I have come across some webhosts which have the following attributes.

-Their contact page are identical except their contact details.
-URL structure are the same, including their BML extension.
-Affiliate newsletters sent from both web hosts are identical except their contact and name.

This makes think that they are in fact from the same company. Some examples are EasyCGI, Fatcow, and IPower.

Does anyone think the same? What are the other webhosts that are actually from the same company?

Some examples are EasyCGI, Fatcow, and IPower.

Those, and some 20 other hosting brands are owned by Endurance International Group (EIG):

http://www.bbb.org/boston/business-r...gton-ma-76863/

Examples of other hosts with multiple brands:

bluehost, hostmonster, fastdomain

justhost, supergreenhosting

ixwebhosting, hostexcellence

<shock fakemode="on>
Surely you don't think that several hosting "companies" are all the same and just using different names!!!!
</shock>


MY Goodness! Before we know it you'll be revealing to the world that most "hosting reviews" are posted by "shills" or company affiliates!!


</sarcasm>

Originally Posted by ldcdc

Those, and some 20 other hosting brands are owned by Endurance International Group (EIG):

http://www.bbb.org/boston/business-r...gton-ma-76863/

Examples of other hosts with multiple brands:

bluehost, hostmonster, fastdomain

justhost, supergreenhosting

ixwebhosting, hostexcellence

Nice quotation Dan!
I knew only bluehost and hostmonster tandem before

So I think there are 2 possible variants in here:
1. Webhosting company has satellite company.
2. Website content ripping.
I have seen a lot facts about web site content ripping

Originally Posted by WebIntellects-R

So I think there are 2 possible variants in here:
1. Webhosting company has satellite company.
2. Website content ripping.
I have seen a lot facts about web site content ripping

If some web hosts are under a parent company, but run their web host autonomously and seperately, I don't mind.

But if like what you said, no. 2, content ripping, trying to create another brand name to fool others, it's a big no no for me.

They're just getting all money they can. See it like this, many people don't like Coca-Cola so they go for Pepsi. But what if the Coca-cola owner is the same owner like the Pepsi owner? People think it's different, but the money goes both into the same hands.. it's something which is done on a daily basis.

I don't know what the big problem with this is. If HostGator starts a new, smaller hosting company next to their main, I'm sure it will be another awesome one so might go for that one

If HostGator starts a new, smaller hosting company next to their main, I'm sure it will be another awesome one so might go for that one

That's roughly how things went with Hostmonster. Bluehost was the old brand, and they started Hostmoster, which was basically the same service (same staff, same business model etc.)

Obviously the two companies had similar strengths and weaknesses.

The trouble with this multiple brands thing is that one may end up leaving a host only to choose the same host via another brand. This is can happen very easily if the customer is using the typical "top hosts" sites, who often list 5-6 EIG brands.

sorry i dont know about that

u check in google .

Originally Posted by ldcdc

Those, and some 20 other hosting brands are owned by Endurance International Group (EIG):

http://www.bbb.org/boston/business-r...gton-ma-76863/

Examples of other hosts with multiple brands:

bluehost, hostmonster, fastdomain

justhost, supergreenhosting

ixwebhosting, hostexcellence

Interesting! Approximately one year later from your initial post, most of the hosts you mentioned are now owned by EIG, Endurance International Group.

Indeed they are, and I imagine even more hosts will get bought by EIG, and the bigger they get , the bigger the hosts they gobble up. This is, I feel a real problem for the long term health of the industry. We need big companies fighting for customers, not a quasi-monopoly. If there was lack of quality when there was competition, less competition spells out more trouble for the customer.

I guess we will sit back and see who EIG's next victim is going to be.

I think no matter what the name is, as long as they can serve the customer well then it's good...

Originally Posted by webpark

I think no matter what the name is, as long as they can serve the customer well then it's good...

You are welcome to think as you like. But if you have ever been involved in a EIG takeover, you more than like would have a different outlook. To put it bluntly, EIG is notorious for screwing things up during the integration process.

I have heard that there are owners of 3 or more web hosting companies..

Yeah, I have seen some new hosts doing this.. it is illegal!

Originally Posted by ~ServerPoint~

Yeah, I have seen some new hosts doing this.. it is illegal!

It's not illegal about using more than a single brand, or for a company to own other companies. The major problem is that customers can move from Host A to Host B hoping for a change, not knowing that actually the same people are behind it, and they'll be getting essentially the same service.

getting essentially the same service

Or NOT as the case maybe.

The major problem is that customers can move from Host A to Host B hoping for a change, not knowing that actually the same people are behind it

You are definitely right here.. Clients don't know really that..

Agreed,

Have seen loads of those host who use same interface, same technology using different names, may be they think that is better way to market and create competition within self created business rivals

Regards