I frequently get suggestions from members recommending that we use cheap hosting providers (both shared server and/or dedicated), I have looked at dozens and always came to the same conclusion that the way we are going now is the best all around option. I am going to share my most recent response to those member recommendations here.
QuoteIf that was a valid and workable option I would consider it, but it's not.
The server does right around 300,000 unique visitors, 21 million pageviews (counting search engines and bots), and transfers over 1tb of data monthly. Our database and storage needs exceed what most shared hosting providers allow (175gb). We cannot use a shared server or even a dedicated server on someone else's network. it's just not possible.
We have no cost 24x7x365 access to the server in case of problems, which is actually a big deal. We also have enhanced security since only one person has access to the server in question.
The monthly goal includes $600 in dedicated website expenses including enterprise level internet service, and $1,400 a month for a full time staff member. You are not going to run a enterprise level site this cheap anywhere else.
We do not sell advertising (use third party ad networks) to protect our member's privacy, I could make a lot of money doing so otherwise ($120,000 a year, around $10,000 per month). We also do not require anyone to donate or subscribe for access. We instead rely on the generosity of members like you. All donations help no matter how small.
If you want to help us with the expenses, we would certainly appreciate your support. I would like to thank you for your recommendations otherwise!
There's a lot more that goes into my decision to self host instead of using a hosting provider. But those are the main ones. It would take a lot of positives to get me to consider another option, because the negatives are huge including the possibility of multi-day outages over weekends or holidays. Saving a couple hundred dollars by its self is not going to do it.
