Max # Of Hosting Reps From 1 Company

[Thorny]

Hello all,

Yes it's time for one of my rant's again;
So today im posting in a post and reading through it to become very disorientated as to who is actually posting what, im not going to name them but they know who they are. I just thought it would be a good point to bring up with the fact that here at FWS you dont allow "direct linking" or "advertising" as such but there's also times when having around 5-6 sales reps etc is maybe classed as some form of "advertising" in some way?

Ok 2-3 is ok but that's still plenty, it's like several companies on this board want to own the place, it's like a comparions with a stock market if you like to invisage it that way, the more people you get to work on the board the more clients you get.... shame that when it comes to after sales support, some companies generally lack here.

Now i have been in the hosting industry some time now, both private, local, and publically, and there's times when i have really hated it, often when you find several companies that do have an established background and client base, pasting their offers everywhere, i feel sorry for those host's starting out simply because theres no way that they can keep up. All i ask is that maybe a quote be set on how many rep's a company can have on the board....

What does everyone else think, dont flame/bash me, it is something that other people have brought up also

[James]

Good thread. Wanted to add my post from the other thread:


It is off-topic but of worthy value.

They do not allow affiliate websites or links (eg. resellerspanel) but so many of these eg. "sales reps" who earn commissions from sales are allowed. I'm not against such practice but something is unhealthy from this.

An interesting topic for discussion in another thread perhaps. Apologize for going off wire.

[xplhost]

Thorny,
I have to agree with you. I do believe that this is a form of advertising. On company in particular pretty much "rules" FWS.

[Dan]

Moved here from Host Talk as I feel it is more appropriate here.

[DavidsAwesome]

True, there is one company that seems to be ruling over FWS. However, I'm fully in favor of capitalism, and I feel that if they have the financial resources to keep those people employed, that's their thing. However, it's probably a good idea to limit it, just to discourage other host's from taking over the forum with hundreds of reps. (HostGator, etc..).

However, you must realize that when this one company gets big enough, they'll no longer need the advertisement that FWS provides. Posting here isn't a very efficient way of spending company time when you make enough money.

[Darknight]

True, there is one company that seems to be ruling over FWS. However, I'm fully in favor of capitalism, and I feel that if they have the financial resources to keep those people employed, that's their thing. However, it's probably a good idea to limit it, just to discourage other host's from taking over the forum with hundreds of reps. (HostGator, etc..).

However, you must realize that when this one company gets big enough, they'll no longer need the advertisement that FWS provides. Posting here isn't a very efficient way of spending company time when you make enough money.

To true, as you notice with FWS ad's on the site, all the bigger companys just pay for a banner or something....

[Jan]

I guess not everyone can afford to buy advertising ;)

[Stan]

Turn this into a poll, let the community decide. I vote 2-3 reps MAX.

[Richard]

3 as an absolute max.

If you want to watch this forum 24/7 for new requests, you can easily do that with 2, or 3 representatives.

PS: Most of our staff have accounts here, but only 2 of us openly advertise. And I think that is sufficient. But on that note - We don’t employ by commission, like the said company this thread is about does.

[Jordan Mclay]

I also agree this is beginning to turn into a one man race, which isn't good.

I dont advertise for the host i work with, but there are about 5 others who do and its becoming a race for sales tbh.

[Richard]

... this is beginning to turn into a one man race, which isn't good.

Hardly.

[James]

I think 1 is enough. 2 maximum for larger companies. (large, I mean real large)

I don't think it's a problem of domination, having more reps doesn't mean you are winning a race. If you are a host looking to find clients, wasting 6 reps on one forum is quite honestly, a very wrong judgement and a waste of possible valuable resources that could be used else where. Frankly it boils down to something as simple as - what is the point of having more than 1 rep per forum? It actually looks very bad, shows desperation of a ill-structured business.

But not only this, from a forum member's perspective it is also quite annoying. This is not a one host's forum. All these "reps" referring to themselves and the company as "we" is getting irritating, as if forming groups and clans within the forum. And all these people just poping out of nowhere claiming to be a company rep is also kind of comical.

If it is just a commissions or referrals thing without a yearly salary and legally registered employed status, I do not see how that is different from reselling for resellerspanel which is dealt with quite harshly here.

I think this is something to think about and solving this might cut out a lot of the crap that goes on around here.

[Richard]

James,

What about sections? For example, we at GS have staff that only work on one of our areas, for example, ShoutCastI (Dini). Dini is in charge of advertising for ShoutCastI, yet works for Galaxy Solutions, LLC.

Are you classing it as the company as a whole, or the services they provide if kept separate? For example, Dini will never advertise GS or GH.

[James]

Yes I am talking about the representing of a company/host on the forums. I'm not saying there shouldn't be more than 2 staff of a company registered as members. Being a staff member doesn't mean you are actively advertising it in the signatures and replying to hosting requests, at the forums.

All in all, I'm saying there should be limits to the amount of visible, active representation a company is allowed in a forum full of web hosts, free and paid. The last thing we want is a sea of "MSN mates" who are reps for each other. This ruins FWS. It needs more user-end hosting/website users activity and less hosts.

This would also stop hosts using this as a support forum for their services. This is also annoying - FWS is not your support portal! It seems fashion to have a technical support rep, few sales reps, abuse rep, customer relations rep, server admin rep, billing rep, resellers rep, shared hosting rep, so on and so on, and not to forget - the rep who is 'the owner'. Excuse the exaggeration but simply put, is it so necessary? By trying to appear professional, you achieve unprofessionalism.

[Corazu]

James,

What about sections? For example, we at GS have staff that only work on one of our areas, for example, ShoutCastI (Dini). Dini is in charge of advertising for ShoutCastI, yet works for Galaxy Solutions, LLC.

Are you classing it as the company as a whole, or the services they provide if kept separate? For example, Dini will never advertise GS or GH.

I would think that in this situation having more would be fine, as it's essentially a child company, and since they are not overlapping in advertising, it would appear to most people as though it is separate companies.

[jerryg]

I guess not everyone can afford to buy advertising ;)
So true. Not everyone here making big money everyday/month.

[Thorny]

The next thing to do though....how would the mods' moderate this, and would it put even more "stress" on them and would they be willing to do it....

[Dan]

Thorny, I'm gone mental from stress as it is so I am sure I can handle some more. The Prozac Decker sent me actually works. :lol:

[.Andy]

I would think that in this situation having more would be fine, as it's essentially a child company, and since they are not overlapping in advertising, it would appear to most people as though it is separate companies.

I agree that is fine. I am just tired of this one company thinking they own this board.

[iBrightDev]

i personally dont advertise geek rack, but, i will post offers since i do work for them. yes, 4, 5 or 6 reps may seem excessive to some, but, on the same hand, a company growing as fast as geek rack is, the more reps you will find. it just happens that a good number of us are here at fws. seems we may need to spread a little to conquer more.

[Decker]

I think this ones kicked back in for the wrong reasons.

If there is a hosting company with staff are they to be banned from here if there are too many?

Not so long ago 2 was a lot from one host, so do we cull them all?

Unfortunately market forces drive and if a host has 100 sales staff (not affiliates only I hasten to add - although if that is the hosts business model, well) then should they be shunned?

There are some visitors who appear momentarily with offers (and one in particular who has gotten lazy with the same copy and paste - look at our offers and some bad advice) and add nothing else.

If a host has more staff than another then tough cookies, some around here have more than one active member and are respected for it and their advice appreciated. Especially when they're there at times you can't get your own hosts to answer questions and solve problems.

Lot of good people here, don't shoot them as they bring supplies!

As for who owns FWS (unnofficially) - Jan (no offence Peo or Todd, but bet you wouldn't fight her :D)

[James]

i personally dont advertise geek rack, but, i will post offers since i do work for them.

What? That doesn't make sense... I reckon you really meant "I personally advertise geek rack because I do work for them. And since you do work for them you should state this in your signature, I found some of your posts confusing at first, with all this "we" talk.


yes, 4, 5 or 6 reps may seem excessive to some, but, on the same hand, a company growing as fast as geek rack is, the more reps you will find.

That is just not true. It is just imbalanced, wasted, poor staff management and time will tell the real truth. On WHT for example. there are providers 20 thousand times larger than you and they have one or two reps around.

Another thing you notice on FWS which is quite amusing. One starts doing it and others imitate. :lol: Check out the ads section.

[Decker]

Oh James :lol:

I also put some trust in you with clients, I'm upset.


On WHT for example. there are providers 20 thousand times larger than you and they have one or two reps around

You want to quote WHT? The biggest anally retentive forum going.

[iBrightDev]

James, is your head up your butt right now :S

i never post offers in the ads and offers section for GR, which i may consider doing now, and i do NOT have them in my signature either.

also, my second part you quoted, it is a matter of opinion. you see it one way, i see it another.

[T^2]

I honestly don't think there is a NEED for more than 2-3? I mean...there just aren't that many new threads. However, if a company chooses to do so and it is well managed then there isn't really a problem.

Problems arise with confusion caused by so many reps and in the recent cases all of the "reps" prove to have their hands tied in most situation as they do not have sufficient power to do anything. In addition, the confusion that's added from one user being associated with more than one is just unnecessary.

Is it just me or does running your own while working as a sales rep/support rep for another seem like a clash of interests? Your working for a competitor to yourself...while still advertising yourself and representing the other company? Boggles my mind.

My two cents.

- Tang

[iBrightDev]

well points made IMO Tang

[Matt8]

I'll chime in with my personal stance on this:

-More than 2-3 reps per company is pretty nuts, but allowed at this forum.

-We have rules put in place to infract anybody that does not obey double offers, waiting period for new threads, etc.

If a host with only one rep is here and they advertise in every request thread that a host with 3 reps does (remember; one offer/per company per thread), then it is very possible it would make no difference.

I would also go as far as saying that the large majority of people that view offers and make hosting requests, do not become an active enough participant of this forum to even notice that one hosting company has more than the average number of reps.

Thats at least my view; I do feel like there are certain companies here that go to an extreme excess with the number of reps they have. Then again, if they post more than one offer/too often offers, the mods have been strict about infracting and that WILL NOT change regardless of how many reps your company has

[Decker]

The voice of reason;


I would also go as far as saying that the large majority of people that view offers and make hosting requests, do not become an active enough participant of this forum to even notice that one hosting company has more than the average number of reps.

Agree - have all the reps you like but don't step on each other to get offers in :) but do feel free to help out (that gets your co some good rep)

[Richard]

I would not say that GeekRack is "Growing as fast as it is". Any company offering "Affiliated Pay" *could* get as many, and much more, sales representatives than geekrack has now quite easily. Its not hard. We have people ask us daily for this.

No - I don't think its a problem. In fact, I think it sorts the big boys from the little girls. I personally see it as unprofessional, and cheap. Its a real put-down for me, which is why we don't employ such staff.

So on that note, I have to agree with James. It does get quite amusing.

[Decker]

Richard - stop it!

Your being silly now.

[fnixws]

I dont really have a problem with it.

Just as long as theres not 5 replies from the one company in the request threads. Perhaps a 1 reply per company per request rule could be added?

Tho it probly should be made clearer who actually works for/represents who around here. Too many people seem to work for / promote multiple companies.
Wich is especially annoying when you post somthing reguarding a specific company and you get someone arguing that, according to their siggy, works for / owns another company entirely. Tho eventually u find out, they work for the original company too :/

Hell, i even had some moron who was completely unrelated to a company post my details in the forum wich he got from someone on MSN in reply to my thread...

IF you wanted to do somthing to minimise confusion in this reguard, perhaps you can allow 82x31 badges in siggys to say who you work for.
Perhaps they chould be added by moderators to people who are elected as "company representitives" for each company.
Perhaps only people with badges be allowed to reply to requests or post offers


My BS Rant!
Competition is healthy a good thing, but theres a difference between competition, and anti-competitive behaviour.

Anti-competitive behavour is actually illegal and unfortunatly it looks like alot of hosts actually take part in anti-competitive behaviour constantly.

The first one of these is obvious, and too many people are doing it these days, and thats overselling. Its not possible for those legit companies offering non oversold space to compete.

The second is predatory pricing. In other words selling your services for a lower cost than possible to get all the business. Overselling is an example of this, but the worst example of it are these morons who sell reseller packages with say 20gig HDD for $14 yet sell hosting to clients with 50gig for 1/4 the price. Again, this is anti-competitive and really should be looked into by the authoraties.

The third, is dumping, (my example is really reverse dumping) altho youll be hard pressed to prove people are intentionally doing this. Its rather obvious if you go look at the free host offers its going on. The ridiculous space and bandwidth people offer for free creates no need for people to purchase hosting.

The Fourth example of anti-competitive behaviour around here is abuse of a dominant position in the industry. Wich is exactly what this thread is about. Flooding the marketplace with offers because you have 3x more reps than everyone else.
I dont see a great deal of it going on here, but as i said before, its too hard to tell who works for who 1/2 the time, no wonder ppl are confused.

Just my opinion.

[Richard]

Oh. And after reading the last post. Yes, I also agree that there should be another title after "Location" on each post. One that links to the Host's URL they work for, it would need to be moderator added tho.

[.Andy]

moderator added tho.

Thats creating more work. Why dont you just change location to Company as I dont see a use for location personaly. Or just put the url as your location.

[fnixws]

Thats creating more work. Why dont you just change location to Company as I dont see a use for location personaly. Or just put the url as your location.

If you read my post, the whole point is to eliminate confusion.
You cant rely on peoples honesty, otherwise the current system with the companys listed in the siggy would be fine.

[Decker]

Using the location for ID on a host you work for wouldn't be a bad idea actually. It would limit it to one for a start, as you can't seriously represent more than one as it would be a conflict of interest.

But a problem would be abuse, it would take policing to ensure someone didn't just stick any host in there and start grabbing clients on the strength of it for themselves or trashing a host by direct words or general bad behaviour.

[fnixws]

Your right about conflict of intrest, however i believe a few people provide support for other companies in exchange for the other company providing support for them during the opposite hours.

Some also own a company that for example only sells standard webhosting, but advertise dedicated servers for others, not really conflict of intrest.

Then there is those who run a free host and a paid host under seperate names or provide other services.
However those can be put in siggies i guess, and the location only as your elected main company.

[Decker]

Your right about conflict of intrest, however i believe a few people provide support for other companies in exchange for the other company providing support for them during the opposite hours.

Yes, possibly. There is a problem there how?
Outsourced support, they have their own so support one only in public any work they do for others is not a problem.

I support various clients, some my own and some for others, just a skills requirement.

[Corazu]

Some sort of group thing would be nice, new companies apply for a group, the owner is the lead, can verify new reps in it. Then display that as the Company field, would be a bit of work to get into the design, but with a rule stating that all reps must have it and companies must have it..would be a bit easier to organize. Plus you could go to a listing to find people from a company to talk to.

[Skylar]

Some sort of group thing would be nice, new companies apply for a group, the owner is the lead, can verify new reps in it. Then display that as the Company field, would be a bit of work to get into the design, but with a rule stating that all reps must have it and companies must have it..would be a bit easier to organize. Plus you could go to a listing to find people from a company to talk to.

I completely agree with that! This would definitely be a good solution.

[fnixws]

Depends how you represent them on the forum IMO.

If its official, or do you just go butting into other peoples business because your friends owns a company being discussed.

An example is This thread (http://freewebspace.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2204656) where i was asking the general opinions of people, and ended up with some ------- who had nothing to do with the company in question posting my personal details because he was friends with the company in question. (Jan removed the offending information)
He of his own accord decided he represented the company, but theres no evidence of this in his signature or profile.

Anyway, im manily talking about the Offers and Request sections that could do with some kind of system to minimise the anti-competitive behavior i mentioned above.

[Skylar]

The system would help in both aspects, because then replies regarding specific information could/would be removed as they are not marked as a representative of said company.


With how it is now, and how many reps there are for GR, I could register as GR-Skylar, and start acting like i worked for GR and nobody would know the difference. Now with the system in place, then you would know that I was not a "verified" representative for GR

[Corazu]

The system would help in both aspects, because then replies regarding specific information could/would be removed as they are not marked as a representative of said company.


With how it is now, and how many reps there are for GR, I could register as GR-Skylar, and start acting like i worked for GR and nobody would know the difference. Now with the system in place, then you would know that I was not a "verified" representative for GR

I think you're famous enough now that nobody would fall for that :P

On another note, this would eliminate the necessity for having names like CS-Skylar, or [GR]Whatever. With the company name elsewhere in the postbit and profile, there's no need to have it in the name, and could probably be discouraged perhaps rules with it - since that's the number one cause for name changes.

[Skylar]

I think you're famous enough now that nobody would fall for that :P
I was hoping somebody wouldnt have been a smartass :P


On another note, this would eliminate the necessity for having names like CS-Skylar, or [GR]Whatever. With the company name elsewhere in the postbit and profile, there's no need to have it in the name, and could probably be discouraged perhaps rules with it - since that's the number one cause for name changes.
I agree


---EDIT----
666 posts RUN FOR COVER

[fnixws]

Ya, i completely agree.

Take poor GR-Andy for example. Im sure hes had his name change already, and now hes stuck with it even tho he doesnt work for them any more.

[Decker]

Ya, i completely agree.

Take poor GR-Andy for example. Im sure hes had his name change already, and now hes stuck with it even tho he doesnt work for them any more.

Same old problem, yep poor Andy! Can I ask everyone what it is with GR bashing currently?

Seems to be a theme of hit out at GR on every possible chance.

Are you just all jumping on a bandwagon so you can seem 'cool' or do you have proper cause to continually mention in bad posts?

[fnixws]

How is that bashing GR?

[Decker]

Take poor GR-Andy

How is he 'poor' - explain?

[fnixws]

ahh lol
nah man, I was refering to the fact hes had his name change already and is now permanently called GR-Andy (well i think) dispite not working for them.

I wasnt saying "Poor GR-Andy" because he worked for them, i think you just misunderstood. :P
Ive never had any probs with GR myself and i apologise if my example seems to be picking on them.


ok.. so now back to the topic :P
*quotes his own post*


My BS Rant!
Competition is healthy a good thing, but theres a difference between competition, and anti-competitive behaviour.

Anti-competitive behavour is actually illegal and unfortunatly it looks like alot of hosts actually take part in anti-competitive behaviour constantly.

The first one of these is obvious, and too many people are doing it these days, and thats overselling. Its not possible for those legit companies offering non oversold space to compete.

The second is predatory pricing. In other words selling your services for a lower cost than possible to get all the business. Overselling is an example of this, but the worst example of it are these morons who sell reseller packages with say 20gig HDD for $14 yet sell hosting to clients with 50gig for 1/4 the price. Again, this is anti-competitive and really should be looked into by the authoraties.

The third, is dumping, (my example is really reverse dumping) altho youll be hard pressed to prove people are intentionally doing this. Its rather obvious if you go look at the free host offers its going on. The ridiculous space and bandwidth people offer for free creates no need for people to purchase hosting.

The Fourth example of anti-competitive behaviour around here is abuse of a dominant position in the industry. Wich is exactly what this thread is about. Flooding the marketplace with offers because you have 3x more reps than everyone else.
I dont see a great deal of it going on here, but as i said before, its too hard to tell who works for who 1/2 the time, no wonder ppl are confused.

Just my opinion.

[Richard]

ahh lol
nah man, I was refering to the fact hes had his name change already and is now permanently called GR-Andy (well i think) dispite not working for them.

I wasnt saying "Poor GR-Andy" because he worked for them, i think you just misunderstood. :P
Ive never had any probs with GR myself and i apologise if my example seems to be picking on them.


ok.. so now back to the topic :P
*quotes his own post*

Just ignore decker. Hes jumping on the bandwagon and bashing everyone for no reason to be cool ;)

[James]

I guess the conclusion is - it's your problem if you want to use 10 reps on one board. Do what you want! :D

[Skylar]

I guess the conclusion is - it's your problem if you want to use 10 reps on one board. Do what you want! :D

Looks rather unprofessional if you ask me. So if they want to damage their own image because it just looks like a bunch of reps not doing anything other than sitting around on a forums, then that's their deal.