New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
No I didn't see the sarcasm, he had a 'serious' tone on him there.
Indeed, but then what you offer is not worth 10% of my revenue. I would be cheaper with OnApp.
And phone verification too! Which we have integrated.
through twillo I could do that easily just using their tutorial on their site so it isn't worth nothing I could do myself.
I never said it's worth anything, I was responding to a person that had a concern with LET's chargeback rate (Which I already know is exhausting).
Having these three setup will reduce most chargebacks by a lot.
I already noted that it scales from 10 to around 2% the larger you are. We are planning on being cheaper than OnApp in every way.
Faiir enough, however the issue for me is this. Yes you may be bringing the software and it could be awesome, but I bring the hardware, clients, support, marketing and so on.
If I was to give you a % of my revenue then I would only do that if you share the risks. Taking a % of revenue means you want to own part of what I own but like virtkick without any risk. That is not an option for me.
please OnApp provides one time fee not give me a cut of your revenue per month.
I already noted that We are flexible - Revenue share won't be necessary if you are willing to dash out setup fees. As far as I'm aware OnApp charges $600/mo for 48 cores. Twelve E3 servers or Two 2xE5 Servers. How is 10% more again?
We can offer custom solutions for clients, the standard product will not include billing like VirtKick. But if a sale is worth the value it can bring - Then yes we do offer custom solutions as mentioned on our website.
Else, you could charge based on the running dedicated server. Lets say, 1gb ram = $1 and so on. So smaller hosts get smaller prices while big gets big
Btw, I'm not highly interested in cloud panel
Thanks for the tip. Could work if some want a more straight forward pricing system.
Changed the poll for you mate
I don't think you're ready for the hosting market if you casually dismiss chargebacks so easily.
And how DOES that work? Or do hosts have to sign over both their WHMCS and Paypal credentials to you? And every other payment processor. And what about bitcoin...
I'm also curious how you'll handle provider fraud. The data you want is inevitably coming from a data source I designate and passes through my network on the way to you. Suppose I tell it to report I sold $10 last month? You'll say "well, we're looking at your config and making an API call" and that is all trivial to get around.
A bit? ;-)
We are the cloud panel, we don't deal with billing unless a customer specifically wants us to.
Like I said, the software is on-premise and setting up billing can be done through the admin ui. If you'd like WHMCS to handle credits, you can utilize them - The software redirects you to the WHMCS page when you are trying to add credit.
If you'd like our system to handle billing, you can just hook up paypal directly.
No need to share any sensitive information - If we do go with the revenue share model then we will collect data about the revenue generated by the software.
The platform will be directly connected with our systems, if it loses connection at any time to our servers then the adminui will be locked out & new user registration will be on hold until its fixed.
So that's a business model change as well. 99% of LET hosts aren't having customers deposit money for credits.
I don't think your plan will work unless you control billing, because there is (a) too much data that is outside of WHMCS that you won't be able to see (chargebacks), and (b) it's trivial to spoof the data that you see. And yes, some LET hosts will do that.
So you're really asking people to surrender both their control panel and their billing/CRM system. Replacing WHMCS is a tall order because now you're asking people to throw away custom themes/buy new ones, and there's a lot of non-billing functionality (e.g., mass mailing) that's built into WHMCS, etc.
On top of the 10% revenue cut - which you can see is not possible - you will have a tough sell.
https://github.com/LunaNode/lobster
/thread
Looks cool, can't see how it contradicts our offerings though. It's a VPS Panel that allows you to charge hourly billing on solusvm (And who wants to deploy OpenStack)? Well that's where it seems to end. DET.io is not that simple.
OnApp is cheaper than that...
As someone else mentioned previously, we can charge customers by the hypervisors specs they use. Around the $1.00 -> $0.25 /gb ram range instead of '10%' -> '2.5%'.
There is no point in dropping prices too much for small companies anyways, since these generate hardly any money - Who doesn't prefer a client that has 100x the market share?
Again, I'm not sure where you guys are getting these costs from? Public pricing of OnApp starts at $600/mo for 48 cores. Are these some super secret LowEndTalk quotes I'm missing out on?
@DETio give it up most of the providers on here are tech savvy and don't need your software to handle anything especially not when other solutions are way cheaper and more established.
@jarland please ban this user for not following the offer rules please.
Thanks for your input! The software's lead developer was an Ex IBM Senior Application Architect - I'm sure some guys here are much more tech savvy but the product has value and can generate more sales than traditional solusvm vps's - Which the majority use here.
@timnboys Stop posting before a moderator comes and bans you. We know you are trying to just spam about how "terrible" it is, but you clearly have a competing product.
I still remember you posting people's public data. So stop.
Bit of a stretch don't you think? He's got nothing to sell.... ask him for a link to his website.
I didn't want to be straight up coming here with links and stuff. Our website can be found http://det.io - This post is for opinions not sales.
really? because I just want to say that was a mistake posting "people's public data" and I took it down as soon as I noticed it.
no I am not spamming I am just saying what everyone else is trying to tell him sorry if I tell him more straight forward then other people do.
So far the main negative vibe has been only you & raindog - I don't mind the negative feedback but please don't say that no one's interested? Raindog has been offering constructive criticism, You on the other hand - 'Get out of here no one wants this' which translates to 'Get out of here I don't wanna lose sales'
OMG. Dude, that is not a positive.
I think that's a bit much.
@DETio - I think you suffer from the same issue that the OnApp guys have with SolusVM, and that's that they don't understand their target market/customer base.
While you might feel that 10% to handle everything is fair, and to a more enterprise market it could be, but for the budget market most people around here are crying over the $10/month SolusVM charges them.
The market is slowly moving off SolusVM whenever it can and moving to some of the Proxmox based platforms just because it's cheaper. It's just as insecure as SolusVM, don't get me wrong, but most of the Proxmox modules are < $200/year for unlimited customers & nodes. Hell, the modulesfactory one is $70/lifetime or $40/year.
Let me explain the budget market to you. VirtKick came on here with a great looking panel, bunch of really energetic workers, good looking code from what I remember and offered to put the whole thing out opensource & free, so long as they could meet their kickstarter. They only got like 30% of the way there if that, and it was only like $30k or so they were after. There is many hosts on here paying SolusVM hundreds a month and yet they couldn't bank roll that panel at all. Many of the hosts around here are operating on a 20% margin per node at best, and now you want to take half that?
SolusVM has been trying to figure out how they can make their users buy-up to OnApp via either the federation platform or by marketing how cool OnApp's features are. No one cares, and i'll be extremely surprised if any host offers the federation services when it gets bolted onto the side of SVM. The OnApp guys are now stuck completely rewriting the SVM platform and spending countless hours and capital doing this and to what benefit? There isn't much else they can add to SVM that wouldn't be crushing the toes of OnApp.
Francisco