If only all service companies could be like Rackspace

It’s been a particularly bad week for customer and client service from two very important vendors to us (*ahem*…Omniture & scene7). Rather than focus on the negatives, I will instead post my 100% satisfaction with the service and support of Rackspace Managed Hosting.

Web-based support that can be trusted for a speedy response
Rackspace has both phone and web-based tech support, but they are so speedy and courteous at responding to web-based support messages that I routinely go there first for a question, request, or resolution to a problem. How many companies can you say this about?

You know the drill: the cryptic support hierarchy laid out on a company site, insisting you search their knowledgebase first (which is always sub-par and rarely has the answer to your question), presenting you with a customer service contact form, and if you’re lucky, a toll-free support number.

I can’t tell you how many times my only point of contact is an e-mail address at a vendor either for their “technical support” or for an account manager. I always am concerned that the e-mail will go into a black hole and never be returned (e-mail is such a terrible way to manage tasks). I’ve been so accustomed to this, that I always end up BCCing myself so that I know to flag the e-mail for later follow-up. Otherwise, I’ll forget about it and I may never hear back unless I resend the e-mail.

A customer knoweledgebase that just works
The Rackspace support model is equally as fantastic. You have an account manager and essentially a “dedicated” team of support techs of varying skill sets that you’ll basically always deal with throughout the week. Each message is signed by the tech, an entire log of your conversation is available in their support ticket system, and it all just works — it’s a complete CRM solution customized for their business and the customer benefits from their collaboration. No matter who you talk to, they can access the same information anyone else in the company can access (aside from sensitive information like server passwords). What a concept!

Better yet, the account managers can access what the support people are doing with your account. Not the case at some vendors who have departments operating in silos.

Managing customer expectations
There’s nothing I love more than to report a problem or submit a request, get a response within a 2-hour window with a list of “next steps” and when it will be resolved by. Sometimes a customer problem is not a simple, 30-minute fix, either. Even the problems that keep Rackspace scratching their heads over the course of the week are kept up-to-date on a daily basis each week and always have a senior technician checking in on the status each day.

With these other vendors, I am the one checking in with them. Where’s the client service in that?

Anyway, thank you, Rackspace. Always a pleasure to deal with you.

Post to Twitter

Tags: , , ,

Related posts

We’ve landed on a managed hosting contract

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:

4th Place: INetU
INetU

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
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
PEER1
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
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.

Post to Twitter

Tags: , ,

Related posts

Google Apps for your Domain – 8 domain limit

I’ve been a Google Apps for your Domain user/administrator since they first launched the service with just e-mail hosting. It wasn’t until recently that I noticed they offered more services than just e-mail hosting:

  • Calendars
  • Chat
  • Customized Start Page
  • Domain Web Pages

I realized that calendars and chat were basically available, what I didn’t realize was that you could toggle them on/off. I also realized that there wasn’t a waiting list for signing up new domain names any more (though the service is still in “beta”), too. I proceeded to setup google apps for 7 other domain names, making a total of 8 domains that I use Google apps for. After trying to add a 9th domain, I got this message:

Hello,

Thanks for your interest in Google Apps for Your Domain. Unfortunately, we are not able to invite your domain into the beta at this time, because you have reached the maximum number of domains per administrator. If we increase this limit, we’ll let you know by email.

Sincerely,

The Google Team

Bummer! But, I can’t complain. I’ll take free e-mail hosting for 8 domains. This also means I can clear off all of the e-mail accounts on our mail server which makes one less thing to setup when we switch ISPs. What I also like is the ability to host web pages on a domain name with Google, meaning I can eliminate all of the one-page domains that we host, as well. Can’t wait to see what’s next with the service — hopefully full integration with Picasa, Gmail mobile, and other Google applications/utilities.

Post to Twitter

Tags: ,

Related posts

What is so difficult about this sales process thing?

I deal with vendors on a daily basis, most of which are a pleasant experience. Then there are the others that are either, too pushy and only interested in the sale, and then there are others who cannot close the sale because of a simple question.

Take Peer 1, a managed hosting company who we are strongly considering to have handle SuperMotors.net hosting. Everything checks out on their website – professionally designed, up-to-date information, current press releases. Not much in terms of comments on their managed hosting service online, but that may be because this is still a relatively new market for managed hosting with not a lot of competitors and customers. The price looks good, the company looks good, but when I ask for 2-3 existing customer references (of equal or higher contract terms as we’re considering) from the sales rep I’ve been working with, I get nothing. Last communcation from the rep was on November 13th. It’s now December 5th. I’ve sent follow-up e-mails re-requesting 2-3 customer references on November 14th, November 26th, and December 1st.

I guess e-mails are not good enough and I’ll need to call. It shouldn’t be this hard for us to spend money. Not only is this annoying, but it speaks volumes about their commitment to customer service. Do they even have 2-3 customers that are going to give them top marks? Strike 1 for Peer 1!

Post to Twitter

Tags: ,

Related posts

apache mod_deflate reduces bandwidth usage by 27% on SuperMotors.net

In the ongoing battle of optimizing, tweaking, and testing, in November we enabled apache’s mod_deflate module on SuperMotors.net. Literally adding about 10 lines of code to httpd.conf (the apache config file), all text-based content on our pages now use gzip compression when delivered to web browsers that support gzip compression. By using this tool, you can see if your site currently utilizes gzip compression. When testing SuperMotors.net with this tool, our homepage size was originally 49K, but with gzip compression thanks to mod_deflate, it is reduced to 9K. This is an 81% savings in bandwidth usage.

So, when implemented over the course of the entire month, we saw an overall 27% reduction in bandwidth. Surprisingly, our absolute unique visitor count was down 14% for November (holidays do this to our site), but page views actually increased by 1%. Page views are ultimately the driver in bandwidth utilization. I interpret this to mean that fewer users were able to do more on our site because they were downloading content in less amount of time.

So, why does the test tool from above show an 81% reduction in bandwidth yet we only saw an overall reduction of 27%? This is because images (and other files) are not compressed when delivered to web clients. Since we primarily serve images and videos, the rest of our bandwidth still remains largely untouched by mod_deflate — which is by design.

This bandwidth reduction is very good news for us. As previously posted, we are leaving the world of colocation and moving to managed hosting — with a new billing model. The “total bandwidth used” billing model favors us even more now that we’ve reduced bandwidth usage by 27%. This translates into squeezing more data out of the pipe than previously anticipated. We’ll be able to maintain our fixed costs and increase revenue, thanks to this little module. The more data we push out, the more page views we serve, and the more revenue we make from our CPM-based advertising model with Tribal Fusion and our in-house ad inventory (read the challenges we face when we introduce Ajax functionality and how it’ll affect our CPM-based ad model).

The mod_deflate module does increase CPU usage due to the need to compress each page sent out. However, this had very little impact on us as we had plenty of processing power to spare. Your results may vary, so keep an eye on CPU usage when you implement this module. The slight increase in CPU usage was worth the risk, because the 27% reduction in bandwidth was a much bigger gain for us.

12/4/06 Edit: Ajaxian has an article on gzip compression with some user responses. Interesting insights (in the comments section) on the law of diminishing returns with gzip compression used on ajax-enabled pages. 

Post to Twitter

Tags: , , , ,

Related posts