Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Subscribe to our newsletter

Advertise on LowEndTalk.com

Latest LowEndBox Offers

    Should LET price rules be adjusted to match LEB?
    New on LowEndTalk? Please read our 'Community Rules' by clicking on it in the right menu!

    Should LET price rules be adjusted to match LEB?

    jarjar Provider
    edited September 2016 in Announcements

    Recently the price rules for LEB were changed. Should we change LET to match? The rules can be found here:

    https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/89726/lowendbox-new-offers-guidelines

    This is your decision as members of this community. If you say yes, we do it. If you say no, we don't. Plain and simple. Some things should not be a staff decision. I saw a couple mentions of it being weird to have the two sites different, so here is the poll to determine how members feel about it:

    https://goo.gl/forms/jXQlzwdA67xXkiBo1

    Thanked by 1FredQc
    «1

    Comments

    • No.

      Thanked by 2jar doghouch
    • Has it been a roaring success on LEB? Until you see some evidence of success, I'd say no.

      More offers on LET is the wrong direction anyway, IMO.

    • No.

      Thanked by 2jar GCat

      |post4vps| for a free vps for your developement| me |

    • KobeKobe Member
      edited September 2016

      I really would stray away from it if possible. Increasing the price limit would cause more providers to enter this already saturated market, decrease price competition to some extent (overall price would increase, leading to a general rise in prices that may not be justified to begin with) and strays away from the consumer oriented atmosphere and marketplace that LET provides.

      Thanked by 1jar
    • lbftlbft Member
      edited September 2016

      It's silly to have them different, and a couple of posters lately have clearly gotten mixed up over the difference.

      But I voted no - IMHO that doesn't mean LET should be changed to match LEB, it means the silly LEB changes should be reversed to match LET again.

    • Seems like too early a reaction to make, as already mentioned the prices were changed on LEB such a short time ago, where are the results that show that was an effective decision? Let's see some offers up there that reflect the price changes instead of plagiarized tutorials and staff interviews.

      Thanked by 1jar

      It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt

    • jarland said: This is your decision as members of this community. If you say yes, we do it. If you say no, we don't. Plain and simple.

      I'm really glad you're soliciting member feedback here but knowing how, uh, passionate some people are about LET I kinda have to wonder if it's the wisest choice to leave a major decision like this to a poll where you can click "submit another response" and vote as many times as you want. It'd be nice if the honor system were enough here, but, well...

      Thanked by 1jar
    • starservicesstarservices Member, Provider

      I think yes just because it gives members more of a choice demands on LET go up and up but the price doesn't, some members don;t want to pay peanuts for monkeys and if the price is raised we cannot force people to pay more then what they want if a website is not competitive it just will not be used.

      Thanked by 2jar Host4Go
    • No

      Thanked by 2doghouch jar
    • Νο

      Thanked by 1jar

      • If a program actually fits in memory and has enough disk space, it is guaranteed to crash.
      • If such a program has not crashed yet, it is waiting for a critical moment before it crashes.

    • bersybersy Member
      edited September 2016

      Amitz said: Now we will get the same shitty offers as before. Just a bit more expensive... ;-)

    • @starservices i understand your point but even if we providers are part of the community i dont think we can be unbiased on this matter so i will not vote.

      Thanked by 1ManofServer

      Thomas - Technical Support - ikoula.com

      hyperv vps /-/ xen cloud vm /-/ dedicated servers

    • MikePTMikePT Member, Provider

      @Nekki said:
      Has it been a roaring success on LEB? Until you see some evidence of success, I'd say no.

      More offers on LET is the wrong direction anyway, IMO.

      Agreed, 100%.

    • yes.

      most recommended Provider: First-Root KVM Power-Edition /w SSD
      UltraVPS.eu KVM in US/UK/NL/DE: 15% off first 6 month | Netcup VPS/rootDS - 5€ off: 36nc15279180197 (ref)

    • I think there is a very rational case to at least keep pace with inflation, in REAL terms the LET caps have dropped significantly. I also disagree that all it will do is increase prices - there are plenty of plans under $7 a month to show this is bull. What it will do is allow a greater RANGE of services and plans.

      Times are changing, web services are expanding, storage and services are moving to distributed clusters, it would be nice to see soem of these come witrhin LET range, along with some more dedicated resource VMs. It would also be nice to see more geographical diversity, which is hampered by the curren cap.

      Alternately perhaps additional caps could be introduced for cluster (cloud) hosting, cloud VMs and dedicated resource VMs? AFAIK these things werent round when the caps were introiduced (at leats not widescale). And poissibly a percent increased cap for 'exotic' locations, so there is more inducement for sellers in places like singapore, japan, eastern eu, south america etc where there is no reasonable way they can compete on the low end cap? Another option may be to allow offers to go x% over the cap as long as at least 50/75% of offers are under it?

      I cannot see how more can possibly be less, more QUALITY offers will benefit us all, and a little more money should make for more quality. If people dont want more unviable deals and summerhosts - they shouldnt be looking to less offers, they should be looking to sustainable plans.

    • @bersy said:

      Amitz said: Now we will get the same shitty offers as before. Just a bit more expensive... ;-)

      Damn. I knew someone would hold this against me!

      "Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart."
      Donald John Trump, Flat-Earther and White Supremacist, 2018

    • jarjar Provider
      edited September 2016

      @Dylan said:

      jarland said: This is your decision as members of this community. If you say yes, we do it. If you say no, we don't. Plain and simple.

      I'm really glad you're soliciting member feedback here but knowing how, uh, passionate some people are about LET I kinda have to wonder if it's the wisest choice to leave a major decision like this to a poll where you can click "submit another response" and vote as many times as you want. It'd be nice if the honor system were enough here, but, well...

      Oops. I don't think there were enough votes to not even themselves out over say...the next week, at least (if feelings differ from current results). Thanks for catching that.

      Thanked by 1Dylan
    • doghouchdoghouch Moderator
      edited September 2016

      There goes all my $7 dedicated server jokes :(

      Please don't change it; LEB is a dump anyway, and like @Lee said, has "undesirable" content)

      Thanked by 1FredQc
    • Please no

      Hola perro!

    • I didn't feel that it was a good move for LEB, and I don't think that it will be a good move for LET. Please don't make the change.

    • Currently, the LEB pricing seems way too convoluted.

      The new pricing creates several new categories and sub-categories (why is reseller hosting a separate thing?), it also removes any yearly pricing limits on shared hosting/vpsses, which was used by many hosts to overcome paypal fees on monthly payments.

      Furthermore, there is NO guarantee on any of the "managed" hosting providers about the amount of "managing" that will take place (reinstall OS? Setup ssh? Install webserver? Upload website? configure website to use installed mysql server? Optimize mysql tables? Optimize mysql queries? Write some new mysql queries? Write website from scratch? Think of and set up an entire business around a single server? Where will you draw the line in this?)

      And at 150usd/month it's very expensive to "try out" how much managing a provider will do for you.

      I like my uptime down low and my servers all hacked. Can see me droppin' twenty-fours with a router in the rack.
      Ya like ya Switch-Ports hot and ya servers all hacked. If ya pings real high and ya networks pitch black.

    • seriesnseriesn Member, Provider
      edited September 2016

      teamacc said: Write some new mysql queries? Write website from scratch?

      I wouldn't think that falls under server management anyway?

    • teamaccteamacc Member
      edited September 2016

      @seriesn said:

      teamacc said: Write some new mysql queries? Write website from scratch?

      I wouldn't think that falls under server management anyway?

      Then where exactly would you put the limit? At updating installed apps (apt-get upgrade)? At upgrading the wordpress installation to version x+1? At debugging why a plugin won't work with the updated wordpress version?

      All I'm saying is that there is no clear indication of what "managed" means.

      I like my uptime down low and my servers all hacked. Can see me droppin' twenty-fours with a router in the rack.
      Ya like ya Switch-Ports hot and ya servers all hacked. If ya pings real high and ya networks pitch black.

    • seriesnseriesn Member, Provider
      edited September 2016

      Pretty sure managed means managing your server to work with what you want it to work with. Not managing your apps or sites.

      Unless someone specially says managed wp hosting or similar.

      @teamacc said:

      @seriesn said:

      teamacc said: Write some new mysql queries? Write website from scratch?

      I wouldn't think that falls under server management anyway?

      Then where exactly would you put the limit? At updating installed apps (apt-get upgrade)? At upgrading the wordpress installation to version x+1? At debugging why a plugin won't work with the updated wordpress version?

      All I'm saying is that there is no clear indication of what "managed" means.

    • @teamacc said:

      All I'm saying is that there is no clear indication of what "managed" means.

      Ss
      Industry standard terminology is usually initial setup and management upto and including the OS. Beyond that you're on your own, and additional help falls in Professional Services.

      There's not enough people offering management to define an LE* standard, so I'd say the industry standard should prevail.

      Of course, without a definition per offer, that's going to go hilariously wrong at some point.

      Thanked by 1joepie91
    • Idea: no offers on LET for 2 months, increase offer frequency on LEB for that period. Deal?

      Thanked by 1trewq
    • @Jarland

      This is your decision as members of this community. If you say yes, we do it. If you say no, we don't. Plain and simple.

      So where was the choice for the LEB decision. Not having a go but doesn't seem right

    • jarjar Provider
      edited September 2016

      @OpticalSwoosh said:
      So where was the choice for the LEB decision. Not having a go but doesn't seem right

      LEB isn't a community. LET is.

      Thanked by 2seriesn mycosys
    • seriesnseriesn Member, Provider

      LEB is a blog, LET is a community. Give jar a break.

      @OpticalSwoosh said:
      @Jarland

      This is your decision as members of this community. If you say yes, we do it. If you say no, we don't. Plain and simple.

      So where was the choice for the LEB decision. Not having a go but doesn't seem right

    • OpticalSwoosh said: So where was the choice for the LEB decision. Not having a go but doesn't seem right

      And let's face it, none of us really give a fuck about LEB these days, which is why it's in the state it is.

      Thanked by 2Pwner vimalware
    • yomeroyomero Member
      edited September 2016

      The only issue that I see having LEB offers at <= $10, is the people coming here, not reading and posting >$7 offers.

      Also, having $10 offers here, probably will open the place to very overselled plans of... 8GB RAM or so.

      Thanked by 1jar
    • What I fear about this, is the offer that was $7 before, would now become $10 for same resource. So at the end, the customer get ripped off.

      Thanked by 1jar
    • FredQc said: What I fear about this, is the offer that was $7 before, would now become $10 for same resource. So at the end, the customer get ripped off.

      That surely only happens if you allow it to?

    • @Nekki said:

      FredQc said: What I fear about this, is the offer that was $7 before, would now become $10 for same resource. So at the end, the customer get ripped off.

      That surely only happens if you allow it to?

      Yes! I should have put some "if" in that sentence. Sorry for the confusion ;)

    • SplitIceSplitIce Member, Provider

      I like the format of that post, and the distinction between more categories.

      Thanked by 1jar
      X4B - DDoS Protection: Affordable DDoS protection including Layer 7 mitigation with PoPs in the US, EU and Asia.
      Latest Offer: $14 in Asia DDoS mitigation
    • No, but if you really want to, add a managed offers category for fully managed offers

      Thanked by 1jar

      My comments are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the opinion of my business

    • IMO, offers should be allowed to post multiple plans as long as the cheapest plan is not higher than $7/month, and the most expensive plan in the offer post is not higher than $10/month. E.g. DO can post in the offer thread listing 2 products: 512MB for $5/mo and 1GB for $10/mo

      This would save me a bit of trouble PMing the provider to ask if they have a higher plan available.

      Thanked by 1jar

      Will shill for carrots.

    • Yes, def match the new LEB rules! I'd love to see what providers are willing to do for a few extra dollars.

      If they do just re-price their $7 plans to $10 it will be pretty obvious and the provider risks getting RAKED OVER THE COALS.

      Thanked by 4jar FredQc Francisco GCat
    • jarland said: Should we change LET to match?

      No.

      Thanked by 1jar
    • jiggawattzjiggawattz Member
      edited September 2016

      jarland said: Should we change LET to match?

      Not to match - but the ceiling should be changed to $0.007/hr

      Thanked by 2jar GCat
    • I vote No

      Thanked by 1jar

      Security Consultant

    • joepie91joepie91 Member, Provider
      edited September 2016

      FredQc said: What I fear about this, is the offer that was $7 before, would now become $10 for same resource. So at the end, the customer get ripped off.

      If that happens, you should start asking yourself some hard questions. Was it ever sustainable at the $7 that was offered? If yes, and the provider increases the prices just because they can, are they not just out for money? Would you prefer to host with a provider like that, or with a provider where the owner(s) just want to provide a good and sustainable service?

      Realistically, the bargain bin offers usually aren't sustainable, and it's not doing the the customers any good. There's mountains of crap in the VPS hosting industry right now, and that's largely because people are looking for the absolute-most-resources-per-dollar.

      Compare this to LEB/LET a number of years ago, where the active providers were by and large small providers that intended to make a reasonable living off it, provide as good a service as they could, and just generally contribute to the community.

      While I've voted "no" in this poll because I don't think more offers is a good idea here at all, I think your fear of providers raising prices says more about the providers you choose to use, than about anything else. I would expect the Reasonable Providers(tm) here to simply stick with the pricing they have, because it is already sustainable at that level.

      Chances are that the only ones raising prices in response to an increase in the offer cap, are hosts that you really wouldn't want to be hosting with in the first place, because they apparently care more about price and/or customer base size, than about providing you with a good service.

      </rant>

      Thanked by 4jar FredQc mycosys GCat
    • jarjar Provider
      edited September 2016

      Seems a fairly strong case for "people don't want this" is building. I'm totally okay with that. I still stand by the notion that as overhead has decreased in the market, the price limit should technically be lower to maintain the same purpose. However, the purpose itself is of less interest these days because lower offers are easily found in all categories.

      I've no issue with merely pressing on and focusing on community, leaving the offer side as-is.

    • joepie91joepie91 Member, Provider

      jarland said: I still stand by the notion that as overhead has decreased in the market, the price limit should technically be lower to maintain the same purpose.

      While I agree with that in principle (and I think it would improve the quality of the offers, at least in the short term), there is the problem of increasing IPv4 prices.

      Thanked by 2jar GCat
    • No.

      Thanked by 2FredQc yomero

      I recommend Prometeus, the best provider ever!

    • souensouen Member
      edited September 2016

      Thanks for the poll. With the recent discussion about revitalising LEB and suggestions people made about better integration between LEB and LET, I would have liked to see the policies for both closely aligned if not the same.

      However, I agree with the comments noting there's not enough data yet to see whether the price change has had a net positive effect. I'm not sure the change is helpful for customers with a LE* focus, though if the site is moving from specialising in LE* and expanding to other audiences, it would make that criteria irrelevant. This from the perspective of a customer, which may be different from a provider perspective, and both are part of the community. Additionally, since there was no poll about the LEB price change, I guess LET could also be considered a standalone site for now or distinct enough from LEB, with a different decision-making process and rules.

      tl;dr: no.

    • I think providers who have proved themselves should be allowed to post offers higher then $7 but they need to have good rep from trusted buyers (meaning that people with low quality posts should not be accepted.

      Signature goes here.

    • admsamadmsam Member, Provider

      Yes. Some location like Malaysia, indonesia, vietname...these countries still having high bandwidth cost, they are totally not affordable to offer the price as per listed in LET. Its not fair to them have a chance to offer this to any potential client.

      www.dgchost.net - Singapore 100Mbps Unmetered Server | Singapore Cheap VPS | Singapore Share Hosting

      Los Angeles Data Centre- KVM | Smart Server | Dedicated Server |

    • Yes.

      0% chance of trolling in posts.

    Sign In or Register to comment.