Best hoster for website

I started off with a website with a few pages several years ago and my website hoster told me this year that the site could get much further up the google rankings if I changed my platform to another one he offered. I used to pay £25 a year and now I pay £80 per month.

The new website has around 6 pages. It has the facility to take "tweets" from Twitter so that Google moves it up the rankings. Maybe so did the old one - it's so difficult for me to know for sure. I can also set up blogs. I may do this later, so do need that particular facility in the long run.

The new platform enables me to set up internet shopping and all sorts of things that I will never need. I am really confused about how to proceed from here, but I am definitely not going to pay £80 a month for very much longer.

My hosting company is a two man band who are NOT pirates but not as commercially aware as they could be and clearly have oversold the new platform to me. If after a discussion they do not want to lower the fees to a more reasonable level I have to be prepared to disappear.

I would only go to a large company from now on, as I don't need very complicated things in addition to my emails going to that site and I would expect economies of scale.

I have checked out some of the "big boys" but it is not always clear to me what they are offering. Their sales support people seem to have less knowledge than I do about what they can do for me.

I would welcome any advice from those who understand these things!

Comments

one.com

neutru | | Permalink

check them out, really reasonable pricing  - and you will also get a cash back via quidco ...

you can ask questions online

http://www.one.com/en/blog 

Try

firtrees | | Permalink

Give these guys a call, I find them very resonable and they will help you

www.kpoint.co.uk

 

NetAccountant's picture

What do you need?

NetAccountant | | Permalink

When your host said that your site could move "much" further up the Google rankings, they are actually greatly exaggerating. The impact of server speed on rankings is minimal.

Google "added" a new ranking factor to their algorithm (which counts over a hundred of them) : the speed of a site / server.

However, this has a lower impact than any other thing you could do to get higher up (adding new content or getting links).

By the sound of it your site is relatively "static" : no database, no forum and the Twitter updates are not - usually - relevant on server speed, so a host that charges £50 (or less) / year should be enough... until you get the blog.

I have been using, and can thoroughly recommend, Titan Internet or Clook as hosts.

[shameful self promotion]
I discussed website speed and SEO on my blog, if you want to learn more about it and how to assess it.
[/shameful self promotion]

maxxy's picture

Hosts, Designers, or SEO?

maxxy | | Permalink

From my own experiences I would recommend 34sp.com as great hosts with excellent customer service. 

However I would say to look at whether your supplier is a host, or a designer, or a search engine optimisation/marketing supplier or if they can cater for all three requirements. 

 

-- www.maxxy.co.uk www.find-me-an-accountant.com Twitter:@maxinemaxxy

Moonbeam's picture

Blogging

Moonbeam | | Permalink

Net Accountant - Thank you so much for your detailed answer - this is the sort of thing I was looking for.

Are you suggesting that once I start blogging the type of webhost service I use is more important?

efficiencycoach's picture

Avoid Fast hosts

efficiencycoach | | Permalink

It sounds to me like you have probably been given very duff advice.

I was previously with fast hosts. Don't go with them however attractive looking their offers. Their reliability was very low.

I personally now use www.betterwebspace.com, the guy who runs it Keiron is very good at returning calls and e-mails. I've never had any outages due to problems with their servers or systems. I may not be an expert in this area, but I don't see how being on a different platform can make a significant difference to your google ranking. Google ranking is a combination of having the right keywords in the right places (URL, meta tags, main text, images), the competition for the keyword, the number of keywords hyperlinked back to your site from trusted high ranked google pages, age of site and how often the site is updated.

If you only have six pages in your website, so you may be able to get away with a package from better web space for £15 a year.

I would seriously consider moving away from your current hosters, I am concerned that they are only out there to make money, not provide the most appropriate service for your business.

Kind Regards

Heather

increase the number of referrals you get by effective networking

 

NetAccountant's picture

Host When Blogging

NetAccountant | | Permalink

Hi Moonbeam,
when you decide you are ready to blog, you will have to choose between a self-hosted blog or not. Self hosted means that your blog will be hosted on your server and you are not going to use a service like blogspot or other third party. You look as though you want to go down that route, which is also the one I would recommend as you are then in "total control".

  1. if you go for self-hosted, the blogging software you use will probably require a database (MySQL probably). There are lightweight blog software that use XML files but I am not too familiar with them. This might make the cost of hosting a site a bit higher (but still only in the £100-150/year).
  2. will you want to "install" and configure the blog yourself via FTP, or have a one click installation - such as the ones you can find on control panels like fantastico
  3. finally, blogging software require a bit more resources (memory) than "normal/static" websites, so you should ask if the hosting plan you sign up for can - either support a blog, or be upgraded easily and for free.

Hope this helps :)

Moonbeam's picture

Webhosting now sorted

Moonbeam | | Permalink

I would like to thank everyone for their comments.

Last night, not being able to sleep, I had a good look through lots of reviews of web hosters and discovered some are phoney and really disguised adverts.

I then looked at Titan and Clook and found the reviews to be very good indeed. I was mentally prepared to go with one or other of them.

This morning I had a very frank and friendly discussion with my current hosters. I think a large element of the monthly cost includes design fees as it is relatively complicated to update the site, being a database site.

I told them that I accepted that they had a pricing model that suited their business but that it didn't suit mine. I am not getting floods of people coming through as a result of using the database rather than a "flat" site, and cannot justify the costs.

They have offered to keep the website as is, but not to do any maintenance on it, as they apparently were doing monthly up to now. When my Graphic Designer does a re-design, they will then convert his design back to a flat site. They will charge me £50 just once a year.

If I needed to do a blog I could use an outside source to the website. Per NetAccountant this is not the optimal route, but it will enable me to keep the fees down while I decide whether or not I can bear the hassle of setting up blogs.

This is the best option for me at present as I don't have to move anywhere.

It was very comforting that so many people were willing to help me.

NetAccountant's picture

Glad to hear...

NetAccountant | | Permalink

... everything's sorted, and yes if the site is "dynamic" and the monthly cost included updates / maintenance, I can understand that the price was £80/month :)

Add comment
Log in or register to post comments