I've run into problems with my reseller package because one of my sites has a very busy forum which - they said - used too much 'server resources'. They blocked my site and wouldn't unblock it until I'd removed the forum (and then they were d...n slow unblocking it! :angry: )

I'm changing forums but that's unlikely to totally avoid the problem in the future - can't really afford (or need) a dedicated server - and doubt my ability to run one anyway. So have been looking at semi-dedicated servers, in particular the offer from @webhost (http://atwebhost.com/?zone=semidedicated/main) This would give me one-sixth of a server with ample disc space and bandwidth for less than I'm paying for a (U.K.) reseller account with lousy customer service!

Is there any downside to a semi-dedicated server? If my forum gets a bit heavy on server resources - will it be 'my' sixth - or the total server that's impacted? Is there any downside to hosting in the USA when I (and my clients) are in the U.K. (Apart from the phone bills if I need to ring support!) Sorry if these are DUMB questions - you can see why I'm worried about going the dedicated route!

Any advice/thoughts much appreciated.:confused:

Wow! There is some serious "fudging" going on here:

"With only 6 clients per server, you can host unlimited domains in one large plan"

Wrong. They mean 6 Reseller accounts and if each can host "unlimited domains" the Server can end up with 100's of accounts -- i.e., clients.

"150 GB of monthly bandwidth (bandwidth type BW-1A)"

Besides the fact the link to "BW-1A" is invalid, so I have no idea what definition they are using, simple math says,
6 Resellers @ 150GB ea. = 900GB per Server
6 Resellers @ $50 / mth = $300 month income per Server

Seems obvious to me, there is some serious over selling going on here. Even with today's prices, 900GB of data transfer is going to cost more than $300 month or close to it. Add-in their other costs of doing business and where is there room for profit?


In the plan offered by @webhost (as with most hosting plans) all resources of the Server are shared by all accounts on the Server. Odds are, you will run into the same problems you've experienced before, but read their terms of service to be sure.

You also need to make sure the Forum you are using is allowed. Getting to be more common these days where certain scripts, of any kind actually, are not allowed for various reasons. Usually because they have proven to be resource hogs.


Cannot see a problem with USA Hosters and if you're worried about Long Distances charges, see if they have a VoIP program (like Yahoo Messenger) which allows for voice conversations without the hefty charges. I use it for Clients all over the world and it works great.

I wouldn't even consider 'semi'-dedicated. For the same price you can get a host who offers 'virtual' dedicated. No shared resources. You will be given guaranteed resources so you will not have to worry about others. Semi-dedicated is nothing more then a shared server with less sites hosted. It is a poor companies version of a VDS. :)

Do a search here to find a VDS host.

Yes, VDS is the ideal platform for semidedicated servers. Although there's nothing illegal/immoral/wrong with jumping on a server with 5 folks and splitting it up between you. I've seen this work very well with web developers etc.

Originally posted by Website Rob
"With only 6 clients per server, you can host unlimited domains in one large plan"

Wrong. They mean 6 Reseller accounts and if each can host "unlimited domains" the Server can end up with 100's of accounts -- i.e., clients.

"150 GB of monthly bandwidth (bandwidth type BW-1A)"

Besides the fact the link to "BW-1A" is invalid, so I have no idea what definition they are using, simple math says,
6 Resellers @ 150GB ea. = 900GB per Server
6 Resellers @ $50 / mth = $300 month income per Server

Seems obvious to me, there is some serious over selling going on here. Even with today's prices, 900GB of data transfer is going to cost more than $300 month or close to it. Add-in their other costs of doing business and where is there room for profit?

You are right, Website Rob. I think the same.

Originally posted by Website Rob

"150 GB of monthly bandwidth (bandwidth type BW-1A)"

Besides the fact the link to "BW-1A" is invalid, so I have no idea what definition they are using, simple math says,
6 Resellers @ 150GB ea. = 900GB per Server
6 Resellers @ $50 / mth = $300 month income per Server



Yeah, I was looking at that earlier today and the math just didn't seem to work out right. Even with the Cogent bandwidth, it still adds up wrong.

Regardless, I have to give Asher the benefit of the doubt. He seems like he knows which end is up, so there must be some reasoning behind it. :)

Your calculations are definitely valid from mathematical point of view, but in actual reality I don't think they'll hold true.

Your assumption is each reseller will use 150GB. That is not necessarily, and will not be true.

I think someone using simi-dedicated servers, as soon as they hit 50GB Bandwidth point, they'll start considering dedicated servers due to the more flexibility and storage needs.

In addition, If I'd to have 100 clients on my reseller account, I'll not even bother with simi dedicated. That is enough money to get me moving towards higher dedicated servers. I guess @webhost considered these points when they designed the plans. In addition, the plans seem to be targeted towards resellers more than one-domain users.

Originally posted by tamouh
Your calculations are definitely valid from mathematical point of view, but in actual reality I don't think they'll hold true.

Your assumption is each reseller will use 150GB. That is not necessarily, and will not be true.

I think someone using simi-dedicated servers, as soon as they hit 50GB Bandwidth point, they'll start considering dedicated servers due to the more flexibility and storage needs.

In addition, If I'd to have 100 clients on my reseller account, I'll not even bother with simi dedicated. That is enough money to get me moving towards higher dedicated servers. I guess @webhost considered these points when they designed the plans. In addition, the plans seem to be targeted towards resellers more than one-domain users.

Well, of course there's overselling going on. Nobody questioned that. It's the amount of overselling that doesn't seem to sit right.

There is a market in the semi dedicated space, but it's tight. You'd have to split up a server maybe in 8 to 10 lots and charge $75 - $100/mth each, just to make the server worthwhile. This might not seem like enough revenue for the single domain hosts with 500 accounts per server, but it's a different market.

Good dedicated servers start at around the $300/mth, so there's some breathing space between the $100/mth cost for the semi-dedicated and the $300/mth for the dedicated.

For the host starting out, a semi dedicated server with 8 to 10 accounts, could be better than starting at a reseller account or a dedicated server. It's in between those 2 markets that the offerring exists.

Originally posted by tamouh
Your calculations are definitely valid from mathematical point of view, but in actual reality I don't think they'll hold true.

Your assumption is each reseller will use 150GB. That is not necessarily, and will not be true.

I think someone using simi-dedicated servers, as soon as they hit 50GB Bandwidth point, they'll start considering dedicated servers due to the more flexibility and storage needs.

In addition, If I'd to have 100 clients on my reseller account, I'll not even bother with simi dedicated. That is enough money to get me moving towards higher dedicated servers. I guess @webhost considered these points when they designed the plans. In addition, the plans seem to be targeted towards resellers more than one-domain users.
Everything you said seems right but do you think they're overselling? Can I offer 200GB bandwidth at the same price? BTW, I don't think "6 clients per server" has any value, we should limit the number of client per server depending on the resource usage, there is not much different between 6 and 20 (or more) reseller accounts on a server.

Originally posted by NetworksData
BTW, I don't think "6 clients per server" has any value, we should limit the number of client per server depending on the resource usage, there is not much different between 6 and 20 (or more) reseller accounts on a server.
True words. I love the simplistic arguments that are based around the "number" of accounts etc. Maybe folks should be taking notice in what each account was promised as far as disk space and data transfer. That just might have some slight bearing on the reliability of the server in question. :D

1 account could be promised 50Gb disk space and 750GB data transfer/mth. That 1 account could push that server to hell and back. But hey, there's only 1 other account on the server you're on - so you're safe as. ;) :rolleyes:

Yes, I was being sarcastic. :D

I actually reviewed their website again, and they are selling 25GB transfer for $15/mo.

So I guess it cost them $10/mo. per 25GB transfer.

Now taking the assumption the server need 900GB Transfer (This must be jumbo server).

IT will cost them $360 for 900GB. (That is $60 more than their cost)

Taking Risk management in account, how long will it take for 6 resellers to reach 150GB bandwidth ?

I would say, a year. So in year, making $300 x 12 = $3600

Server cost $1500 /year. Upgrades = $500 / year
Bandwidth = $1000 / year

They are left with $600 / Year as net profit from one server.

I don't disagree with you there is overselling, but if calculated properly, it would make sense. How about life insurace ? You pya $20 / mo. , if I just purchased the insurance and I die tomorrow, the insurance company will make a loss of $100,000. However, how likely it is that I purchase a life insurace and die tomorrow ??

I think their plan is well calculated. If they'd redeuce the number of resellers per account, it might even be better!

Originally posted by tamouh
So I guess it cost them $10/mo. per 25GB transfer.


absolutely wrong, why bother 'guessing' how much we pay for our bandwidth when you really have absolutely no idea?

please do not get me wrong, you are most certainly entitled to your concerns, but trying to guess what our costs are doesnt seem right, or fair to me, unless you got a hold of our accounting books.
note: you are also incorrect about the pricing of our servers

@Webhost is under very qualified management, its brought to you by one of the owners of Acenet (who own hostcharge), id like to assure you that this pricing was not created on a whim, and a sound business plan is in place

is there overselling going on? not even.. all i can say is that even if clients use all their bandwidth, we do not make a loss, or even close to it

i should also add, saying we put 6clients per server is just a measurement. if resource consumption ends up being too high, we will put less clients per server and ensure the highest quality.

thank you

Greetings,

I just love it when fellow webhosts jump in to bash another webhost to get a peice of their business... its the best thing about WHT actually :rolleyes:. While obviously you'd start flaring up when someone passed a comment about your company, I on the other hand will not do anything of that sort since its beneath my dignity.

Overselling ? 900gb is overselling ? Lets see how you ran those numbers? How much does Cogent cost? It costs $30 / meg ... 900gb is roughly 3 megs... calculate that. Added even our NTT/Verio redundancy by no means are we overselling. Even if our clients were to use all their bandwidth we would still make a very nice profit. By no means do we oversell our resources to an extent where our services would be no longer profittable to us in order to attain short term supernormal profits.

Or are you implying that a server cannot take 900gb of bandwidth? Absolutely incorrect, we have colocated and semi
dedicated clients who push far beyond that.

When you compare a VDS to a SEMI DEDICATED server that we are offering, I can tell you ways in which a semi dedicated server is far better than a VDS. Semi dedicated gives you more room to grow in... we keep a very strict eye on ALL our servers performance to make sure everyone gets their fair share of resouces.

@Webhost.com is an operation which has been in planning since a long time. We know what we're doing. Next time you want to bash a company please pick another one, since you wont find any major flaws with us.

All the best,
Asher Saeed.

[Edited to add a word]

Originally posted by ^Kyo
@Webhost.com is an operation which has been in planning since a long time. We know what we're doing. Next time you want to bash a company please pick another one, since you wont find any flaws with us.
While I shun away from pointless flaming :rolleyes: making arrogant statements like that is nothing but a sign of immaturity or complete self delusion. :eek2:

We all have flaws. We wouldn't be human if we didn't. :)

Originally posted by Aussie Bob

While I shun away from pointless flaming :rolleyes: making arrogant statements like that is nothing but a sign of immaturity or complete self delusion. :eek2:

We all have flaws. We wouldn't be human if we didn't. :)

So you are saying that I'm immature or I am delusional about my own company? While bashing another webhost to make a buck isn't? Sure we may have small flaws here and there but you really wont find any eminent flaws in my companies.

Asher.

Originally posted by ^Kyo
So you are saying that I'm immature or I am delusional about my own company?
Yes, absolutely. When you say things like -
since you wont find any flaws with us.
That's a sign of severe arrogance and you're setting yourself up for a fall if you truly have that attitude.
While bashing another webhost to make a buck isn't?
I've not bashed anyone in this thread or others. Read back through my posts in this thread.
Sure we may have small flaws here and there but you really wont find any eminent flaws in my companies.
:) Glad you clarified that from "you won't find any flaws with us" to "sure we have small flaws".

Just for the record, I think the semi-dedicated model is good. VDS is probably the ultimate Semi-dedicated model, but as I said in this thread -
Yes, VDS is the ideal platform for semidedicated servers. Although there's nothing illegal/immoral/wrong with jumping on a server with 5 folks and splitting it up between you. I've seen this work very well with web developers etc.

Originally posted by Aussie Bob

Yes, absolutely. When you say things like -

That's a sign of severe arrogance and you're setting yourself up for a fall if you truly have that attitude.

I've not bashed anyone in this thread or others. Read back through my posts in this thread.

:) Glad you clarified that from "you won't find any flaws with us" to "sure we have small flaws".

Just for the record, I think the semi-dedicated model is good. VDS is probably the ultimate Semi-dedicated model, but as I said in this thread -


To begin with, I wasnt mentioning you in my orignal post... so you pretty much jumped the gun by calling me arrogant... I beleive an apology from you is due.

Asher.

Guys.... Guys... Guys...

This thread is going nowhere, and doesn't inflict a positive effect on either company.

It is very stupid for something like 'arrogance' to be argued over. Everybody has it!

Originally posted by ^Kyo
To begin with, I wasnt mentioning you in my orignal post... so you pretty much jumped the gun by calling me arrogant... I beleive an apology from you is due.
Absolutely not. I was making a personal observation from your statement -
Next time you want to bash a company please pick another one, since you wont find any flaws with us.
You claim that you have no flaws. You made that statement. I replied that a statement like that is arrogant. Do you wish to retract that statement?

Originally posted by Aussie Bob

Absolutely not. I was making a personal observation from your statement -

You claim that you have no flaws. You made that statement. I replied that a statement like that is arrogant. Do you wish to retract that statement?

Calling somone arrogant is pretty immature, like phpcoder said we all have it. Sure I am arrogant to a certain extent I dont deny it. But it never hurt my business nor will. I am proud of my company plain and simple.

And NO I will not retract my statement. Thank you.

Asher.

Originally posted by ^Kyo
Calling somone arrogant is pretty immature, like phpcoder said we all have it.
Calling you arrogant is a factual observation made evident from your statement about not having any flaws.
Sure I am arrogant to a certain extent I dont deny it.
Thank you. :)
But it never hurt my business nor will. I am proud of my company plain and simple.
I guess you'll just have to learn that arrogance and the attitude that you're without "flaws" will harm you and your business in the long run. Age and maturity will teach you this one. If you think you're infallible and perfect, then you're wide open to failure.
And NO I will not retract my statement. Thank you.
You contradicted your statement anyways -
since you wont find any flaws with us
and -
Sure we may have small flaws here and there but you really wont find any eminent flaws in my companies.
So it's of little value. I do hope that we can end this discussion on this positive note?

"Age and maturity"

Do you have any idea Aussie Bob, how old I am ? Do not comment about what you don't know. I don't pass comments about you. Its absolutely beneath my dignity to pass comments about anyone as a matter of fact. If you like stooping low its your choice.

Secondly in my orignal reponse (and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out) I was referring to major flaws. Not minor flaws.

Asher.

Meanwhile lads...back at the ranch. :)

I wonder whether there's a lot of scope for either semi-dedicated or VPS. The VPS model has been around for a while, without making a whole lot of impact. The semi-dedicated idea is fairly new, and doesn't offer much more than bare capacity between a reseller plan and a dedicated/managed box. So, it will be interesting to see where it goes from here.

Cheers

Gary

Originally posted by ^Kyo
Secondly in my orignal reponse (and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out) I was referring to major flaws. Not minor flaws.
Funny though. I along with everyone else remembered reading -
....since you wont find any flaws with us.
But good to see that you've changed that to "major flaws" instead of "minor flaws". I was confused for a bit there. :)

Anyways, I imagine Chicken will be here soon to do his job. If you make statement like "since you wont find any flaws with us." I will comment that a statement like that is arrogant and immature. Factual observation from statements made.

If you don't want folks to make comments like mine, then don't make statements like that.

Thank you. :)

Wow..
Ahser is a very good guy, I have talked to him several times, his serice very well could be flawless. Aussiebob ever since I have been a member here you have always been starting it up with different people. I am wondering what exactly you are trying to prove here?

P.S. Aussiebob don't even bother posting back telling me I am imature or anything along those lines, because I am just putting this one statement in. Incase you have tarnished (doubt it) Ashers reputation. I would just like to clear anything up to any potential clients for Atwebhost who are reading this.

Originally posted by Aussie Bob

Funny though. I along with everyone else remembered reading -

But good to see that you've changed that to "major flaws" instead of "minor flaws". I was confused for a bit there. :)

Anyways, I imagine Chicken will be here soon to do his job. If you make statement like "since you wont find any flaws with us." I will comment that a statement like that is arrogant and immature. Factual observation from statements made.

If you don't want folks to make comments like mine, then don't make statements like that.

Thank you. :)

I have edited my original post to include 'major flaws' for the lesser understanding people.

Asher.

Originally posted by DJiMPaCT
Wow..
Ahser is a very good guy, I have talked to him several times, his serive verywell could be flawless. Aussie bob ever since I have been a member here you have always been starting it up with different people. I am wondering what exactly you are trying to prove here?

P.S. Aususie bob don't even bother posting back telling me I am imature or anything along those lines, because I am just putting this one statement in. Incase you have tarnished (doubt it) Ashers reputation. I would just like to clear anything up to any potential clients for Atwebhost who are reading this.

Thank you :)

Originally posted by Editor
Meanwhile lads...back at the ranch. :)
Nothing wrong with some spirited interaction. :)
I wonder whether there's a lot of scope for either semi-dedicated or VPS. The VPS model has been around for a while, without making a whole lot of impact. The semi-dedicated idea is fairly new, and doesn't offer much more than bare capacity between a reseller plan and a dedicated/managed box. So, it will be interesting to see where it goes from here.
I believe that there's a model there somewhere. I guess it comes down to how well a company could sell the concept etc. VDS platform on a server is probably the ultimate SDS [SemiDedicated Server]. But I see nothing wrong with limiting a server to 10 accounts and charging $75/mth per account etc. They're really just big reseller accounts.

As I said, the model is there somewhere, but it's under big competition by cheap servers. Is there anyone around WHT who is successfully marketing and implenting the semi-dedicated server approach. I remember Matt from Voxtreme saying he was going to start offering them. I wonder how the uptake went?

Originally posted by ^Kyo
I have edited my original post to include 'major flaws' for the lesser understanding people.

Asher.
lol. Thank you. :)

Originally posted by DJiMPaCT
Aussie bob ever since I have been a member here you have always been starting it up with different people. I am wondering what exactly you are trying to prove here?
That he is not flawless, like he implied. I made my point - Asher edited his statement from my request. My point proven.
P.S. Aususie bob don't even bother posting back telling me I am imature or anything along those lines, because I am just putting this one statement in. Incase you have tarnished (doubt it) Ashers reputation. I would just like to clear anything up to any potential clients for Atwebhost who are reading this.
Thanks for clearing that up. Your input was invaluable. :)

Originally posted by Aussie Bob

That he is not flawless, like he implied. I made my point - Asher edited his statement from my request. My point proven.

Thanks for clearing that up. Your input was invaluable. :)

Correction:

I dont have major flaws just minor ones like everyone else on this board including you Aussie Bob.

I never intended on implying I am absolutely flawless but obviously that thought never struck your mind hence I edited my post... ;)

Asher.

Originally posted by Aussie Bob
But I see nothing wrong with limiting a server to 10 accounts and charging $75/mth per account etc. They're really just big reseller accounts.

Or 20 accounts at $37.50/mth. Or 40 accounts at $18.75. You're right, they are only reseller accounts. Brought about I think, by the rush to fill reseller boxes with a lot of resellers adding unlimited domains. It's not a solution as such, because it doesn't really solve anything. But similar to the discussion we had recently about the whole "unlimited domains" thing...in reverse it does reduce the chance of problems by commiting to a lower number of resellers who pay more.

These are my opinions Bob. I'm not "telling you how it is". I'm explaining what I have seen over the last 18 months to 2 years. The VPS solution (because it does effectively lock down resources to a degree) was interesting, but dedicated server prices plummeted before it made an impact. The semi-dedicated idea is more about keeping the reseller market interested against the dedicated options, by better managing those server. Which in itself is a good thing.

Cheers

Gary

Originally posted by ^Kyo
Correction:

I dont have major flaws just minor ones like everyone else on this board including you Aussie Bob.
I have MAJOR FLAWS. Probably much more than you. I'm working on them though. I know they're there and I'm slowly but surely changing them. :) It's when we're aware of our flaws that we have the power to overcome them and truly improve. I am a tad passionate about this subject. Your statement kind of got in the firing line. ;)
I never intended on implying I am absolutely flawless but obviously that thought never struck your mind hence I edited my post... ;)[/B]
Peace. Issue resolved. :)

Back ontopic - I think your semidedicated model can work. I haven't crunched the numbers etc of your offerring, but they seem a little cheap. $49 * 6 clients ?? That's only $294/mth revenue from the server. Shouldn't the reveune be higher than that?

Originally posted by Aussie Bob

I have MAJOR FLAWS. Probably much more than you. I'm working on them though. I know they're there and I'm slowly but surely changing them. :) It's when we're aware of our flaws that we have the power to overcome them and truly improve. I am a tad passionate about this subject. Your statement kind of got in the firing line. ;)

Peace. Issue resolved. :)

Back ontopic - I think your semidedicated model can work. I haven't crunched the numbers etc of your offerring, but they seem a little cheap. $49 * 6 clients ?? That's only $294/mth revenue from the server. Shouldn't the reveune be higher than that?

That is correct, thats the revenue we gain on nearly all our semi dedicated boxes. Since our launch, we have filled up a load of boxes :D We're not out here to make supernormal profits in the short term. We want to grow slowly, surely and steadily.

By putting such a small amount of resellers on 1 server we can efficiently manage that server without running into problems in the long term. This is not true when you host a lot of resellers on one box, management becomes more and more difficult when you have more and more domains.

Asher.

Originally posted by Editor
But similar to the discussion we had recently about the whole "unlimited domains" thing...in reverse it does reduce the chance of problems by commiting to a lower number of resellers who pay more.
....but who would possibly use more too. One of those resellers could break the server. But I can agree with parts of what you said and about our recent discussions along this line. :)
These are my opinions Bob. I'm not "telling you how it is". I'm explaining what I have seen over the last 18 months to 2 years.
And that's a good thing. :agree:
The VPS solution (because it does effectively lock down resources to a degree) was interesting, but dedicated server prices plummeted before it made an impact.
Yes, there is space in the market, but as dedicated servers get cheaper, that space becomes less.
The semi-dedicated idea is more about keeping the reseller market interested against the dedicated options, by better managing those server. Which in itself is a good thing.
Yep. The business model is there, but it's tight and it really comes down to whoever can sell the model and the benefits of the service, to whether they can make it work....So I guess it comes down to marketing ??

Originally posted by ^Kyo
I just love it when fellow webhosts jump in to bash another webhost to get a peice of their business... its the best thing about WHT actually :rolleyes:.
No, I'm not here to bash any companies. I just speak out what I think and I could be wrong. At WHT, we are expected to hear both good and bad comments about us and what we should do is to explain to everybody what's right and what's wrong rather than accusing people of bashing us.

In fact, I see the simi-dedicated server model with limited number of resellers per server quite convenient for Resellers like myself who have a potential number of clients and planning to move forward to open a web hosting company eventually.

Moreover, there is a greater possibility for someone to move from simi-dedicated to fully dedicated servers within the same company. So that is another benefit for the company itself.

The cost for a simi-dedicated offered athostweb is quite reasonable. In fact, it is very affordable with all these features.

This will help us not only concentrate more on our customers than the network, it will present a better image for the company too.

A webhosting provider usually gotta start from somewhere, and if I have known about athostweb before, I might have joined rather than paying triple the fees for less value.

That sort of simi-dedicated @ $49 in my believe is a starting point for a reseller, and a transition point toward dedicated and then after colocated servers.

Originally posted by tamouh
That sort of simi-dedicated @ $49 in my believe is a starting point for a reseller, and a transition point toward dedicated and then after colocated servers.
:D They're breaking the rules with that pricing. *tsk tsk* ;)

Price brackets could be -

(1). $15 - $50/mth - standard reseller plans.
(2). $75 - $100/mth - VDS or Semi dedicateds.
(3). $250 - $500/mth - full dedicated servers.

Originally posted by Aussie Bob

:D They're breaking the rules with that pricing. *tsk tsk* ;)

Price brackets could be -

(1). $15 - $50/mth - standard reseller plans.
(2). $75 - $100/mth - VDS or Semi dedicateds.
(3). $250 - $500/mth - full dedicated servers.


Pricing like ours is only feasible for people who dont have a fixed cost per server (like rent etc). Thats why we can offer what we offer.

Asher.

Originally posted by Aussie Bob
As I said, the model is there somewhere, but it's under big competition by cheap servers. Is there anyone around WHT who is successfully marketing and implenting the semi-dedicated server approach. I remember Matt from Voxtreme saying he was going to start offering them. I wonder how the uptake went?

The uptake has been fair - we haven't had millions of signups, but then we aren't offering the cheapest semi-dedicated - you could get a RackShack server for cheaper than our semi-dedicateds. People offering really cheap semi-dedicated servers must be taking a large hit on the box's profitability, placing a high number of clients per box on it, or using much cheaper hardware and bandwidth. I forsee, in our case, that it will take a while for people to see that we're actually offering a quality managed solution before we make a large headway into the market.

It's nice to be able to offer resellers an interim between a reseller plan and a dedicated server though.

Matt

Originally posted by voxtreme-matt
It's nice to be able to offer resellers an interim between a reseller plan and a dedicated server though.
Yes, I see it as a good product to offer to an existing client base and gives them another option etc. We've had many requests for semi-dedicated servers from potential clients and from existing clients. So there is a market there....:)

Three things.

1) We all know what you pay. You do not get some deal that only *you* are given. If you believe that, you will believe anything a salesperson will say. The ol' "Sign this non-disclosure, because you are getting the best deal around" works on some people I guess. We all know what servers cost. We all know what colo/leases run. We all know what basic cost are. We all can understand the rough bottom line. If you can't, you don't know business.

2) What is a semi-dedicated server? Really? No isolation. No guaranteed resources. Is a server with two busy shared sites on a it, a semidedicated server? Why is something like a standard MCHost not advertised as semidedicated? Is there a difference between a semi-dedicated with 6 sites vs. one with 20? Who sets these standards? Maybe my semidedicated allows 100 sites instead of the 1000 I usually add (figurlativily speaking).

3) VDS are working just fine for us. There will always be a market for them. A managed VDS that lives and breathes like a dedicated for $60 - $90 is better for *some*, then a $99/mo unmanaged solution. Not every one needs the full power of a dedicated when a VDS can provide what is needed. Also, never compare a VDS to a semidedicated. They are not the same. One offers fault tolerance and isolation. The other doesn't. Huge difference.

Also, maybe you do not see VDS making waves on WHT because most host here are resellers and can not afford the cost associtaed with running them. Ensim requires SX. HSP*** requires a large up front, like $2500, Sphera is like $400/mo/server. Many resellers are still upset they are paying $45.00/2 GBs of space.

<B>
(1). $15 - $50/mth - standard reseller plans.
(2). $75 - $100/mth - VDS or Semi dedicateds.
(3). $250 - $500/mth - full dedicated servers.
</B>

I think that is a little bit over priecd model. Small dedicated servers should be able to start reasonably around $150.

computer hardwares have been dropping dramatically in the recent year, and cost per server is almost negligible on the long-term (speaking of regular towers).

The only costs I foresee are rent space / net connection and support staffs.

Originally posted by UmBillyCord
Also, never compare a VDS to a semidedicated. They are not the same. One offers fault tolerance and isolation. The other doesn't. Huge difference.
We know there's no real definition of word "semi-dedicated servers" and what it means and what it doesn't mean. It's really a matter of personal opinion etc.

But could we say that a true semi-dedicated server uses a VDS platform?

Originally posted by tamouh

(1). $15 - $50/mth - standard reseller plans.
(2). $75 - $100/mth - VDS or Semi dedicateds.
(3). $250 - $500/mth - full dedicated servers.


I think that is a little bit over priecd model. Small dedicated servers should be able to start reasonably around $150.

computer hardwares have been dropping dramatically in the recent year, and cost per server is almost negligible on the long-term (speaking of regular towers).

The only costs I foresee are rent space / net connection and support staffs.
Yeah, many variables for dedicated server pricing. I was just throwing out some numbers in comparison to semi-dedicated and reseller pricing etc....

Try checking out some pricing at www.rackspace.com and compare them to www.rackshack.net

Different markets - different equipment - different pricing...:)

You can probably say VDS and Semi-Dedicated are the same.

You might get better utilization when less number of resellers are sharing the same server. However, it will all go down to whom you're sharing the server with more than the number of people you share it with.

However, I still like the idea of semi-dedicated better.

You know what would be even much better? If you could have one server with multiple partitions. Each partition is designated to a reseller with its own OS, DB....root...etc....etc.

I think its possible! That would be a nice mini-dedicated server.

I guess i'm getting a little bit sleeeepy ! :o

Originally posted by UmBillyCord
[B]
2) What is a semi-dedicated server? Really? No isolation. No guaranteed resources. Is a server with two busy shared sites on a it, a semidedicated server? Why is something like a standard MCHost not advertised as semidedicated? Is there a difference between a semi-dedicated with 6 sites vs. one with 20? Who sets these standards? Maybe my semidedicated allows 100 sites instead of the 1000 I usually add (figurlativily speaking).
[B]

We define semi-dedicated to be a server with 6 users per box on - and advertise our plans as larger reseller plans. We don't guarantee resources per user, nor do advertise that we do.

VDS is probably a better solution if you are wanting to guarantee resources and give root priviliges, but we find semi-dedicateds work well for us.

Regards
Matt

I wouldn't call VDS and semi-dedicated the same; they do have many differences.

What you described at the bottom is basically a VDS...

Originally posted by Aussie Bob
But could we say that a true semi-dedicated server uses a VDS platform?

No, as one is a more closely managed server for resellers and the other is a virtual dedicated server. :)

Gary

:eek: I didn't mean to start World War 3:D You guys HAVE been busy while I've been asleep.

I THINK I vaguely understand the situation - I THOUGHT semi-dedicated was roughly the same as virtual - seems not! But I'm still not sure what the best solution is for me.

I currently have about a dozen sites on my reseller plan - that might increase by 8 or 10 over the next year (I only host a few to help cover costs for my own and for friends.) Between them they're using just over 20 GB bandwidth a month - and 19 of that is the one 'main' site. I suppose that could double in the next 12 months.

I DON'T want to jump from the frying pan into the fire and get 'blocked' again (which presumably may well happen with a semi-dedicated.) But what about a virtual? If my big site goes into overdrive, will it just 'break' MY 'virtual' or other virtuals as well??

Any suggestions for a Virtual host - I'm hoping NOT to spend MORE than $100 a month (hopefully, a bit less.)