products for whatever price they want..

Just because they sell cheaper then you doesn't mean you get to start a bashing thread to help get people to dislike them and choose others... personally.. I think nocster is doing a great thing.

Originally posted by kdghsu


Someone comes out with

Server3 - $490 - Additional $10 for Cpanel.

Watches people start bashing it..



No one bashed Burst for anything. The original concern is were they getting special treatment from Darkorb. If they want to sell a server for $50/month and give Cpanel free with it then GREAT! All the original poster was concerned about is if the playing field was even. I too have/had the same concerns. But we're told they do not have any special pricing arrangements... me personally that is all that I was concerned about and am satisifed we all have a fair advantage.

On second thought, I can also see it from the opposite side. If I were a CPanel reseller, I must admit that I would not like it either.

Originally posted by masood


:D

Server3 - $100 - Additional $400 for Cpanel :D :D :stickout

I will then buy cpanel license from any other reseller and have server for $175 LOL :D :D :stickout

Originally posted by mahinder


I will then buy cpanel license from any other reseller and have server for $175 LOL :D :D :stickout

You are right. The price comes down to same mark if you compare with other packages :D well almost, coz you missed the $500 setup charges in fine print :stickout

:D

Originally posted by rastoma


No one bashed Burst for anything. The original concern is were they getting special treatment from Darkorb. If they want to sell a server for $50/month and give Cpanel free with it then GREAT! All the original poster was concerned about is if the playing field was even. I too have/had the same concerns. But we're told they do not have any special pricing arrangements... me personally that is all that I was concerned about and am satisifed we all have a fair advantage.

Sounded like you were bashing to me saying they get it cheaper.. but I guess it's just how you interprete it. Anyway.. it doesn't really matter... burst owns cpanel.. they can sell it for whatever they want and if you really dont like it then dont use it... that's all anybody can really say.

Originally posted by kdghsu


Sounded like you were bashing to me saying they get it cheaper.. but I guess it's just how you interprete it. Anyway.. it doesn't really matter... burst owns cpanel.. they can sell it for whatever they want and if you really dont like it then dont use it... that's all anybody can really say.

Burst does not OWN Cpanel. Nick, the creator of Cpanel works at Burst... that doesn't mean Burst owns Cpanel.

And yes I do use it.. I like it and sell it and will continue to sell it.

This thread was about people who SELL Cpanel being concerned all distributors are being treated the same.

Someone who takes money for a vaporware control panel (meaning they claim the control panel was done and then take a lot of people's money and then say "oh our programmers are now re-writing it" is the last person that needs to add their own negative remarks to someone selling a legitimate control panel.

i think i'm missing the point of this:

Anyway, there is alot of speculation that BT works with BTOpenworld and feeds inside information and participates in unfair trading to enable BTOpenWorld to thrive in the industry and do better than others..

As they are the same company, how can they feed themselves information?

on the cpanel front, logically they can sell it to burst / nocster for whatever price they like?

<vent>

The creator of cpanel works? If I were him, I'd be retired to my own private country by now sleeping on a bed of dollars that continue to roll in from my excessive product licensing fees...

Excessive or no, however, it's not a monopoly or unfair business practice, because you're free to use any other control panel you like. And I might suggest just that to people searching through these threads. Cpanel is great for the end user, makes their lives lots easier. IMHO, though, it makes the admin's life much more stressful and annoying.

<vent>

IMHO, though, it makes the admin's life much more stressful and annoying.

i'll second that.

Please ignore my ignorance, but what are the major problems with Cpanel for the sysadmin? (making it stressful and annoying?)

Originally posted by rastoma
I didn't want to add my .02 worth but being a partner NOC with Darkorb myself, I know where Burtonhost is coming from.... I just think he used wrong terminology.

I too got irritated when I saw Burst selling Cpanel for $19.95 and I emailed Nick (creator of Cpanel) and expressed my concerns and felt it wasn't fair Bust would get below cost pricing. He assured me that Burst is not getting special pricing. I'm not doubting his word, but like Burtonhost, it's just hard to believe that Burst is not getting special pricing.

Yes it's within their rights to sell it at whatever price they wish... that's not the issue. But from outward appearances it seems like they are getting it cheaper than anyone else and that is what seemingly is not fair. The cheapest anyone can get Cpanel is supposed to be $25. So Burst sells it at a $5 LOSS on a server that is already priced as low as you'll find any of the recent 'wholesale/low priced' servers. So they already sell a server at a price that's hard to reach by most unless running only/mostly Cogent, then they loose $5 on Cpanel on top of that. That makes no sense and it's understandably the reason why Burtonhost and others feel Burst is getting special treatment.

Again, Nick said they are not so I have to believe him.


Isn't it normal big companies that buy alot of licenses get a lower price ?

I'm sure rackshack gets a lower price then anyone else on Plesk licenses.