Media Temple (mt) sold to GoDaddy

[Lucas]

Yeah, MediaTemple's reputation has been going down for years now. Although I read on WHT that they will still be working as subsidiary and will keep MT as it's currently working. They were actually suggesting they have more capital now to improve their issues. Personally I'm more into using small-medium sized hosting companies which have been around for years and have a bit more personal support and attention.

 

[Carlos]

I've heard of mediatemple, and I almost bought a server from them - the only thing that kept me from doing so was the prices. Too expensive.

 

[HannahP]

They were actually suggesting they have more capital now to improve their issues.

Welllll...they always had plenty of capital. What it boils down to is how much profit the owners want to take away from a business. Anyone who believes that GoDaddy will start pouring money into Media Temple might be disappointed by what really happens.

The big question that no one knows the answer to yet is why the hell did GoDaddy buy Media Temple? I know a couple of people over there and they have no idea (nor, incidentally, did they know the sale was happening when it did).

Some believe Media Temple is meant to be nothing more than a high tech feather in GoDaddy's cap, what with the guy who is running things over there now trying to legitimize their hosting and convince people take it seriously. If that's your thinking, then the acquisition of Media Temple certainly could lend GoDaddy "legitimacy." In which case they may well invest heavily into it as a kind of flagship that doesn't necessarily have to make a profit.

Then of course there are those who suspect that GoDaddy is all about profit and nothing but profit, in which case the end game for Media Temple might not be terribly pretty.

All I know is I still work for an independent host here in Los Angeles, and where there used to be a dozen of us, now we're becoming more rare than a dry pair of socks at Bonnaroo.

 

[SneakyDave]

I suspect MediaTemple saw the writing on the wall, and thought that the whole web hosting business was being commoditized, and jumped at the chance when GoDaddy made them an offer.

If GoDaddy really wants to keep MediaTemple a separate subsidiary, then there's really no reason for them to buy it. Things like support will be the first thing "integrated".

All the "cloud" talk, and the basement prices for VPS' are probably putting a damper on a lot of independent hosting companies.

The same thing happened with ISP's in the early to mid 90's. I had a choice of six different internet providers in my town for dial up internet back then (not counting AOL). Now I only have 2.

 

[Carlos]

Welllll...they always had plenty of capital. What it boils down to is how much profit the owners want to take away from a business. Anyone who believes that GoDaddy will start pouring money into Media Temple might be disappointed by what really happens.

Some companies buy other companies for different reasons.

Some reasons off my head:
Employees/workforce.
Better products/services. (which mt probably does have)
Better brand name.
"Take out the competition."
Create a new subsidiary with the brand name purchased.

The big question that no one knows the answer to yet is why the hell did GoDaddy buy Media Temple? I know a couple of people over there and they have no idea (nor, incidentally, did they know the sale was happening when it did).

Some believe Media Temple is meant to be nothing more than a high tech feather in GoDaddy's cap, what with the guy who is running things over there now trying to legitimize their hosting and convince people take it seriously. If that's your thinking, then the acquisition of Media Temple certainly could lend GoDaddy "legitimacy." In which case they may well invest heavily into it as a kind of flagship that doesn't necessarily have to make a profit.

That's what this acquisition is about. Godaddy isn't great as a hosting company, so the best way to make money off their hosting business is to merge their hosting company with this new acquisition and act as a stand-alone entity. That's if I want to protect the godaddy trademark/reputation while entering new avenues (hosting).

Then of course there are those who suspect that GoDaddy is all about profit and nothing but profit, in which case the end game for Media Temple might not be terribly pretty.

Every company in existence is all about making money. It's how the companies are managed. Godaddy has a bad reputation because of their customer service, control panel, and/or other reasons I might not know. All I'm saying is that, every company is in it for profit, people only perceive them as evil because of the practices they have.

 

[HannahP]

If GoDaddy really wants to keep MediaTemple a separate subsidiary, then there's really no reason for them to buy it.

Exactly. But the people still at Media Temple have to say something to their customers, so what can they do but spout unconvincing crap like "Now we'll have more money to do things right."

every company is in it for profit...

Huh. That will be tragic news to the thousands of NPOs out there.

But since you clumsily broached the subject in your inimitably endearing way, I'll just say that every company is not "in it for the profit." You can be quite profitable and still not be in it for the profit. In fact, there's a dichotomy of sorts at work in the universe, in that the less you are in it for the profit, the more likely you are to really care about what you're doing and therefore become quite profitable practically unintentionally. Chew on that for a while, Carlito.

 

[Carlos]

There's a difference between "for profit" corporations and "non-profit" corporations. The ones that are non-profit is doing it for "real-world" problems. But in general, the class "corporation" is loosely based around "for profit." In another example LLC's could be considered "non-profit" because of how the system works. The higher management of an LLC are the ones who are putting forward the cash to keep that company going, in many cases - the staff pays for the upkeep of the company, too. All profits are "kept." LLP's are a little different but for the most part works like an LLC's the only difference is the "partners" keeps the profits.

The reason why NPO's use the corporate [or limited liability for that matter] structure is because there really isn't another class for non-profits. The current system that exists doesn't put NPO's in it's own class, so NPO's are mixed into either LLC's/LLP's or Corporations.

So, no, I don't need to "chew" on that, because I'm not a retard.

 

[HannahP]

Well, I would never call you a "retard," Carlito, nor do I consider you to be a "retard," but I have to say that you missed the point completely. You need to let go of the pedantic a little bit. Turn off your mind, relax and float downstream - it is not dying, as the kids say. Think about the dichotomy I mentioned. Learn what it's trying to tell you. Listen to the talking dog. You dig, baby?

 

[Eoj Nawoh]

One of the organizations I work for works with Media Temple, never been a fan. This is just a stronger reason to jump ship.

 

[OSS 117]

Our move completed earlier today. Took the new data-center and MT staff around 12 hours to move all the data and do some bug testings along with a few security audits.