We’ve landed on a managed hosting contract
Posted in: freebsd, hosting, supermotors, technology, By: E. Long, At: December 28th, 2006
In a previous post, I outlined how we were looking at managed hosting for SuperMotors, to replace the current colocation contract we’ve had for nearly 2 years. After much negotiation with Rackspace, PEER 1, and INetU, none of them were able to come up with a proposal that was attractive enough as ipHouse’s offer. Here’s how things went down:
I really liked their website, the fact that they promoted their customer satisfaction rating (which is really high, at 96%), and they offered FreeBSD (my OS of choice, and where my comfort level is). Unfortunately, their pricing structure is not setup for high-bandwidth environments, as their bid came in much, much higher than the other 3 ISPs who were bidding on our business. Kudos to them for not straying from their core competency, but probably not a viable consideration for us in the future unless they make significant changes to their billing model.
3rd Place: Rackspace

I have real-world experience with Rackspace and their managed hosting, so I knew what to expect in terms of service and support. They did an excellent job in coming down on the costs of their hardware to match PEER 1’s quote, but just were not able to match the bandwidth (they could not go higher than 1000 GB/mo — as this is their standard bandwidth package). They could have gone higher, but at $1/GB, which would have gotten very expensive for us. Had bandwidth not been the primary driver behind our decision, Rackspace might have been our final decision, just based on my past experience with them as a managed hosting provider.
2nd Place: PEER 1

Excellent sales follow-up, paid attention to my blog, and had the best overall price between INetU, Rackspace, and PEER 1. However, in the end, they did not offer FreeBSD for an operating system and required a 12/31/06 commitment date, which would have meant 2 months of overlapped billing with our current ipHouse colocation contract and the new PEER 1 managed contract. Also, switching ISPs would have meant dealing with DNS switches for our customer’s domains, dealing with e-mail account downtime for customers, transferring data over the Internet to the new servers…the list of “cons” went on and on. Granted, this would have been the situation for INetU, Rackspace, or PEER 1…which is why we went with ipHouse:
1st Place: ipHouse

Our current ISP where we’ve colocated for many years now. We’re comfortable with their support, their sales staff, and their network reliability. This, combined with the fact that they will run a managed FreeBSD server for us, matched the PEER 1 bandwidth quote, beat the PEER 1 hardware quote (PEER 1 uses commodity hardware to keep costs down where as ipHouse is getting us new Dell servers). Plus, not having to deal with the IP change, DNS changes, e-mail downtime, etc…everything just made sense for us to stay with the current provider, and for less than we’re paying today. We also bumped up our colocation contract expiration date by 30 days to get started with managed hosting even sooner. Bottom line: no overlap in hosting contracts, faster time-to-production with managed hosting, more bandwidth, better/faster/more reliable servers, less cost.
Moral of the story
- If you’re near the end of your hosting contract, always shop around to see what else is out there. The grass may be greener on the other side.
- Put a competitor’s bid in the hands of your current ISP and see what they can do about meeting or beating the bid.
- Prices are usually negotiable. Never take the first offer and always talk to the rep via phone or e-mail about the quote so they can understand your level of commitment for hosting.
- By renegotiating, you may be able to enter into a new/better contract a month or two sooner than expected — and thus not have to wait for your existing contract to expire, as long as it means your current ISP keeps you as a customer for a longer period of time.
- It’s more expensive for an ISP to obtain a new customer than it is to retain an existing customer for slightly less money.


