5 Reasons to avoid multi-year colocation contracts

Since its inception in 1998 as SuperFord.org (originally as a place for friends to post information about their vehicles) to the transition to a database-driven online community (in May 2001 re-launched as SuperMotors), SuperMotors has been running on commodity hardware built and funded by us three owners of the business. We were fortunate enough to have the expertise of web development, server building, and FreeBSD administration shared between the three of us. When we eventually outgrew our commercial-grade cable internet service in the early 2000’s, we entered the wonderful world of colocation.

In our never-ending quest to drive down operational costs of running a hobby-site-turned-online-business, it was critical for us to find an affordable colocation provider in terms of rack rental fees, bandwidth fees, reliability, and 24/7 data center access.

These reasons for not entering into multi-year hosting contracts are not to do any disservice to our current colocation provider. We have been nothing but happy with the experience. Changes in online business, technology, personal, and professional lives of small business owners are sometimes very unexpected, and it’s these changes that we’ve experienced that I wish to share with you in our 5 reasons to avoid multi-year hosting contracts:

1.) The price of bandwidth continues to drop

This may seem obvious, but it is completely true. Since we began colocating, the competitive landscape has increased many times over. Prices, levels of service, and popularity of colocation and managed hosting have changed significantly. We are nearing the end of a 2-year contract and let me tell you, in March of 2005 when we renewed our contract, it was the best deal at the time. But guess what? It’s very expensive compared to what can be had now. We find ourselves today locked into 2005 pricing.
Lesson learned: It may look like a cost-savings at the time to drive down your immediate monthly costs by a few dollars. The money wasted down the road is considerable.

2.) The price of server hardware continues to drop

What seemed like an “investment in the future” in mid-2004 when we built our server, turned out to be anything but. The simple fact is that a server investment is a considerable expense for a small business, especially for a community-driven site that can grow at exponential rates. At the time, 300 GB SATA drives were the biggest, baddest drive you could buy. Today, just over 1 year later, 750 GB drives are coming into the realm of affordability for the common man. We quickly outgrew our server in the course of just 1 year and found ourselves in need to make another significant investment. While still commodity hardware, it does get more expensive to “do it right.”

Bound and determined to again “invest in the future,” we made a significant investment which would later turn out to be a complete disaster. While not really linked to colocation in any way, this type of situation is a potential risk in any business building their own servers and working with the lowest cost vendor. Hindsight is always 20/20; if I were to do it all over again, we would have purchased a Dell PowerEdge server for considerably more money and just called it a day. However, that would not have saved us from #3.

3.) You WILL outgrow your servers

Unless you have a SAN, which is highly unlikely for a small startup, you will outgrow your storage capacity more and more often. For our business, file storage is a critical component…more so than database performance. We can get away with a fairly light-weight database server due to our database structure and server optimization with FreeBSD and MySQL, but there is no magic to file storage. We just need more. And we need more space ALL THE TIME. This creates a very difficult financial model because it truly is exponential growth. The more users that hop on broadband internet connections, the easier it is for them to post more data. The more digital cameras become affordable, the more pictures they post. The more megapixels digital cameras offer, the larger the file size is that gets posted. Today, with the popularity of video and how easily the average consumer can record video and digitize it on their home computer, this creates an even larger demand for storage.

4.) You WILL outgrow your original bandwidth requirements

When we locked into a 2-year contract in 2005, we were locked into specific Mbps 95th-percentile billing. 95th percentile billing is a great way to control your monthly costs, but is an even better way to choke your growth potential. Community-based sites offering photo, audio, and video hosting like SuperMotors are much better suited for total bandwidth transferred. Furthermore, what we found is that in order to increase our bandwidth, this meant committing to the bandwidth through the end of our contract or signing a new contract (and thus extending the original contract).

Due to the nature of 95th percentile billing, we did cap it. An open 100 mbps connection to the internet on a 95th percentile billing model is a recipe for disaster for a site like ours, financially speaking. A user that posts a link to a video on a popular forum could single-handedly increase monthly hosting costs many times over because of the spike in traffic that their shared video could cause. Under total data transferred, this is a much more manageable billing model for our site.

But back to the bandwidth requirements — your requirements will surely increase over time. It’s better to start low and gradually increase your monthly costs than to commit to where you think you’ll be in 2 years just to get the better monthly deal now. You’ll spend more money in the long-run by committing early. While there is no guarantee, the trend definitely says bandwidth will continue to drop — which is another reason to ramp up your bandwidth needs.

5.) These days, managed hosting is completely affordable

Thanks to increased competition, more affordable server hardware, and bandwidth prices dropping, viable companies like Peer1, Rackspace, and INetU have made a business out of providing managed hosting. Through Peer1 managed hosting, we will get 40% more storage space, 4 times the bandwidth (based on our monthly average data transferred), 24×7 managed hosting, a 1-hour hardware replacement Service Level Agreement (SLA), and a 100% network uptime guarantee on the core Peer1 network all for 5% LESS than what we pay for colocation today. This is an incredible change in landscape compared to where we were nearly 2 years ago when we were “planning for the future” with buying and managing our own server hardware and locking into the “affordable” 2-year colocation contract.

Best of all, we no longer have to manage or own any hardware. There are no more sleepless nights wondering if the servers will crash or repairing the servers when they do crash. We can focus 100% on building our online community and sleep peacefully at night knowing we have a solid service level agreement and 24×7 tech support.

We will be committing to a 1-year contract (minimum commitment). At any point in time we can upgrade our servers to support additional storage or processing needs as well as add additional bandwidth on an as-needed basis. This model keeps our operational costs at an all-time low while giving us the flexibility to scale without signficant financial risk (like our CCSI vendor fiasco) and without significant financial/time investment (like purchasing, building, and setting up a server). At the end of 1 year, we can always re-evaluate the competitive landscape to see if it makes sense to move our business elsewhere. Moving an online business from ISP to ISP is certainly no joy-ride, but knowing we have the option puts us in a position of power come time to renegotiate a contract.

Post to Twitter

Tags: , ,

Related posts

Apple’s iPhone – mp3 playback a commodity?

In a recent post on Jeremiah’s Web Strategy Blog, he says that Apple must get into this space by accepting that mp3 playback will be a commodity. I guess I agree and disagree with this. mp3 playback on a computer is a commodity, but iTunes holds a huge share, and the iPod dominates the market for consumers’ mp3 playback device choice. I’m not sure that cell phones will be any different because there’s no clear market leader right now.

I’m in the market for a new cell phone, and although I love my BlackBerry, it doesn’t have video playback or mp3 playback…plus I don’t have cell service with my plan (it’s provided by the day-job…sorry, data plan only!). So, I carry a separate cell phone, my Nokia 8862. The qwerty keyboard was great when I first purchased it (I e-mail, text message, and IM a lot), but I never use it anymore due to having the blackberry. I really would like a cell phone and mp3 player combination. In looking at my options, there really aren’t any phones that dominate this category. Yes, there are many that can play music, but will they play my downloaded music from iTunes? No. Will they have the same familiar interface as the iPod? No. Will they have integration with my iTunes playlists? No.

For the millions of iTunes users, Apple’s iPhone could potentailly fill a void in the market…even if Japanese phones referenced in the article make their way over to the states. Without knowing what or when the iPhone will be announced, it’s hard to say much else about it…I can’t wait to check it out. Will it offer purchasing of music directly from iTunes? Will it have large storage capacity? Can I use it to replace my dated (gen1) iPod Shuffle? How will it sync with my computer…usb, firewire, or both? I hope I’m not disappointed.

Post to Twitter

Tags: , ,

Related posts

kudos to omniture for monitoring blogs

Bonus Points for Omniture
Unbeknownst to me, last week as I was testing out this new installation of WordPress blogging software, a post I made which referenced Omniture would make its way into a few blog feeds and someone from Omniture would actually take notice — and better yet, take action. In the post, I indicated some frustration with the UI and setting up reporting and that I was considering giving Clickshift.com a try at SEM needs. Today I received a call from our SearchCenter contact and we talked through some of the details of the post and he showed me how to create some business rules to solve a problem I was having.

In the business of tracking: clicks -> conversions to free samples -> offline sales
I explained that my goal right now, since we do not sell products via our website, was to maximize the conversions from visitor to free sample ordering. From the sample ordering data we collect, we can determine the percentage of sample orders that convert into offline purchasers. Fortunately for our business model, we sell custom products, which means orders are placed directly with us, regardless of retailer. The manufactured blind makes its way to the consumer, so we can simply match the shipping address of a product order against our database of addresses we collect for free sample ordering. (All of this is obviously done under our privacy policy and consumer data is kept under lock & key.)

Ahhh…the cost/conversion metric I had been looking for
Anyway, since we do not sell products online, we thus have no online revenue to track, which makes some of the default reporting within Omniture’s SearchCenter product useless to us — in particular ROAS (Return on Ad Spend). What I am looking to do is reduce our cost per conversion (cost per swatch order). This metric did require our account rep to setup a custom setting on his end to enable us to better report against it, but at the end of the call, I had cost/conversion reporting setup and was on my way to creating business rules for our search engine bids.

FWIW, cost/conversion is a default metric available in Google’s free web analytics. It seems like somewhat of an oversight to omit this metric from the default reporting, but I guess that Omniture’s clients typically are e-commerce businesses that rely on ROAS metrics since they have online revenue to also inject into reporting (at which point cost/conversion is less critical).

Herein lies the delimma: OPTIMIZING keyword campaigns on cost per conversion
Clickshift.com’s model automatically optimizes entire campaigns based on keywords that drive the best cost per conversion. Additionally, Clickshift.com also optimizes based on landing page.

Omniture’s system is not so automated or all-encompassing (yet). Omniture’s reporting is able to TELL me what keywords are driving for cost/conversion, but only through arbitrary automated increments (that I specify based on no data/research) can I enforce increases or decreases in bid spending. Furthermore, Omniture’s support for A/B(/C/D/E…n) landing pages is a little more involved that Clickshift. Technically, it can be done, but requires tagging pages specifically, and doesn’t really offer the complete solution that Clickshift.com is selling businesses on. I would have to separately test landing pages and keyword campaigns and assemble my own findings between the two. I can’t just automatically disable landing pages or move my bids to another style of landing page automatically. Omniture’s business rules currently allow one action to be taken at a time…and landing pages can only be manually changed.

Net/Net: I’ll make further attempts at creating additional business rules (within Omniture) for bid automation based on average ad position, cost/conversion, and other criteria I deem necessary. We’ll see how much further I can drive down cost/conversion. And I’m very pleased at the level of customer service from Omniture.

Post to Twitter

Tags: ,

Related posts

Google Reader

Google Reader

For some time now I’ve been looking for a way to share a central list of RSS feed bookmarks between my home computer (iMac G5) and my work laptop (Powerbook G4). I keep track of several RSS feeds each day in my quest of staying in the loop with open source development, web marketing, and internet news. What I was finding is that I was reading more RSS feeds during the evenings on my home computer in addition to catching up on feeds over lunch while at the office. The problem was that I was adding new feeds to each computer without any way of conveniently sharing feeds.

Enter Google Reader. I now can manage a central source of RSS feeds no matter where I’m at, all through my Google account. I no longer have to use another app (I was using Vienna for Mac OS X) to keep up with my feeds. This too was always a gripe for me because I would forget to leave Vienna open and would go a day or two without reading feeds. Now I have web-based access to a central RSS feed list for everything I want to keep on top of.

Furthermore, I can also log into my RSS feeds in Google with my BlackBerry. And, if I read a feed at work on one machine, it’s automatically marked as “read” on any other machine I view feeds on, including my BlackBerry. I no longer have to worry about re-reading feeds I’ve already looked at due to the shared feed list I can now use through Google Reader.

Post to Twitter

No tags for this post.

Related posts

Banner ads with no relevance to service being sold

Lowermybills.com ad

I often visit CNN.com for news updates. LowerMyBills.com runs ads on CNN.com and I just have to ask, how does an animated tattoo needle that draws a picture of a silhouette of a dancing couple sell mortgages? Clearly, they are using these ads to grab your attention because the animation is eye-catching, but seriously…is it driving click-throughs AND conversions?

Post to Twitter

Tags:

Related posts