G'day All

A quick search revealed there was not much of a discussion on this - thought I would make one.

If you were in the position where you were buying out several high profile, competing, hosts - would you continue to run it as a separate brand or would you (eventually) integrate their clients into your existing brand (with or without changing their plans).

Growth by acquisition is happening often (and I'll admit, I do it often). There are pro's and cons for both moves - what would you do?

My personal methods are to inform all clients of the takeover, and keep clients on existing hardware and infrastructure. I move all of them into my existing billing systems and inform them that their host is now named 'My Company' instead of 'Company X'. They remain on their existing plans - yet if it were more expensive than mine, they stay at their existing prices. Then all old company domains are forwarded to my website.

Quite obviously I do this for ease of use on my end, and to allow a 'bigger' feel to my venture. The cons here are that I only have one recognizable portal now selling packages, instead of the 3-4 I could potentially be running.

Im curious as to how others handle this.

Alex,

It all depends on the brand to be honest. If it's a worthy brand I'd continue to execute it separately. If the brand isn't all that powerful I'd consider 'updating it' with some proper logos, mottos -- overhaul!

If there's little potential then a complete merge would be in order.
Of course, all of their packages & billing would remain completely the same in order to decrease the amount jumping ship.

Probably keep the brand, then make the brand a Subsidiary of your original business.

Keep your original business as a holding company.

It really would depend on the brand. As you acquire more and more I'd suggest picking one or two that are either the largest or have the best recognition and then merging other smaller acquisitions into both your original company and these larger brands. If you're taking on business after business, keeping them all straight is eventually going to get out of hand.

Especially if the acquired companies vary in the sorts of services they offer. You might have three 'flagships' that cover different types of services (shared, dedicated, colo etc) and then depending on which the new acquisitions do, fold them into the appropriate one. That way you don't have one main brand that's all over the map.

It really depends on the brand and specific situation. As you said, there's pros and cons to both. It's more about the specifics than "what I'd do".

Probably keep the brand, then make the brand a Subsidiary of your original business.
Keep your original business as a holding company.

I might not be a good marketer, but why not keep all in one brand?

I would probably do like what said...However, I am curious if someone would buy out not just their competition but buy out someone to expand your services. Hopefully, though, you won't be another CA. :))

When we adquired another company we do exactly like you say, I think there are too much web hosting "companies" to add one more brand to the over-saturated's mind of your customers.

This works if are the same market, same niche or similar, perhaps if are differents will be better to do it separately.

Another question for me it's : it's really interesting adquire another hosts? By my experience it's not as good as looks economically (or I did't do a good deal!)

I'd look at the company's financial position more closely now that you have complete information. If the company is profitable and performing to your satisfaction I would leave it running status quo. If the company is bleeding money I would restructure the new accounts onto your existing service platform to minimize unnecessary overhead costs.

Wow, its a mixed cocktail.

It appears most people follow my line of integration (assuming a similar product line).

would you continue to run it as a separate brand or would you (eventually) integrate their clients into your existing brand (with or without changing their plans).


We've found it takes time for the "culture" of the clientbase to adjust to the new ownership, new procedures and so on, and that each "brand" has its own followers/advocates/style etc.

On small (sub 200) customers we simply move them into whichever "brand" is the closest fit, for larger acquisitions we've kept the brand identity, focussed the product line to be more specific and slowly integrate over a period of years.

4 years after shutting one brand down, we still get calls from clients saying "I'm an xyz customer ..."

I would revamp the newaly aquired company with new logos and teamplates but i would keep the name.

You have to think, the customers chose that name/brand so it must work, so there is no need to change it, just make it better.

I would revamp the newaly aquired company with new logos and teamplates but i would keep the name.

You have to think, the customers chose that name/brand so it must work, so there is no need to change it, just make it better.

Is it just me, or does that not make a whole lot of sense?

As you said in the 2nd paragraph, the customers have recognition with the brand - so why would you then go and change the brand with a new logo, design, etc?

I would definitely consolidate brands. It is confusing to consumers to have so many disparate brands, and it is resource-intensive inside of the company to manage them. Creating a unified brand goes a long way towards building higher-level brand equity and customer satisfaction.

Is it just me, or does that not make a whole lot of sense?

As you said in the 2nd paragraph, the customers have recognition with the brand - so why would you then go and change the brand with a new logo, design, etc?


when i said i would change the logos and temaplate, i ment i would improve them, such as make logos more clear and colourfull, so that your old users could still recognise them but they looked better.

look at a site such as google, when it started its logo was simple text with four diffrent colours, now its logo is 3d, has a shaddow and is crystal clear, but still has the same "look" as 10 year ago.

I may not be a host yet but I think this goes with most companies, offline as weel.

I would look to integrate the aquired business and use it as an expansion of my current client base. Although saying that, there are times when keeping brand identity is a definate, just look at 1&1 buying Fasthosts out. You wouldn't want to lose the Fasthosts brand as so many people know it.