Reseller hosting alternatives

Could I ask why you are looking at moving? I currently host with them and I do experience a few quirks here and there, but would be keen to hear from others.

Well it's been over a year since i posted this and Im still with them so they cant be that bad can they?. It is a real mission to move websites is one reason Im still there and the other is better the devil you know.....

Things that concern me though are the following:
1. There only seems to be 2 people in the entire business. While I'm all for small businesses I am a little uncomfortable having my entire business in the hands of 2 people. If you are peeved there is absolutely no way you can get to speak to any management of any kind. All such requests go ignored or redirected. I assume the 2 in support are the management. Basically what I'm saying is transparency is seriously lacking.

2. Weekend support is very poor in terms of response times. Fortunately I don't need it often.

3. Their Control Panel on Helm 4 is dated, no quick install for wordpress for example. I have to still do it the old time consuming way we did in the dark ages.

4. If you use Touchbase to send out bulk emails for your customers no one who has email hosted on their servers will receive the emails. I tried to get the two companies to talk but Touchbase gave up and reported the following "I've never had to go through such a rigorous process in my life - being asked to send through a very specific template of information but not providing the template or requirements, and only letting me know what's missing when I send it through. It was an odd and frustrating process". Sadly still unresolved.

5. They don't have any resource reporting on their Helm 4 Control Panel such as Bandwidth domains are using. When queried they insist that reporting is not part of the service im paying for, which left me confused and frustrated. They have kindly offered to write a custom script, but the conditions of that is for me to spend unproductive time sifting through hundreds of domains to see which resolve to their servers. After 2 odd years of trying I have given up.

6. Control Panel battles with basic tasks like setting folder permissions, applying redirects. It timesout or throws errors. Support does then step in and do it for you but it is unproductive as you have to wait for them.

7. They tend to say something cant be done and only after you kick up a fuss do they then re look at your request.

8. As you experience I also find wordpress sites a bit slow. Mine are hosted on a windows server so deem their speed to be acceptable. I think I will get a PHP based hosting account and host WP sites on that. I think that is a huge factor in WP speeds IMO. It is also Database related. I had some sites that were really slow and when we moved the database to one of their newer servers the speed improved dramatically. Their DB1 server is crap. Make sure it is on another server.

It's not all doom and gloom

On the pro side
1. Their up time is very good with my sites only being slow to unresponsive in the early ours of the morning, I assume during backups.
2. They are very strict on security issues and spam as all good providers should be. Sometime too strict (see touchbase comment above)
3. Their support is good during the week.
4. Pricing is competitive

Admittedly I am quite possibly over critical :) but only a little. This is just my experience I have had with them over the last few years. I think all providers have their pros and cons, you just have to decide what you are prepared to deal with and then live with it. These comments are based purely on their shared hosting reseller service.

Would I recommend them? Yes i would but cautiously.
 
Last edited:
very similar type service as elitehost - though their software is probably more jacked up. I don't need their support often, no tel support but quite responsive to twitter and facebook if their chat is offline.
 
Thanks Frogstar, I appreciate the time and the comments

...It is a real mission to move websites is one reason Im still there and the other is better the devil you know.....

This is probably the biggest factor for me, so maybe I will stick around for a bit :-)
 
very similar type service as elitehost - though their software is probably more jacked up. I don't need their support often, no tel support but quite responsive to twitter and facebook if their chat is offline.

really? similar experience? because elitehost responds within 20 minutes even if I log it at 2am on a sunday morning...
 
Sorry for the off topic, but why is everyone so against overseas hosting? I have been hosting in the USA and don't see what the problem is. In general you get a lot more for your money and their service levels are way better in my experience. Most local call centres I've spoken to only know one thing - FLOWCHART stuff :)
 
Sorry for the off topic, but why is everyone so against overseas hosting? I have been hosting in the USA and don't see what the problem is. In general you get a lot more for your money and their service levels are way better in my experience. Most local call centres I've spoken to only know one thing - FLOWCHART stuff :)

tl;dr version: SEO

If you're looking to rank better in the googs you should consider local hosting. Faster response times means better rank and retention. Amazon did a study where 100ms boosted sales quite considerably. I've personally seen boune rates go from 80% to 55% just because a site's load speed went from 1.6 seconds to 500ms.

But if you're not concerned (or your revenue isn't derived from) about traffic/user experience because you only have a company website that's used to establish some form of presence online, why not.

The gap in terms of service levels and price has shrunk dramatically in the last decade. So there really is no reason for you to have local sites not hosted locally. They're actually very competitively priced and I like not having to worry about the Rand/Dollar exchange rate pushing up costs unexpectedly. As for service levels? I've been with Hetzner, Afrihost, Web Africa, MWEB, I.S and Elitehost. Dedicated, VPS and Shared. So far Elitehost has the best service IF I need it. Probably sounds like a broken record, but I won't say so if I didn't mean it.
 
really? similar experience? because elitehost responds within 20 minutes even if I log it at 2am on a sunday morning...

Thats nice for you. I don't think they have ever responded within 20 minutes, regardless of the time of day. Will still recommend them as even though their contact methods suck, the prices are reasonable and not many issues.
edit:
ok, I just checked my tickets, indeed some within 20 minutes, some over an hour and some had to go to twitter as response was too slow, as in a few hours passed
 
Last edited:
Thats nice for you. I don't think they have ever responded within 20 minutes, regardless of the time of day. Will still recommend them as even though their contact methods suck, the prices are reasonable and not many issues.
edit:
ok, I just checked my tickets, indeed some within 20 minutes, some over an hour and some had to go to twitter as response was too slow, as in a few hours passed

Hi lived666,

Please PM me your account email address so I can check this for you. We'd like to investigate what caused the delay to prevent it from happening again in the future
 
tl;dr version: SEO

If you're looking to rank better in the googs you should consider local hosting. Faster response times means better rank and retention. Amazon did a study where 100ms boosted sales quite considerably. I've personally seen boune rates go from 80% to 55% just because a site's load speed went from 1.6 seconds to 500ms.

But if you're not concerned (or your revenue isn't derived from) about traffic/user experience because you only have a company website that's used to establish some form of presence online, why not.

The gap in terms of service levels and price has shrunk dramatically in the last decade. So there really is no reason for you to have local sites not hosted locally. They're actually very competitively priced and I like not having to worry about the Rand/Dollar exchange rate pushing up costs unexpectedly. As for service levels? I've been with Hetzner, Afrihost, Web Africa, MWEB, I.S and Elitehost. Dedicated, VPS and Shared. So far Elitehost has the best service IF I need it. Probably sounds like a broken record, but I won't say so if I didn't mean it.

Sorry, but there's literally no evidence in the fact that hosting locally will improve your ranking. Sure, website speed is an established factor in Google's ranking algorithm (although we don't know to what extent) but where do you think they're measuring these speeds from??? Just because a website loads faster for you because of your proximity to it, doesn't mean Google's engine will see it as such. In fact, Google doesn't even have a datacenter in SA, so by that logic you're better off hosting overseas.
Sorry, I completely understand not wanting to pay a foreign exchange rate, but don't agree with the need to host in a local datacenter. I've ranked PLENTY of websites hosted on international servers above more popular sites hosted locally on Google.co.za. It has never been an issue. Of course it helps tremendously to set the website's geographic location and to have a co.za domain, but beyond that, server location in my experience counts for ziltch.
In fact, for a number of reasons - political, infrastructure etc. - I often advise against it.
 
Last edited:
Google doesn't even have a datacenter in SA, so by that logic you're better off hosting overseas.
Sorry, I completely understand not wanting to pay a foreign exchange rate, but don't agree with the need to host in a local datacenter.

There is a very secure, awesome looking vaulted off area in Teraco JHB where Google has their local servers.
Google peers directly on NapAfrica and their setup is very impressive to see, that is why when you do a traceroute to youtube and such it looks like this:

Code:
C:\Users\stryd_000>tracert www.youtube.com

Tracing route to youtube-ui.l.google.com [216.58.223.46]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1     1 ms    <1 ms     1 ms  192.168.1.1
  2     8 ms     6 ms    13 ms  154.127.112.141
  3     5 ms     4 ms     4 ms  google.jb1.napafrica.net [196.46.25.166]
  4    10 ms     4 ms     5 ms  72.14.239.129
  5     5 ms     5 ms     5 ms  jnb01s08-in-f14.1e100.net [216.58.223.46]

Trace complete.

Code:
C:\Users\stryd_000>tracert www.google.co.za

Tracing route to www.google.co.za [216.58.223.35]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms     1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.1.1
  2     8 ms     6 ms    12 ms  154.127.112.141
  3    11 ms     6 ms     7 ms  google.jb1.napafrica.net [196.46.25.166]
  4     6 ms     6 ms     4 ms  72.14.239.129
  5     9 ms     4 ms     7 ms  jnb01s08-in-f3.1e100.net [216.58.223.35]

Trace complete.
 
There is a very secure, awesome looking vaulted off area in Teraco JHB where Google has their local servers.
Google peers directly on NapAfrica and their setup is very impressive to see, that is why when you do a traceroute to youtube and such it looks like this:

Code:
C:\Users\stryd_000>tracert www.youtube.com

Tracing route to youtube-ui.l.google.com [216.58.223.46]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1     1 ms    <1 ms     1 ms  192.168.1.1
  2     8 ms     6 ms    13 ms  154.127.112.141
  3     5 ms     4 ms     4 ms  google.jb1.napafrica.net [196.46.25.166]
  4    10 ms     4 ms     5 ms  72.14.239.129
  5     5 ms     5 ms     5 ms  jnb01s08-in-f14.1e100.net [216.58.223.46]

Trace complete.

Code:
C:\Users\stryd_000>tracert www.google.co.za

Tracing route to www.google.co.za [216.58.223.35]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms     1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.1.1
  2     8 ms     6 ms    12 ms  154.127.112.141
  3    11 ms     6 ms     7 ms  google.jb1.napafrica.net [196.46.25.166]
  4     6 ms     6 ms     4 ms  72.14.239.129
  5     9 ms     4 ms     7 ms  jnb01s08-in-f3.1e100.net [216.58.223.35]

Trace complete.

Oh, I'm not saying Google doesn't have any servers in SA. I know they do. They even have offices here. But in this case it's not relevant to the SERPs. If that were the case, websites hosted in Joburg would in theory receive preferential treatment on Google.co.za over websites hosted in Cape Town for instance, or elsewhere. It's not the case.
 
Oh, I'm not saying Google doesn't have any servers in SA. I know they do. They even have offices here. But in this case it's not relevant to the SERPs. If that were the case, websites hosted in Joburg would in theory receive preferential treatment on Google.co.za over websites hosted in Cape Town for instance, or elsewhere. It's not the case.

Well yes and no, if you have location services enabled and you are in joburg and search for say plumbers or restaurants or any search where your location might be relevant, google will show you results of joburg over capetown.

Google does do Geo-targeting, for example if you have a .com domain and host in the US, google will deems this site less relavent on a google.co.za search.

Google explain it like this:

If no information is entered in Webmaster Tools, we'll continue to make geographic associations largely based on the top-level domain (e.g. .co.uk or .ca) and the IP address of the webserver from which the context was served.

If no information is entered in Webmaster Tools, we'll rely largely on the site's country domain (.ca, .de, etc.). If an international domain (.com, .org, .eu, etc) has been used, we'll rely on the IP address. If you change hosting provider for a country domain, there should be no impact. If you change the hosting provider of an international domain to a provider in another country, we recommend using Webmaster Tools to tell us which country your site should be associated with.
 
Google explain it like this:

If no information is entered in Webmaster Tools, we'll continue to make geographic associations largely based on the top-level domain (e.g. .co.uk or .ca) and the IP address of the webserver from which the context was served.

If no information is entered in Webmaster Tools, we'll rely largely on the site's country domain (.ca, .de, etc.). If an international domain (.com, .org, .eu, etc) has been used, we'll rely on the IP address. If you change hosting provider for a country domain, there should be no impact. If you change the hosting provider of an international domain to a provider in another country, we recommend using Webmaster Tools to tell us which country your site should be associated with.

"If no information is entered in Webmaster Tools..."

So as I mentioned previously:

chopsky said:
Of course it helps tremendously to set the website's geographic location and to have a co.za domain, but beyond that, server location in my experience counts for ziltch.

So yes, you need to set the geo-location in WMT and have a co.za domain. But beyond that, it doesn't matter at all. Google only falls back on things like server IP when the webmaster has failed to properly specify the geo-location in WMT.
 
Last edited:
tl;dr version: SEO

If you're looking to rank better in the googs you should consider local hosting. Faster response times means better rank and retention. Amazon did a study where 100ms boosted sales quite considerably. I've personally seen boune rates go from 80% to 55% just because a site's load speed went from 1.6 seconds to 500ms.

But if you're not concerned (or your revenue isn't derived from) about traffic/user experience because you only have a company website that's used to establish some form of presence online, why not.

The gap in terms of service levels and price has shrunk dramatically in the last decade. So there really is no reason for you to have local sites not hosted locally. They're actually very competitively priced and I like not having to worry about the Rand/Dollar exchange rate pushing up costs unexpectedly. As for service levels? I've been with Hetzner, Afrihost, Web Africa, MWEB, I.S and Elitehost. Dedicated, VPS and Shared. So far Elitehost has the best service IF I need it. Probably sounds like a broken record, but I won't say so if I didn't mean it.

I have just had a quick look at the host in your example, there is a huge difference in the pricing to what I'm paying compared to them. The difference isn't just price, the specs is also way less than what I'm getting, both bandwidth and disk space are way off. With regards to your SEO example, I believe that you've seen those differences, but I have sites that's been hosted in the US for 10+ years and the only time it dipped below position 5 on the big G, was when I moved hosts and took it off dedicated IP to shared IP's, and even that was only a temporary thing.

I also had a look at VPS services here, and again, way more than I'm paying now and also way less CPU, Mem and disk space. I'm sure that there are people who just like local more, because local is lekker, but for me, it's only business. I have to get the best all round deal to give my clients the most bang for their buck, with good 24/7/365 support, something I feel there is a huge shortage of in this country.

You are also correct in saying that the situation has improved a lot, it's almost competitive, it's not 5 times the price like it used to be, it's closer to double now.

If someone can suggest a true local competitor with international standard support staff, I would gladly look into moving my VPS and reseller hosting here, but until then, I'll just keep it where it is. Hehehehe and another thing, where my services are hosted, they don't even know what load shedding is :)
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X