Would you choose cheap hosting company or are you willing to pay more ?

Well I am pretty sure a person selling web hosting services for his living won't sell a $12/year plan. :D

But generally 20 websites on a VPS won't really blow it off.

I think a new, small webhost would start with such kind of plans. But eventually they will all raise their prices substantially for growth in longer term.

As a promotion at maximum, for the first year then normal pricing. Starting off with these prices are just and keeping them ongoing just isn't profitable.

20 sites can easily overload a VPS depending on its spec, after you consider the VPS resources, the cPanel resource usage + all the extras you have filled it with.

But I do see your point also ;).
 
As a promotion at maximum, for the first year then normal pricing. Starting off with these prices are just and keeping them ongoing just isn't profitable.

Exactly my point. Eventually they have to raise the prices to be able to expand. And not to mention, to eliminate low quality accounts from their clientbase.
 
cheap is never the best. You need to be confident about your hosting company and feel comfortable with their services and budget
 
cheap is never the best.

I think that depends from person to person. Some people don't have high requirements and the cheap service provided by their web host is enough.

Then again, not all cheap hosts are horrible. Some do provide excellent services.
 
I think that depends from person to person. Some people don't have high requirements and the cheap service provided by their web host is enough.

Then again, not all cheap hosts are horrible. Some do provide excellent services.

Able to solve tickets, is main motive, even if it's cheap hosting.

I'd never say cheap means bad, look at us (Arvixe) for example. From a mere $5 per month (2 coffees?) you get a huge number of freebies such as a free domain name, backed with numerous guarantees, 24/7 support over multiple methods etc...

I'd say we're cheap, I'd also say we're a very good and reputable provider.
 
Checking the companies support before actually renting a server used to be my indication of a good hosting company
 
I personnally know that many cheap hosting company have a standar quality. They are not bad because they are cheap, people need to know the difference for this. Many hosting are Overpricing the space and customer should be aware of this
 
Depends on the reviews like Bluehost is cheap but is amazing where as Fatcow is cheap but a host i don't particularly like, sometimes ill go that little bit extra but not often.
 

They're owned by the same parent company so that makes them just as equally bad?

They're run by different management teams (yes of course with some input from EIG) but overall FatCow and BlueHost are very different hosting brands. For example the control panel, BlueHost uses cPanel whilst FatCow is using the EIG vDeck panel etc...
 
They're owned by the same parent company so that makes them just as equally bad?

They're run by different management teams (yes of course with some input from EIG) but overall FatCow and BlueHost are very different hosting brands. For example the control panel, BlueHost uses cPanel whilst FatCow is using the EIG vDeck panel etc...


but sales and support for all EIG brands are fed from the same central location
 
In my opinion it really comes down to what you want to host. If your hosting a site for a small gaming guild/clan then the cheapest route would probably be the best option, but if your hosting something that demands up time and performance then paying the extra buck won't hurt.
 
Hosting is critical to some and not to others. But why have hosting if you don't mind it been down. Price can give a good indication of quality unlimited is always a warning word. Do research and word of mouth and recommendations. Service comes at a price, nothing is free. Its all a of balance.
 
Cheap does not always translate into bad quality. Some hosts will discount products, which will make them look cheap. Best to read reviews or phone the host and question them about their services so you are content that they are offering value for money instead of cheap.
 
Depends on the reviews like Bluehost is cheap but is amazing where as Fatcow is cheap but a host i don't particularly like, sometimes ill go that little bit extra but not often.

You do know that Bluehost and Fatcow are practically the same company right? So same quality behind both of them.
 
It really depends on your budget and what you are looking for. Generally most shared hosting plans will give you unlimited space/bandwidth. If you need dedicated CPU/memory, a VPS would be ideal or if you need more than that, then a dedicated server would the best. I don't think paying more will get you better hosting, it really comes down to what your requirements are and your budget.
 
Would you choose cheap hosting company or are you willing to pay more for web hosting.
I guess it depends on how valuable your website is to you. If it's mission critical then I wouldn’t even consider shared hosting and therefore I'd expect to pay more for a VPS or even a dedi. For shared hosting I'd pay a higher than 'average' price if the host could show me they have good monthly up-times of at least 99.8%. I do not think 'cheap' necessarily means you'll get a poor service. Some hosts offer cheap plans because they provide no support other than ensuring the servers are up and certainly worth considering IMO.

Do you think that hosting prices are a sign of trust ? :rolleyes2
hosting prices !=trust :twocents:.
 
Back
Top