This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
I believe this company is notable because it's one of the world's largest web hosting company, if not THE largest. I would add up the marketshare of all its acquisitions, but that would be original research. Also, note that many of the companies it bought out already have WP articles, so if those smaller companies are notable, then the parent company certainly is. MichaelBluejay ( talk) 07:10, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
The article should be tagged with both citation needed and recent events. Host Gator buyout has not yet been officially confirmed by either company and there's only one source on the information (lacking citation). June 23, 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.19.127.209 ( talk) 05:54, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Statements like these need reliable third-party sources:
I can't find any source that states any sort of guarantee, much less a free month of hosting. Also, I see an acknowledgement of switch issues on the official response page, but nothing to state it wasn't due to scheduled maintenance that went wrong. Lastly, I don't see any evidence of an "altered explanation", and certainly no RS stating any "changed" wording was motive-based. All the official updates, including the statements about the switches, are still there and there's no so-called self-censorship/retraction. This aside, anything would require reliable third-party sources. ~ Araignee ( talk • contribs) 21:44, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Reasons 1 through 3 were my original reason for proposing deletion. Reason 4 came as soon as the deletion was proposed.
(1) It appears this Wikipedia entry is an advertisement. I don't see the encyclopedic value in providing the entry and listing their customers. Perhaps it would be better to have the company put the information in a prospectus and provide it to potential investors. (2) The company's core business is "small business advocacy in the internet age" (to paraphrase from the website). Listing of their clients seems to be an SEO trick. Consider the number of entries that use a BBB citation as a reference. (3) The company appears to have been performing "brand repair" anonymously on Wikipedia. For example, Network Solutions's history shows unpopular text was removed by an anonymous user with an IP address of 63.149.124.133. That IP address is allocated to Endurance International Group; confer WHOIS 63.149.124.133. (4) This proposed deletion and accompanying comment was immediately reverted without reason or corrective actions. The reversion was anonymous from an IP address of 210.56.103.116, which appears to be untraceable in India.
Jeffrey Walton ( talk) 04:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
There seem to be three matters for discussion: Firstly, the addition of a "controversies" header. Secondly, the removal of the dirtmaker source. And thirdly, the changes to the Huffington Post entry. As for the first, I honestly don't see why you're trying to remove the header in the first place, so I'll need more information. For these second, please refer to WP:ABOUTSELF, which specifically mentions that self-published sources should not be used when they involve claims about third party sources. In this case, the author of the blog is claiming that he was damaged by this company, making it contentious as well. Without a third-party source to verify the damage, this is an unacceptable addition.
For the third issue, I have included additional information from Huffington Post because it is vital to understanding the controversy. The original entry said that Chai's private information was made known to the Thai government. What it failed to mention (and which can be verified in the source) is that the information revealed was his IP address and email and that Chai was not a Netfirms customer, but a visitor to a Netfirms hosted website. Anyone who's run a website before knows that all visitors' IP addresses are logged and the information is in no way private. And while Chai's email could be called private information, it's also arbitrary (i.e. unlike your street address or IP address, nobody can tell you what your email address is) Chai likely provided this information when he signed up to comment on the site. The controvery is a non-point as the site owner has every right to access that information. Rather than add this information as OR, I've included enough information for the reader to make up their own mind. I hope that helps shed some light on my changes. Scoundr3l ( talk) 01:48, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
@Tutelary, Thanks for pointing out that headers should describe their content. Noted, and will amend. The other changes I made were in the commit comment, and removed dead links. Since network outages or server outages can be categorized separately, and privacy issues are a concern of EIG customers and internet users who may be using EIG hosted websites, I am making it a major separate heading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wabstdev ( talk • contribs) 18:22, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
You also removed:
Other things. It seems to me you're trying to depreciate what it was; a controversy. Tutelary ( talk) 18:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
@Tutelary Yes, I did remove one dead source, but I added another in the links section below. I did not remove any dates. I agree that blackouts should blackouts per this wiki article on blackouts. I will amend the headers per the request. I do not have a conflict of interest, I just have some accounts where I make small edits, to protect my privacy. Thanks for your concern. I will keep the changes to the text, and revert the headings per your suggestion. Wabstdev ( talk) 18:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC) edit: fixed link.
I see where I removed the dates, and added them back in. My apologies, I thought I had added them to the headers.
It seems like this article is more about bashing EIG than it is about the company itself. Is it common for other articles to list outages? When a cable TV or electric utility provider has an outage, do they get listed in the articles each time? I almost get the impression that competitors are more interested in using this article to make the company in question look bad in hopes that some business may come their way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.126.235 ( talk) 23:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I can confirm the earlier account that this article is used to bash EIG. I called a competing company to ask about pricing, and at the end of the call I said I wanted to shop around. I was told that since I was looking to buy hosting, it would be useful for me to know about Endurance International Group. They were the parent company of a lot of hosting brands, the spokesperson explained, and I could learn about them from Wikipedia. He never said anything hostile, he only mentioned EIG and Wikipedia.
That this article is being used to competitors' benefit speaks to the degree of its fault. All the "incidents" (which seem small and not atypical of a hosting company, especially one so large) should be evaluated critically to determine if notability is merited. Then, equally notable neutral and positive information should be added to counter the negative information that remains. The overall article should be unbiased. Right now it is biased against EIG, and competitors in the industry know it. Denlah ( talk) 03:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Oldschooldsl, you appear to have a vested interest in the topic in spite of not having edited since 2011. You need to stop edit warring and listen. There is no 'agenda' that I have, if anything, you might be the one having one since you go on hiatus for 3 years and then, after there was a silent consensus to remove the material, you go and edit war it back in. Read WP:BRD. You did a bold edit, were reverted, and you should have gone to the talk page than continuing to edit war. You're at 4 reverts right now, and you need to revert your edit and maybe the reviewing administrator will go easy on you should I decide to report you for breaking 3RR. I'm also pinging editor @ C.Fred: because they dealt with you in the past and gave advice. Maybe if you won't listen to me, maybe you'll listen to him. Tutelary ( talk) 04:12, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Tutelary I and others have used WikiPedia as a point of reference in historical facts. Your agenda seems to be to remove those facts which many other websites have quoted as WikiPedia as a source. Please stop attempting to rewrite history, by removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldschooldsl ( talk • contribs) 04:16, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Historical accuracy concerning places and events that affect people worldwide including millions of people and billions of corporations is WikiPedia's prime function. It was the founding point on why this site even exist and functions today.
This is a documented historical fact of the worldwide web that did indeed affect billions of products and services, taking down an estimated quarter of the internet with it. At the time of the events it was covered by World News and the article until you removed it, cited several valid news sources.
cc: Dreadstar
Is Unified Layer (AS46606) a product by Endurance International Group? lowendtalk.com/discussion/19753/what-is-unified-layer -- 128.90.94.28 ( talk) 22:48, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Unified Layer is a data center that some EIG brands use, most notably Bluehost. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
76.31.234.226 (
talk) 10:58, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey, what am I missing here? The four paragraphs of the section apparently refer to multiple blackout incidents, but they are not differentiated by date, or in any other manner. In the last paragraph of the section we are told the precise times of day that the given blackout started and ended! But we are (likewise) left to guess what the date was. Toddcs ( talk) 18:07, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
The company owns and operates numerous hosting businesses, with shared support information and support agents. A partial list of EIG brands [1] [2] [3] include:
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Freeinfa ( talk • contribs) 12:38, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
References
openaccess
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).bbb
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).bloomberg
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).netcraft
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).necn
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).@ EvergreenFir:
NorthBySouthBaranof did a revert claiming, "We actually need reliable sources for these." This seems to go against a basic Wikipedia policy, the WP:Baby and bathwater policy. This section contains several solid sources/references. What this user is doing is discarding all the information rather than working to improve, correct or tag it. This is the exact policy violation that is used as an example of a baby and bathwater type revert. From that policy page:
Wikipedia policy articles state that reverting to remove (non-vandalism) information should be a last resort, not a first one. – 72.234.220.38 ( talk) 05:11, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I believe that brands that can be absolutely confirmed should be listed, while the rest that are unconfirmed should rename on this page. Therefore, I believe that putting confirmed brands on the page as a confirmed list of acquisitions should be posted on their page, with the brand name, and date of acquisition, as well as references to substantiate said acquisition. SEC Filing notices or mentions in an SEC filing should be considered valid proof, as lying on a SEC form is a federal crime. Mjp1976 ( talk) 20:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
A fresh IP addressed re-added the info back in without discussion here. To explicitly state my objection to the list's inclusion, I feel it is undue given the size of the article, it violations WP:NOTADIRECTORY, and is bordering on being promotional (or at least that seems to be the intent of its addition). EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 16:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello, a little anecdote here. I went to refer a friend to this page because he was considering hosting options and I just wanted to let him know that he will be dealing with the same company if he chooses any one of their properties, and to advise to just choose the one with the best deal right now because they are all the same otherwise. The marketing is unimportant. The most important information here has been deleted, the list of acquisitions. Nothing could be more material to the contents of this page, than the properties they have bought up and consolidated...nothing. So it's shocking that it's been deleted for pretty poor reasons really, rule pages referenced but no solid explanation of how each section of rule applies. (I read the rule pages, it doesn't) it would not be considered a directory if it was only 4 companies, but the fact is they've acquired tens of them. The fact that their ownership list got very long does not make it less worthy of posting or run it afoul of being a directory. Buying up hosting properties is what EIG actually does, their business model. I have firsthand knowledge of this which of course doesn't belong on the main page..but I used to do tech support for them and the phone could ring for any one of these companies and you would have to pretend to only work for that company. This got confusing of course, so you would look at caller ID if you forgot who the customer thought they were talking to. Now, to the righting great wrongs argument. There is no wrong to be righted here except for the lack of information about the company, the entire purpose of a Wikipedia entry in the first place. It's not "wrong" that they bought up properties. Factually speaking, the company has a vested interest in keeping that information not readily available though, so I am not surprised about the actions of the likely paid off editors removing content here(people from Bangladesh and India just so happened to take an interest in this page?! yeah, right.) The business model involves basically service spam. They own so many companies that if you are fed up with one, and decide to switch, the odds are increasingly in their favor per acquisition that you might just end up with them again under a different subsidiary's name; hence their reason for not being too public about their properties. Now to the NPOV argument about the list of owned properties..complete hogwash. The list itself is 100% neutral, they do own those companies and that is not a point of view, it is purely factual. The reasoning of one of the editors for including the list does not make the list itself a non-neutral point of view, that is an argument devoid of all logic. If the company wishes to keep its properties a bit of a secret that is fine, but this doesn't affect the information being material, nor does it affect neutrality of the point of view for people wanting to keep the information in the open. Keeping information available to all is what Wikipedia is actually about lest we forget, so removing an entire section with specious reasoning and then locking the page sure smells pretty fishy. I suggest that the information gets reposted, just the list of owned companies. I also suggest that this page be taken to mediation as certain users seem to be taking too great of an interest in using loose and illogical arguments to take this information down. Baevar ( talk) 22:57, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Why is this even being debated? Listing brands owned by this company is no different than listing products and brands made or owned by any other large firm (pick one and go look at the page! This sort of information is there and NOT debated if it should even be there at all). Seeing as many other companies have their products, brands, and subsidiaries listed, I fail to see why this list continues to be debated beyond credible sources used for citation. What people use the information for is irrelevant to the nature of a reference material and the fact that it is even being discussed is mind boggling. Having worked in the industry in question, I can assure you it is relevant and has value both to workers in the industry and consumers. I fail to grasp why this even being debated unless people have a personal interest (such as being an investor or competitor) and trying to prevent the information from being disclosed and properly documented in an easy to consume format. This entire debate borders on the absurd. Given that this company is not entirely forthcoming with its involvement in the subsidiaries, documenting them is of value to anyone who might wish to know if they should invest, divest, apply for a job, purchase services, or as a reference to the history of the hosting industry of which this company is an important part due to how many brands it holds and the relative size of them compared to the rest of the industry. In short, it is information of consequence and should be documented. The only thing that is worthy of debate is sources and formatting. Defendermaxim ( talk) 10:35, 15 December 2015 (UTC) It seems as if the inclusion of the brands list has been resolved? For balance I wonder whether it would be appropriate to add an external link to this page (which still contains it): http://researchasahobby.com/full-list-eig-hosting-companies-brands/ It seems that providing an external link to EIG's own site would be more properly balanced by adding an external link to that site which does contain the brand information which web customer's who want to avoid EIG subsiduaries may find useful. Slipandslide ( talk) 22:38, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
@Mjp1976 I assume you meant to link here: https://secsearch.sec.gov rather than to a Wikipedia page about the SEC. It would be ideal if there were a page there that we could link to that listed all the hosting companies that EIG owns. Until someone finds one there however, I believe we should offer the best available source which seems to be the site I offered above. EIG seems to have tainted the hosting recommendation process at Wordpress.org and people who want to avoid all EIG companies when buying hosting should be able to find that information easily. What are you basing the statement that 3rd party sites should not be considered on? I see that whole section has been added back in to the main article so this may be moot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slipandslide ( talk • contribs) 14:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Request review & remove (or re-write) of rambling "Controversy" section. Mostly based on non- Neutral POV. Could have truth, but not a proper edit when done/worded this way. Not really even a "Controversy", seems more business practices/ethics related. 72.234.220.38 ( talk) 22:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Why is a report referenced by an expert monitoring service, LegitScript, removed ( here with here}? LegitScript assists Google, Bing, Visa, and other partners to let them know which Internet pharmacy merchants are legitimate and which are not in 19 countries...and Yahoo (Paragraph two). The source states and all these entities accept the assistance of the analysis and interpretation as legitimate, not as being unreliable. Furthermore, wikipedia guidelines state: "...expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications". LegitScript is used by the before mentioned enties (and more) and has been published by third-party publications (e.g. Wall Street Journeal, CNBC.com, Indianapolis Star, Network Wold, PCWorld) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nodove ( talk • contribs)
Added a section on the company's structure and how it has grown through multiple acquisitions. Brought back in data on its acquired brands that had been removed by prior edits. This data is re-formatted so it may now please those who didn't want "a list". More references have been added though more should be found. The company does not make this easy, as they don't list all their brands and also, some acquisitions are not big enough news to make it to "mainstream" publications. Several sources are "primary" not "secondary".
This is an attempt at keeping the valuable reference material in our encyclopedia and trying to reach a middle-ground with others who felt the large list section may have been too much. This is a good-faith edit (as one should assume most are according to Wikipedia tradition & policy). I'm trying not to do any sort of edit-war or annoy others, just replacing information of value that was removed and enhancing the article at the same time. I have zero POV in any way on this company, I, and I think others also, do find its growth plan interesting in comparison to other hosting companies, and historically as it mirrors a few other internet companies' strategies. Discussions about policy/problems/etc. of this edit/article should take place here on the talk page before any reverts or undos. Any further stalemates should immediately go to a Wikipedia mediation process rather than devolve into the past undo/restore waste of time.
This article, like so many others, is far from perfect. But one would hope no one will go against policy & civility and throw the baby out with the bathwater rather than work to improve it. — 72.234.220.38 ( talk) 09:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
It seems, from "all" that I've read in the "Talk" page about EIG, that there has been no input from Web development professionals. I apologize if any of the previous are, in fact, professionals in the Web development industry. But it would seem none are in the industry since none have approached their responses from the aspect of why the information (negative or positive) is important. It's extremely important for Web developers to know the good companies from the bad in order to provide professional assistance to our clients. To be clear, I've been developing Web sites for more than 15 years professionally. I started dabbling in 1996. I began reselling hosting packages in 2000, but stopped in 2013. You can check the dates of when HostGator sold to EIG in order to understand the significance of that year - 2013. When I initially read the post on Wikipedia about EIG, I was extremely happy to see that there "were" facts and a list of companies owned by EIG. The list alone provided in-depth information for me. At my initial review, the facts that I wanted were the sale date of HostGator, to what company, and what "other" hosting companies the buyer already owned. I know what a "quality" hosting company must have. I also know what was lost after the HostGator sale. Knowing that information and reviewing the list of EIG companies made my research much less complicated. I come to Wikipedia for a wealth of information when researching information, usually about hosting or Web development issues. "Facts" - that's all I want. If there are nothing but facts about EIG, I don't want to hear anybody defending why someone has removed those facts. I don't want to see this fruitless arguing over the facts - and I have no desire to be quoted references which debate what is or is not a fact. People come to Wikipedia for facts. If a post has facts, leave it alone. If a post has any fact that is removed, regardless of the reason, put it back. If there are facts that put a business under scrutiny, then that business needs to reconsider its ethics and business model. It's a fact that Brent Oxley ran a highly professional, ethical, honest business - and made that business extremely profitable. Make a profit on underhanded tricks, bait-and-switch, or simply lying is not what I would consider a professional business. But that's my "opinion" and has no business being posted in Wikipedia as a "fact". Due to the facts I found when researching EIG in 2013, regardless of how the facts were viewed, allowed me to scour the Net and find another business like what Brent Oxley sold. And if there was information that was not factual, it didn't matter to me at the time since I only wanted specific facts - and I found them. My current host is not part of the EIG network. Facts "must" include the number of times, dates and periods of outages a company experiences - even if they were only a handful of sites. Again, regardless of the negative impact on the company, factual information needs to be available. The public has the right to know the facts. And, again, any company with issues has every opportunity to repair its infrastructure as well as ethics. If the company chooses to continue its current practices that are questionable, the public has the right to know. Just because a business has poor practices does not give it the right to "hide" that information. Every business has a right to conduct business as it sees fit. Every person has the right to full disclosure. Wikipedia is and has always been a source that posts full disclosure, as long as the information is factual. Instead of removing "any" negative information about EIG, how about posting what positive action(s) was (were) taken to rectify any issue(s)? Therein lies the conundrum for EIG. As long as the information posted is factual, leave it alone. Stop arguing. Who cares about policy and whether a business finds negative information about their company? If it's fact, it stays. LTCreations ( talk) 23:50, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting a protection icon be added to the page. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 19:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Reason for requesting semi protection on this article is due to the previous edit warring. This will eliminate anonymous users and new users from coming in and making arbitrary edits. It is my belief, that keeping semi protection on this article for the next while (indefinitely), will ensure that those that edit will come up with valid sources of information based when making edits. Mjp1976 ( talk) 01:56, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting that the page be reverted to the WP:STATUSQUO/ WP:CONSENSUS state prior to the edit warring by the IP/SPA user. Pre-edit war version is here. I normally would request this, but this user (1) went way beyond 3RR and (2) is acting in questionable to bad faith. They expressed intent to push their edits here despite multiple experienced editors opposition (see talk page above and article edit history). Pinging @ CambridgeBayWeather:, admin who protected page. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 19:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
With the recent (re)addition of the Subsidiary List, I added the references and the original formatting. I would welcome suggestions for criteria to use to trim this list down, and will attempt to find sources for the size of their various subsidiaries, but I suspect that will prove difficult. I would welcome any help in this area.
I have read through the talk page and looked extensively at the edit history and I do not believe there is any consensus on whether this information should be included or not, but there are many strong feelings in both directions.
My own belief is that this information is neutral (in that it is neither advertising for or against EIG) and relevant to any article on EIG given the nature and scope of their business. LloydSommerer ( talk) 03:41, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
This section could be easily improved in both accuracy and quality. I've done a fair amount of my own research to come up with a better list of EIG owned companies. Dollar2Host and MyResellerHome do not belong to EIG. 2slick and SoutheastWebGroup likely don't belong to EIG either. The As Full As Possible List of EIG Companies and Brands With Details page is relatively accurate, but it has errors and many of the sources are low quality. I'm not going to link to my own work in the actual article, but my own research is available here and nearly always relies on publicly available material found either on EIG's website or the websites of EIG subsidiaries. Since I have a conflict of interest here, another editor can decide whether my work or findings merit an update to this page. ChrisSmith1494 ( talk) 22:11, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. [see below] |
Hello, my name is Melanie and I am here on Wikipedia as an employee and representative of Endurance International Group to offer suggestions for the company's article. The current article does not provide a complete summary of the company's services and history, so I've proposed a "Corporate overview" section with services, office locations, and affiliated brands and businesses. The current "Subsidiary brands" section points to many unreliable sources and dead URLs, so I have drafted a complete, accurate, and properly sourced version to improve the article. Finally, the proposed draft provides a more thorough overview of the company's history and its acquisitions.
More generally, I've worked to improve the article's flow and organization, and I believe it is written in a very matter-of-fact, neutral tone. As I've noted at the top of this page, I will refrain from editing the article directly because of my conflict of interest. I've saved a proposed draft at a subpage of my user space: User:Melanie from Endurance/Endurance International Group.
I am hoping to find an unbiased community volunteer who will implement the draft as appropriate. I am open to splitting this edit request into multiple requests if working through the article section by section is preferred. I am also happy to answer any questions you may have here or on my user talk page. Thank you for your consideration and help in advance. Melanie from Endurance ( talk) 16:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
[ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Wiki Project_Companies&diff=prev&oldid=743070708 WikiProject Companies], [ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Wiki Project_Internet&diff=prev&oldid=744810261 WikiProject Internet], and [ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Wiki Project_Massachusetts&diff=prev&oldid=744810509 WikiProject Massachusetts], but no editors have responded. @ Araignee, Nodove, Scoundr3l, and EvergreenFir: I see that you all have edited the article in the past. I wonder if one of you might be willing to review the proposed draft and implement as appropriate? Thank you for any help in advance. Melanie from Endurance ( talk) 15:32, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
On behalf of Endurance, I have returned (see above section) with a more specific edit request. As seen at User:Melanie from Endurance/Endurance International Group, I propose replacing the current article's "Company structure" section with the proposed "Corporate overview" section, which provides an accurate, neutral overview of the company and its services, office locations, and affiliated brands and businesses.
As I mentioned before, the current "Subsidiary brands" subsection points to many unreliable sources and dead URLs, so I have drafted a complete and properly sourced version to improve the article. Is there an editor who will review the below text and copy over to the article as appropriate? I've provided markup below. @ VB00 and PaleCloudedWhite: I am pinging both of you in case you wish to review based on the above discussion.
Endurance International Group, formerly known as BizLand, [1] provides online solutions to small and medium sized businesses. [2] [3] The company offers more than 150 products and services, including web hosting, website builders, domain names, [4] email marketing, mobile device tools, cloud storage, e-commerce, security, productivity, and social media solutions. [5]
The company has offices in: Burlington, Massachusetts; Orem and Provo, Utah; Tempe, Arizona; Austin and Houston, Texas; Vancouver, Washington; Brazil; India; and Leeuwarden, Netherlands. [2] [6] [7] Endurance also has offices in Waltham, Massachusetts, Loveland, Colorado, and New York City, following its 2015 acquisition of Constant Contact. [8]
Endurance brands and affiliated businesses include: [9]
References
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
We are a wholly-owned subsidiary of Endurance International Group Holdings, Inc.
Emailbrain is no longer accepting new customers. For the best email marketing, we recommend trying Constant Contact.
Fastdomain Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Endurance International Group Holdings, Inc.
As a part of the The Endurance International Group, Inc. ("Endurance"), HostClear is able to provide a variety and range of products and services to help customers with their technological needs.
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
==Corporate overview==
Endurance International Group, formerly known as BizLand,<ref name="Giant">{{cite web|title=Email marketing giant Constant Contact acquired for $1 billion|url=http://venturebeat.com/2015/11/02/email-marketing-giant-constant-contact-acquired-for-1-billion/|website=[[VentureBeat]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=November 2, 2015}}</ref> provides online solutions to small and medium sized businesses.<ref name=Bray>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2013/10/25/endurance-web-hoster-endurance-raises-million-ipo/0mwVrnj7qmz3qefHXkRYyM/story.html|title=Web host company raises $252 million in IPO|date=October 26, 2013|accessdate=June 27, 2016|work=[[The Boston Globe]]|first=Hiawatha|last=Bray|publisher=Boston Globe Media Partners|issn=0743-1791|oclc=66652431}}</ref><ref name="Heller">{{cite news|last=Heller|first=Jaime|title=Web Hoster Endurance International Preps for IPO|url=http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2013/03/15/web-hoster-endurance-international-preps-for-ipo/|accessdate=June 27, 2016|work=[[The Wall Street Journal]]|publisher=[[News Corp]]|date=March 15, 2013|issn=0099-9660|oclc=781541372}}</ref> The company offers more than 150 products and services, including [[Web hosting service|web hosting]], [[website builder]]s, [[domain names]],<ref name="Allemann">{{cite web|last=Allemann|first=Andrew|title=SEC investigating Endurance International Group|url=http://domainnamewire.com/2015/12/17/sec-investigating-endurance-international-group/|website=Domain Name Wire|accessdate=June 27, 2016}}</ref> [[email marketing]], mobile device tools, [[cloud storage]], [[e-commerce]], [[Internet security|security]], productivity, and [[social media]] solutions.<ref name="IBD">{{cite news|title=Web Host Endurance International Bulks Up with Buys|url=http://www.nasdaq.com/article/web-host-endurance-international-bulks-up-with-buys-cm463276|accessdate=June 27, 2016|work=[[Investor's Business Daily]]|date=April 8, 2015}}</ref>
The company has offices in: Burlington, Massachusetts; Orem and Provo, Utah; Tempe, Arizona; Austin and Houston, Texas; Vancouver, Washington; Brazil; India; and Leeuwarden, Netherlands.<ref name=Bray/><ref>{{cite web|title=Our Locations|url=https://endurance.com/our-careers/our-locations|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Leeuwarden Office|url=http://endurance.com/our-careers/our-locations/leeuwarden|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=October 3, 2016}}</ref> Endurance also has offices in Waltham, Massachusetts, Loveland, Colorado, and New York City, following its 2015 acquisition of [[Constant Contact]].<ref name="Heltzell">{{cite news|last1=Heltzell|first1=Dallas|title=Loveland layoffs follow closing of Constant Contact sale|url=http://bizwest.com/loveland-layoffs-follow-closing-of-constant-contact-sale/|accessdate=September 15, 2016|work=BizWest|date=February 16, 2016}}</ref>
Endurance brands and affiliated businesses include:<ref name=Brands>{{cite web|title=Our Brands|url=http://www.endurance.com/our-company/our-brands|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=June 27, 2016}}</ref>
{{Div col|colwidth=15em}}
* A Small Orange<ref name=IBD/><ref name="DN">{{cite web|title=Endurance International Group Reveals Purchase of BuyDomains.com from NameMedia|url=http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2014/dailyposts/20141104.htm|website=DN Journal|accessdate=June 27, 2016|date=November 4, 2014}}</ref>
<nowiki>* AccountSupport<ref name="BBB">{{cite web|title=BBB Business Review: The Endurance International Group, Inc.|url=http://www.bbb.org/boston/business-reviews/internet-services/the-endurance-international-group-inc-in-burlington-ma-76863/|publisher=[[Better Business Bureau]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref>
* ApolloHosting<ref name=BBB/>
* Arvixe<ref name=IBD/><ref name=DN/>
* BigRock<ref name=Brands/><ref>{{cite web|title=Management Team|url=http://www.bigrock.com/bigrock-management/|publisher=BigRock|accessdate=June 29, 2016}}</ref>
* BizLand<ref name=BBB/>
* BlueDomino<ref name=BBB/>
* [[Bluehost]]<ref name=Bray/><ref name=IBD/><ref name=Warren>{{cite web|title=Bluehost, HostGator and HostMonster Go Down|url=http://mashable.com/2013/08/02/bluehost-down/#xbhXRBJf_Eq3|website=[[Mashable]]|accessdate=June 27, 2016|date=August 2, 2013|first=Christina|last=Warren}}</ref>
* BuyDomains<ref name=IBD/><ref>{{cite web|last=Allemann|first=Andrew|title=Endurance continues to roll up, acquires BuyDomains|url=http://domainnamewire.com/2014/11/04/endurance-continues-to-roll-up-acquires-buydomains/|website=Domain Name Wire|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=November 4, 2014}}</ref>
* Constant Contact<ref name=Giant/><ref name="Engel">{{cite web|last=Engel|first=Jeff|title=Constant Contact Cuts 15 Percent of Staff After Its Acquisition|url=http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2016/02/12/constant-contact-cuts-15-percent-of-staff-after-its-acquisition/|website=[[Xconomy]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Gagliordi|first=Natalie|title=Constant Contact acquired for $1.1 billion by holdings group Endurance International|url=http://www.zdnet.com/article/constant-contact-acquired-for-1-1-billion-by-holdings-group-endurance-international/|website=[[ZDNet]]|publisher=[[CBS Interactive]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=November 2, 2015}}</ref>
* [[Directi]]<ref name=IBD/><ref name=DN/><ref>{{cite web|title=Endurance International Group Expands in India and Beyond - Completes Directi acquisition, expanding international reach|url=http://www.endurance.com/press/press-releases/endurance-international-group-expands-in-india-and-beyond-completes-directi-acquisition-extending-international-reach|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref>
* Domain.com<ref name=Bray/><ref name=Heller/><ref>{{cite news|title=Domain.com Issues "Brand Better" Challenge at TechCrunch Disrupt|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-385474738.html|accessdate=June 29, 2016|work=Marketing Weekly News|date=September 27, 2014|subscription=yes|via=[[Highbeam Research]]}}</ref>
* DomainHost<ref name=BBB/>
* Dot5Hosting<ref name=BBB/>
* Dotster<ref name=BBB/><ref>{{cite web|title=Registrar Information|url=https://www.dotster.com/dotster/about/registrar-info.bml|publisher=Dotster|accessdate=June 28, 2016|quote=We are a wholly-owned subsidiary of Endurance International Group Holdings, Inc.}}</ref>
* EasyCGI<ref name=BBB/>
* eHost<ref name=BBB/>
* Emailbrain (defunct)<ref>{{cite web|title=Emailbrain: Trademark Coverage|url=https://inventively.com/search/trademarks/77317840|website=Inventively|publisher=Inventively Inc.|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Emailbrain: Smart digital marketing|url=http://emailbrain.com|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=June 28, 2016|quote= Emailbrain is no longer accepting new customers. For the best email marketing, we recommend trying Constant Contact.}}</ref>
* EntryHost<ref name=BBB/>
* FastDomain<ref>{{cite web|title=About Us|url=https://www.fastdomain.com/about_us.html|publisher=FastDomain|accessdate=June 28, 2016|quote=Fastdomain Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Endurance International Group Holdings, Inc.}}</ref>
* FatCow<ref name=Bray/><ref name=Heller/>
* FreeYellow<ref name=BBB/>
* Globat<ref name=BBB/>
* Homestead<ref name=Brands/><ref name=BBB/>
* [[Homestead Technologies]]<ref name=BBB/>
* HostCentric<ref name=BBB/>
* HostClear<ref>{{cite web|title=HostClear Privacy Policy|url=https://www.hostclear.com/privacy|publisher=HostClear|accessdate=June 28, 2016|quote=As a part of the The Endurance International Group, Inc. ("Endurance"), HostClear is able to provide a variety and range of products and services to help customers with their technological needs.}}</ref>
* [[HostGator]]<ref name=Bray/><ref name=IBD/><ref name=Warren/>
* HostMonster<ref name=Warren/>
* HostYourSite<ref name=BBB/>
* HyperMart<ref name=BBB/><ref>{{cite web|title=HyperMart's Privacy Policy|url=http://www.hypermart.net/legal/legal_privacy.bml|publisher=HyperMart|accessdate=June 29, 2016}}</ref>
* IMOutdoorsHosting<ref name=BBB/>
* Impress.ly<ref name=Fourth>{{Cite news|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-449035267.html|title=Constant Contact Announces Fourth Class of Startups Selected for the Small Business Innovation Program; Participants to Take Up Residence at the SMB InnoLoft April 1|date=April 16, 2016|work=Marketing Weekly News|subscription=yes|via=[[Highbeam Research]]}}</ref>
* [[iPage]]<ref name=Bray/><ref name=Heller/><ref name=IBD/>
* Intuit Websites<ref>{{cite web|title=Endurance International Group to Purchase Intuit Websites Business|url=http://investors.intuit.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2012/Endurance-International-Group-to-Purchase-Intuit-Websites-Business/default.aspx|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=August 15, 2012|publisher=[[Intuit]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Endurance International Group to Buy Intuit Websites Business|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-33507063.html|accessdate=June 29, 2016|work=Manufacturing Close-Up|date=August 23, 2012|subscription=yes|via=HighBeam Research}}</ref>
* IPOWER<ref name=Brands/>
* IPowerWeb<ref name=BBB/>
* JustCloud<ref name=Brands/>
* JustHost<ref name=Warren/>
* MOJO Marketplace<ref name=Brands/><ref>{{cite news|title=Mojo Marketplace Launches 'Do It for Me' Services|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-367230435.html|accessdate=June 29, 2016|work=Entertainment Close-up|date=May 7, 2014|subscription=yes|via=Highbeam Research}}</ref>
* MyDomain<ref name=BBB/>
* NameMedia<ref>{{cite web|title=Highland-Backed IPOs and Acquisitions|url=http://www.hcp.com/content3782.html|publisher=[[Highland Capital Partners]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref>
* Netfirms<ref name=BBB/>
* Networkshosting<ref name=BBB/>
* PowWeb<ref name=BBB/>
* PureHost<ref name=BBB/>
* ReadyHosting<ref name=BBB/>
* ResellerClub<ref name=IBD/><ref name=DN/><ref>{{cite web|last=Gite|first=Akshay|title=EIG’s Acquisition of ResellerClub – Update|url=http://blog.resellerclub.com/eigs-acquisition-of-resellerclub-update/|publisher=ResellerClub|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=February 4, 2014}}</ref>
* SEO Gears<ref name=Brands/><ref>{{cite news|title=Uspto Issues Trademark: Seogears|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-3019954911.html|accessdate=June 29, 2016|work=US State News|publisher=[[HT Media]]|date=July 16, 2013|subscription=yes|via=Highbeam Research}}</ref>
* SinglePlatform<ref>{{cite journal|title=Constant Contact Acquires SinglePlatform, Bolsters Online Marketing Business|journal=[[Forbes]]|date=June 15, 2012|url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2012/06/15/constant-contact-acquires-singleplatform-bolsters-online-marketing-business/#200f1dbe6851|accessdate=September 15, 2016|issn=0015-6914}} Note: Constant Contact acquired SinglePlatform in 2012, and Endurance International Group acquired Constant Contact in 2015.</ref>
* Site5<ref name=Reports>{{cite web|title=Endurance International Group Reports 2015 Second Quarter Results|url=http://www.marketwatch.com/story/endurance-international-group-reports-2015-second-quarter-results-2015-08-04|website=MarketWatch|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=August 4, 2015}}</ref><ref name=Hamilton>{{cite web|last=Hamilton|first=David|title=EIG's Acquisition of Verio and Site5 Nets 86,000 New Subscribers|url=http://www.thewhir.com/web-hosting-news/eigs-acquisition-of-verio-and-site5-nets-86000-new-subscribers|accessdate=June 28, 2016|website=Web Host Industry Review}}</ref>
* SiteBuilder<ref name=Fourth/>
* Spry<ref name=BBB/>
* StartLogic<ref name=Brands/><ref name=BBB/>
* [[Typepad]]<ref name=Brands/>
* USANetHosting<ref name=BBB/>
* Verio<ref name=Reports/><ref name=Hamilton/>
* VirtualAvenue<ref name=BBB/>
* VPSLink<ref name=BBB/>
* WebHost4Life<ref name=BBB/>
* Webhosting.info<ref name="ForbesIndia">{{cite journal|last=Thakur|first=Angad Singh|title=How Hari Ravichandran built Endurance through the inorganic route|journal=[[Forbes India]]|date=June 1, 2016|url=http://forbesindia.com/article/work-in-progress/how-hari-ravichandran-built-endurance-through-the-inorganic-route/43361/1|accessdate=June 29, 2016}}</ref>
* Webstrikesolutions<ref name=BBB/>
* Webzai<ref name=IBD/>
* Xeran<ref name=BBB/>
* YourWebHosting<ref name=BBB/>
Thanks, and do let me know if you have any questions. Melanie from Endurance ( talk) 16:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
I removed the following section from the article since it had been flagged as irrelevant for nearly two years. I'm outside my area of expertise, but happened accross this article, and this felt very much out of place. This wasn't a significant enough event to make major news sources and it isn't apparent that it has had long-term impact on the company, so I don't find it notable enough for inclusion in this article. I welcome opinions from others. Sondra.kinsey ( talk) 22:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
In April 2014, a major network issue at the data center in Provo, Utah, affected customers of Bluehost, HostMonster and JustHost, and took down many of the dedicated servers owned by HostGator customers. [1] relevant?
References
After acquiring Web.com in 2021, it seems Endurance International Group was rebranded to Newfold Digital by its parent. [1] It was reported on by a handful of tech-biz-oriented outlets. Thanks. - 71.209.163.100 ( talk) 19:39, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
References
First off, I would like to acknowledge that I am an employee of Newfold Digital, as disclosed in my profile. I have been working with editors I connected with on the Teahouse to create a new article draft for Newfold Digital. A major impetus for this was the issues with this article. The first is that Endurance International Group no longer exists. It was merged with Web.com Group to form Newfold Digital. This page was previously renamed to Newfold Digital, but that wasn't a good solution, because Newfold Digital is not just a continuation of EIG, nor did it solely originate from EIG. It is a new company, formed by the merger of EIG holdings with Web.com Group holdings, and this new company has since acquired several other companies. Rather than extensively editing and renaming this article, I propose leaving it as a historical record and moving forward with Newfold Digital, to simplify things and create a better and clearer experience for the interested reader.
There has been some confusion about why there should be a Newfold Digital article when this article already exists, and I am leaving this comment for any editor who happens to take a look, so they can get some idea of the problems with this article. Here are the issues as I see them:
1) The aforementioned issue of Newfold Digital vs. EIG. EIG no longer exists, but this article mentions several of the brands owned by Newfold Digital as if they were owned by EIG, including some brands that were acquired by Newfold Digital after EIG ceased to exist. This is factually inaccurate.
2) This article probably should not be simply renamed to Newfold Digital, because Newfold Digital is not solely comprised of former EIG holdings.
3) This article suffers from WP:PROSELINE. Newfold Digital was written to avoid this problem and provide simple, clear information about the parent company of these brands for the interested reader.
4) The basic company information in the article is inaccurate and muddled because of confusion between the former company and the new company. The new article would rectify this issue, and this article could link to the new article for clarity's sake.
5) Some of the content is not sourced properly. As an example, consider, "The CEO and all but one "C-level" officers from Web.com were retained after the merger, although EIG was much larger than Web.com." The source for this links to the Newfold Digital leadership page, but this page does not include any information on the size of EIG relative to Web.com. The following line is not sourced at all and appears to be speculative: "Web.com's strategy, like EIG's, was to grow through acquiring brands which they continued to operate, although they generally did not relocate the infrastructure of their acquired brands."
---
I have zero interest in using Wikipedia as a marketing tool for Newfold Digital. But I do want to see accurate, up-to-date information included on Wikipedia, and I believe that having inaccurate, outdated information live, such as this article, is detrimental to Wikipedia. To this end, I am looking for assistance with Newfold Digital, to hopefully get it approved, so that this article can be updated and linked to the new article, resolving many of the aforementioned problems. Zach at Newfold ( talk) 18:49, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
I believe this company is notable because it's one of the world's largest web hosting company, if not THE largest. I would add up the marketshare of all its acquisitions, but that would be original research. Also, note that many of the companies it bought out already have WP articles, so if those smaller companies are notable, then the parent company certainly is. MichaelBluejay ( talk) 07:10, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
The article should be tagged with both citation needed and recent events. Host Gator buyout has not yet been officially confirmed by either company and there's only one source on the information (lacking citation). June 23, 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.19.127.209 ( talk) 05:54, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Statements like these need reliable third-party sources:
I can't find any source that states any sort of guarantee, much less a free month of hosting. Also, I see an acknowledgement of switch issues on the official response page, but nothing to state it wasn't due to scheduled maintenance that went wrong. Lastly, I don't see any evidence of an "altered explanation", and certainly no RS stating any "changed" wording was motive-based. All the official updates, including the statements about the switches, are still there and there's no so-called self-censorship/retraction. This aside, anything would require reliable third-party sources. ~ Araignee ( talk • contribs) 21:44, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Reasons 1 through 3 were my original reason for proposing deletion. Reason 4 came as soon as the deletion was proposed.
(1) It appears this Wikipedia entry is an advertisement. I don't see the encyclopedic value in providing the entry and listing their customers. Perhaps it would be better to have the company put the information in a prospectus and provide it to potential investors. (2) The company's core business is "small business advocacy in the internet age" (to paraphrase from the website). Listing of their clients seems to be an SEO trick. Consider the number of entries that use a BBB citation as a reference. (3) The company appears to have been performing "brand repair" anonymously on Wikipedia. For example, Network Solutions's history shows unpopular text was removed by an anonymous user with an IP address of 63.149.124.133. That IP address is allocated to Endurance International Group; confer WHOIS 63.149.124.133. (4) This proposed deletion and accompanying comment was immediately reverted without reason or corrective actions. The reversion was anonymous from an IP address of 210.56.103.116, which appears to be untraceable in India.
Jeffrey Walton ( talk) 04:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
There seem to be three matters for discussion: Firstly, the addition of a "controversies" header. Secondly, the removal of the dirtmaker source. And thirdly, the changes to the Huffington Post entry. As for the first, I honestly don't see why you're trying to remove the header in the first place, so I'll need more information. For these second, please refer to WP:ABOUTSELF, which specifically mentions that self-published sources should not be used when they involve claims about third party sources. In this case, the author of the blog is claiming that he was damaged by this company, making it contentious as well. Without a third-party source to verify the damage, this is an unacceptable addition.
For the third issue, I have included additional information from Huffington Post because it is vital to understanding the controversy. The original entry said that Chai's private information was made known to the Thai government. What it failed to mention (and which can be verified in the source) is that the information revealed was his IP address and email and that Chai was not a Netfirms customer, but a visitor to a Netfirms hosted website. Anyone who's run a website before knows that all visitors' IP addresses are logged and the information is in no way private. And while Chai's email could be called private information, it's also arbitrary (i.e. unlike your street address or IP address, nobody can tell you what your email address is) Chai likely provided this information when he signed up to comment on the site. The controvery is a non-point as the site owner has every right to access that information. Rather than add this information as OR, I've included enough information for the reader to make up their own mind. I hope that helps shed some light on my changes. Scoundr3l ( talk) 01:48, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
@Tutelary, Thanks for pointing out that headers should describe their content. Noted, and will amend. The other changes I made were in the commit comment, and removed dead links. Since network outages or server outages can be categorized separately, and privacy issues are a concern of EIG customers and internet users who may be using EIG hosted websites, I am making it a major separate heading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wabstdev ( talk • contribs) 18:22, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
You also removed:
Other things. It seems to me you're trying to depreciate what it was; a controversy. Tutelary ( talk) 18:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
@Tutelary Yes, I did remove one dead source, but I added another in the links section below. I did not remove any dates. I agree that blackouts should blackouts per this wiki article on blackouts. I will amend the headers per the request. I do not have a conflict of interest, I just have some accounts where I make small edits, to protect my privacy. Thanks for your concern. I will keep the changes to the text, and revert the headings per your suggestion. Wabstdev ( talk) 18:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC) edit: fixed link.
I see where I removed the dates, and added them back in. My apologies, I thought I had added them to the headers.
It seems like this article is more about bashing EIG than it is about the company itself. Is it common for other articles to list outages? When a cable TV or electric utility provider has an outage, do they get listed in the articles each time? I almost get the impression that competitors are more interested in using this article to make the company in question look bad in hopes that some business may come their way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.126.235 ( talk) 23:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
I can confirm the earlier account that this article is used to bash EIG. I called a competing company to ask about pricing, and at the end of the call I said I wanted to shop around. I was told that since I was looking to buy hosting, it would be useful for me to know about Endurance International Group. They were the parent company of a lot of hosting brands, the spokesperson explained, and I could learn about them from Wikipedia. He never said anything hostile, he only mentioned EIG and Wikipedia.
That this article is being used to competitors' benefit speaks to the degree of its fault. All the "incidents" (which seem small and not atypical of a hosting company, especially one so large) should be evaluated critically to determine if notability is merited. Then, equally notable neutral and positive information should be added to counter the negative information that remains. The overall article should be unbiased. Right now it is biased against EIG, and competitors in the industry know it. Denlah ( talk) 03:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Oldschooldsl, you appear to have a vested interest in the topic in spite of not having edited since 2011. You need to stop edit warring and listen. There is no 'agenda' that I have, if anything, you might be the one having one since you go on hiatus for 3 years and then, after there was a silent consensus to remove the material, you go and edit war it back in. Read WP:BRD. You did a bold edit, were reverted, and you should have gone to the talk page than continuing to edit war. You're at 4 reverts right now, and you need to revert your edit and maybe the reviewing administrator will go easy on you should I decide to report you for breaking 3RR. I'm also pinging editor @ C.Fred: because they dealt with you in the past and gave advice. Maybe if you won't listen to me, maybe you'll listen to him. Tutelary ( talk) 04:12, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Tutelary I and others have used WikiPedia as a point of reference in historical facts. Your agenda seems to be to remove those facts which many other websites have quoted as WikiPedia as a source. Please stop attempting to rewrite history, by removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldschooldsl ( talk • contribs) 04:16, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Historical accuracy concerning places and events that affect people worldwide including millions of people and billions of corporations is WikiPedia's prime function. It was the founding point on why this site even exist and functions today.
This is a documented historical fact of the worldwide web that did indeed affect billions of products and services, taking down an estimated quarter of the internet with it. At the time of the events it was covered by World News and the article until you removed it, cited several valid news sources.
cc: Dreadstar
Is Unified Layer (AS46606) a product by Endurance International Group? lowendtalk.com/discussion/19753/what-is-unified-layer -- 128.90.94.28 ( talk) 22:48, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Unified Layer is a data center that some EIG brands use, most notably Bluehost. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
76.31.234.226 (
talk) 10:58, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Hey, what am I missing here? The four paragraphs of the section apparently refer to multiple blackout incidents, but they are not differentiated by date, or in any other manner. In the last paragraph of the section we are told the precise times of day that the given blackout started and ended! But we are (likewise) left to guess what the date was. Toddcs ( talk) 18:07, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
The company owns and operates numerous hosting businesses, with shared support information and support agents. A partial list of EIG brands [1] [2] [3] include:
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Freeinfa ( talk • contribs) 12:38, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
References
openaccess
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).bbb
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).bloomberg
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).netcraft
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).necn
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).@ EvergreenFir:
NorthBySouthBaranof did a revert claiming, "We actually need reliable sources for these." This seems to go against a basic Wikipedia policy, the WP:Baby and bathwater policy. This section contains several solid sources/references. What this user is doing is discarding all the information rather than working to improve, correct or tag it. This is the exact policy violation that is used as an example of a baby and bathwater type revert. From that policy page:
Wikipedia policy articles state that reverting to remove (non-vandalism) information should be a last resort, not a first one. – 72.234.220.38 ( talk) 05:11, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I believe that brands that can be absolutely confirmed should be listed, while the rest that are unconfirmed should rename on this page. Therefore, I believe that putting confirmed brands on the page as a confirmed list of acquisitions should be posted on their page, with the brand name, and date of acquisition, as well as references to substantiate said acquisition. SEC Filing notices or mentions in an SEC filing should be considered valid proof, as lying on a SEC form is a federal crime. Mjp1976 ( talk) 20:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
A fresh IP addressed re-added the info back in without discussion here. To explicitly state my objection to the list's inclusion, I feel it is undue given the size of the article, it violations WP:NOTADIRECTORY, and is bordering on being promotional (or at least that seems to be the intent of its addition). EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 16:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello, a little anecdote here. I went to refer a friend to this page because he was considering hosting options and I just wanted to let him know that he will be dealing with the same company if he chooses any one of their properties, and to advise to just choose the one with the best deal right now because they are all the same otherwise. The marketing is unimportant. The most important information here has been deleted, the list of acquisitions. Nothing could be more material to the contents of this page, than the properties they have bought up and consolidated...nothing. So it's shocking that it's been deleted for pretty poor reasons really, rule pages referenced but no solid explanation of how each section of rule applies. (I read the rule pages, it doesn't) it would not be considered a directory if it was only 4 companies, but the fact is they've acquired tens of them. The fact that their ownership list got very long does not make it less worthy of posting or run it afoul of being a directory. Buying up hosting properties is what EIG actually does, their business model. I have firsthand knowledge of this which of course doesn't belong on the main page..but I used to do tech support for them and the phone could ring for any one of these companies and you would have to pretend to only work for that company. This got confusing of course, so you would look at caller ID if you forgot who the customer thought they were talking to. Now, to the righting great wrongs argument. There is no wrong to be righted here except for the lack of information about the company, the entire purpose of a Wikipedia entry in the first place. It's not "wrong" that they bought up properties. Factually speaking, the company has a vested interest in keeping that information not readily available though, so I am not surprised about the actions of the likely paid off editors removing content here(people from Bangladesh and India just so happened to take an interest in this page?! yeah, right.) The business model involves basically service spam. They own so many companies that if you are fed up with one, and decide to switch, the odds are increasingly in their favor per acquisition that you might just end up with them again under a different subsidiary's name; hence their reason for not being too public about their properties. Now to the NPOV argument about the list of owned properties..complete hogwash. The list itself is 100% neutral, they do own those companies and that is not a point of view, it is purely factual. The reasoning of one of the editors for including the list does not make the list itself a non-neutral point of view, that is an argument devoid of all logic. If the company wishes to keep its properties a bit of a secret that is fine, but this doesn't affect the information being material, nor does it affect neutrality of the point of view for people wanting to keep the information in the open. Keeping information available to all is what Wikipedia is actually about lest we forget, so removing an entire section with specious reasoning and then locking the page sure smells pretty fishy. I suggest that the information gets reposted, just the list of owned companies. I also suggest that this page be taken to mediation as certain users seem to be taking too great of an interest in using loose and illogical arguments to take this information down. Baevar ( talk) 22:57, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Why is this even being debated? Listing brands owned by this company is no different than listing products and brands made or owned by any other large firm (pick one and go look at the page! This sort of information is there and NOT debated if it should even be there at all). Seeing as many other companies have their products, brands, and subsidiaries listed, I fail to see why this list continues to be debated beyond credible sources used for citation. What people use the information for is irrelevant to the nature of a reference material and the fact that it is even being discussed is mind boggling. Having worked in the industry in question, I can assure you it is relevant and has value both to workers in the industry and consumers. I fail to grasp why this even being debated unless people have a personal interest (such as being an investor or competitor) and trying to prevent the information from being disclosed and properly documented in an easy to consume format. This entire debate borders on the absurd. Given that this company is not entirely forthcoming with its involvement in the subsidiaries, documenting them is of value to anyone who might wish to know if they should invest, divest, apply for a job, purchase services, or as a reference to the history of the hosting industry of which this company is an important part due to how many brands it holds and the relative size of them compared to the rest of the industry. In short, it is information of consequence and should be documented. The only thing that is worthy of debate is sources and formatting. Defendermaxim ( talk) 10:35, 15 December 2015 (UTC) It seems as if the inclusion of the brands list has been resolved? For balance I wonder whether it would be appropriate to add an external link to this page (which still contains it): http://researchasahobby.com/full-list-eig-hosting-companies-brands/ It seems that providing an external link to EIG's own site would be more properly balanced by adding an external link to that site which does contain the brand information which web customer's who want to avoid EIG subsiduaries may find useful. Slipandslide ( talk) 22:38, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
@Mjp1976 I assume you meant to link here: https://secsearch.sec.gov rather than to a Wikipedia page about the SEC. It would be ideal if there were a page there that we could link to that listed all the hosting companies that EIG owns. Until someone finds one there however, I believe we should offer the best available source which seems to be the site I offered above. EIG seems to have tainted the hosting recommendation process at Wordpress.org and people who want to avoid all EIG companies when buying hosting should be able to find that information easily. What are you basing the statement that 3rd party sites should not be considered on? I see that whole section has been added back in to the main article so this may be moot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slipandslide ( talk • contribs) 14:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Request review & remove (or re-write) of rambling "Controversy" section. Mostly based on non- Neutral POV. Could have truth, but not a proper edit when done/worded this way. Not really even a "Controversy", seems more business practices/ethics related. 72.234.220.38 ( talk) 22:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Why is a report referenced by an expert monitoring service, LegitScript, removed ( here with here}? LegitScript assists Google, Bing, Visa, and other partners to let them know which Internet pharmacy merchants are legitimate and which are not in 19 countries...and Yahoo (Paragraph two). The source states and all these entities accept the assistance of the analysis and interpretation as legitimate, not as being unreliable. Furthermore, wikipedia guidelines state: "...expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications". LegitScript is used by the before mentioned enties (and more) and has been published by third-party publications (e.g. Wall Street Journeal, CNBC.com, Indianapolis Star, Network Wold, PCWorld) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nodove ( talk • contribs)
Added a section on the company's structure and how it has grown through multiple acquisitions. Brought back in data on its acquired brands that had been removed by prior edits. This data is re-formatted so it may now please those who didn't want "a list". More references have been added though more should be found. The company does not make this easy, as they don't list all their brands and also, some acquisitions are not big enough news to make it to "mainstream" publications. Several sources are "primary" not "secondary".
This is an attempt at keeping the valuable reference material in our encyclopedia and trying to reach a middle-ground with others who felt the large list section may have been too much. This is a good-faith edit (as one should assume most are according to Wikipedia tradition & policy). I'm trying not to do any sort of edit-war or annoy others, just replacing information of value that was removed and enhancing the article at the same time. I have zero POV in any way on this company, I, and I think others also, do find its growth plan interesting in comparison to other hosting companies, and historically as it mirrors a few other internet companies' strategies. Discussions about policy/problems/etc. of this edit/article should take place here on the talk page before any reverts or undos. Any further stalemates should immediately go to a Wikipedia mediation process rather than devolve into the past undo/restore waste of time.
This article, like so many others, is far from perfect. But one would hope no one will go against policy & civility and throw the baby out with the bathwater rather than work to improve it. — 72.234.220.38 ( talk) 09:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
It seems, from "all" that I've read in the "Talk" page about EIG, that there has been no input from Web development professionals. I apologize if any of the previous are, in fact, professionals in the Web development industry. But it would seem none are in the industry since none have approached their responses from the aspect of why the information (negative or positive) is important. It's extremely important for Web developers to know the good companies from the bad in order to provide professional assistance to our clients. To be clear, I've been developing Web sites for more than 15 years professionally. I started dabbling in 1996. I began reselling hosting packages in 2000, but stopped in 2013. You can check the dates of when HostGator sold to EIG in order to understand the significance of that year - 2013. When I initially read the post on Wikipedia about EIG, I was extremely happy to see that there "were" facts and a list of companies owned by EIG. The list alone provided in-depth information for me. At my initial review, the facts that I wanted were the sale date of HostGator, to what company, and what "other" hosting companies the buyer already owned. I know what a "quality" hosting company must have. I also know what was lost after the HostGator sale. Knowing that information and reviewing the list of EIG companies made my research much less complicated. I come to Wikipedia for a wealth of information when researching information, usually about hosting or Web development issues. "Facts" - that's all I want. If there are nothing but facts about EIG, I don't want to hear anybody defending why someone has removed those facts. I don't want to see this fruitless arguing over the facts - and I have no desire to be quoted references which debate what is or is not a fact. People come to Wikipedia for facts. If a post has facts, leave it alone. If a post has any fact that is removed, regardless of the reason, put it back. If there are facts that put a business under scrutiny, then that business needs to reconsider its ethics and business model. It's a fact that Brent Oxley ran a highly professional, ethical, honest business - and made that business extremely profitable. Make a profit on underhanded tricks, bait-and-switch, or simply lying is not what I would consider a professional business. But that's my "opinion" and has no business being posted in Wikipedia as a "fact". Due to the facts I found when researching EIG in 2013, regardless of how the facts were viewed, allowed me to scour the Net and find another business like what Brent Oxley sold. And if there was information that was not factual, it didn't matter to me at the time since I only wanted specific facts - and I found them. My current host is not part of the EIG network. Facts "must" include the number of times, dates and periods of outages a company experiences - even if they were only a handful of sites. Again, regardless of the negative impact on the company, factual information needs to be available. The public has the right to know the facts. And, again, any company with issues has every opportunity to repair its infrastructure as well as ethics. If the company chooses to continue its current practices that are questionable, the public has the right to know. Just because a business has poor practices does not give it the right to "hide" that information. Every business has a right to conduct business as it sees fit. Every person has the right to full disclosure. Wikipedia is and has always been a source that posts full disclosure, as long as the information is factual. Instead of removing "any" negative information about EIG, how about posting what positive action(s) was (were) taken to rectify any issue(s)? Therein lies the conundrum for EIG. As long as the information posted is factual, leave it alone. Stop arguing. Who cares about policy and whether a business finds negative information about their company? If it's fact, it stays. LTCreations ( talk) 23:50, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting a protection icon be added to the page. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 19:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Reason for requesting semi protection on this article is due to the previous edit warring. This will eliminate anonymous users and new users from coming in and making arbitrary edits. It is my belief, that keeping semi protection on this article for the next while (indefinitely), will ensure that those that edit will come up with valid sources of information based when making edits. Mjp1976 ( talk) 01:56, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Requesting that the page be reverted to the WP:STATUSQUO/ WP:CONSENSUS state prior to the edit warring by the IP/SPA user. Pre-edit war version is here. I normally would request this, but this user (1) went way beyond 3RR and (2) is acting in questionable to bad faith. They expressed intent to push their edits here despite multiple experienced editors opposition (see talk page above and article edit history). Pinging @ CambridgeBayWeather:, admin who protected page. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 19:35, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
With the recent (re)addition of the Subsidiary List, I added the references and the original formatting. I would welcome suggestions for criteria to use to trim this list down, and will attempt to find sources for the size of their various subsidiaries, but I suspect that will prove difficult. I would welcome any help in this area.
I have read through the talk page and looked extensively at the edit history and I do not believe there is any consensus on whether this information should be included or not, but there are many strong feelings in both directions.
My own belief is that this information is neutral (in that it is neither advertising for or against EIG) and relevant to any article on EIG given the nature and scope of their business. LloydSommerer ( talk) 03:41, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
This section could be easily improved in both accuracy and quality. I've done a fair amount of my own research to come up with a better list of EIG owned companies. Dollar2Host and MyResellerHome do not belong to EIG. 2slick and SoutheastWebGroup likely don't belong to EIG either. The As Full As Possible List of EIG Companies and Brands With Details page is relatively accurate, but it has errors and many of the sources are low quality. I'm not going to link to my own work in the actual article, but my own research is available here and nearly always relies on publicly available material found either on EIG's website or the websites of EIG subsidiaries. Since I have a conflict of interest here, another editor can decide whether my work or findings merit an update to this page. ChrisSmith1494 ( talk) 22:11, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. [see below] |
Hello, my name is Melanie and I am here on Wikipedia as an employee and representative of Endurance International Group to offer suggestions for the company's article. The current article does not provide a complete summary of the company's services and history, so I've proposed a "Corporate overview" section with services, office locations, and affiliated brands and businesses. The current "Subsidiary brands" section points to many unreliable sources and dead URLs, so I have drafted a complete, accurate, and properly sourced version to improve the article. Finally, the proposed draft provides a more thorough overview of the company's history and its acquisitions.
More generally, I've worked to improve the article's flow and organization, and I believe it is written in a very matter-of-fact, neutral tone. As I've noted at the top of this page, I will refrain from editing the article directly because of my conflict of interest. I've saved a proposed draft at a subpage of my user space: User:Melanie from Endurance/Endurance International Group.
I am hoping to find an unbiased community volunteer who will implement the draft as appropriate. I am open to splitting this edit request into multiple requests if working through the article section by section is preferred. I am also happy to answer any questions you may have here or on my user talk page. Thank you for your consideration and help in advance. Melanie from Endurance ( talk) 16:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
[ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Wiki Project_Companies&diff=prev&oldid=743070708 WikiProject Companies], [ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Wiki Project_Internet&diff=prev&oldid=744810261 WikiProject Internet], and [ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Wiki Project_Massachusetts&diff=prev&oldid=744810509 WikiProject Massachusetts], but no editors have responded. @ Araignee, Nodove, Scoundr3l, and EvergreenFir: I see that you all have edited the article in the past. I wonder if one of you might be willing to review the proposed draft and implement as appropriate? Thank you for any help in advance. Melanie from Endurance ( talk) 15:32, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
On behalf of Endurance, I have returned (see above section) with a more specific edit request. As seen at User:Melanie from Endurance/Endurance International Group, I propose replacing the current article's "Company structure" section with the proposed "Corporate overview" section, which provides an accurate, neutral overview of the company and its services, office locations, and affiliated brands and businesses.
As I mentioned before, the current "Subsidiary brands" subsection points to many unreliable sources and dead URLs, so I have drafted a complete and properly sourced version to improve the article. Is there an editor who will review the below text and copy over to the article as appropriate? I've provided markup below. @ VB00 and PaleCloudedWhite: I am pinging both of you in case you wish to review based on the above discussion.
Endurance International Group, formerly known as BizLand, [1] provides online solutions to small and medium sized businesses. [2] [3] The company offers more than 150 products and services, including web hosting, website builders, domain names, [4] email marketing, mobile device tools, cloud storage, e-commerce, security, productivity, and social media solutions. [5]
The company has offices in: Burlington, Massachusetts; Orem and Provo, Utah; Tempe, Arizona; Austin and Houston, Texas; Vancouver, Washington; Brazil; India; and Leeuwarden, Netherlands. [2] [6] [7] Endurance also has offices in Waltham, Massachusetts, Loveland, Colorado, and New York City, following its 2015 acquisition of Constant Contact. [8]
Endurance brands and affiliated businesses include: [9]
References
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
We are a wholly-owned subsidiary of Endurance International Group Holdings, Inc.
Emailbrain is no longer accepting new customers. For the best email marketing, we recommend trying Constant Contact.
Fastdomain Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Endurance International Group Holdings, Inc.
As a part of the The Endurance International Group, Inc. ("Endurance"), HostClear is able to provide a variety and range of products and services to help customers with their technological needs.
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |subscription=
ignored (|url-access=
suggested) (
help)
==Corporate overview==
Endurance International Group, formerly known as BizLand,<ref name="Giant">{{cite web|title=Email marketing giant Constant Contact acquired for $1 billion|url=http://venturebeat.com/2015/11/02/email-marketing-giant-constant-contact-acquired-for-1-billion/|website=[[VentureBeat]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=November 2, 2015}}</ref> provides online solutions to small and medium sized businesses.<ref name=Bray>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2013/10/25/endurance-web-hoster-endurance-raises-million-ipo/0mwVrnj7qmz3qefHXkRYyM/story.html|title=Web host company raises $252 million in IPO|date=October 26, 2013|accessdate=June 27, 2016|work=[[The Boston Globe]]|first=Hiawatha|last=Bray|publisher=Boston Globe Media Partners|issn=0743-1791|oclc=66652431}}</ref><ref name="Heller">{{cite news|last=Heller|first=Jaime|title=Web Hoster Endurance International Preps for IPO|url=http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2013/03/15/web-hoster-endurance-international-preps-for-ipo/|accessdate=June 27, 2016|work=[[The Wall Street Journal]]|publisher=[[News Corp]]|date=March 15, 2013|issn=0099-9660|oclc=781541372}}</ref> The company offers more than 150 products and services, including [[Web hosting service|web hosting]], [[website builder]]s, [[domain names]],<ref name="Allemann">{{cite web|last=Allemann|first=Andrew|title=SEC investigating Endurance International Group|url=http://domainnamewire.com/2015/12/17/sec-investigating-endurance-international-group/|website=Domain Name Wire|accessdate=June 27, 2016}}</ref> [[email marketing]], mobile device tools, [[cloud storage]], [[e-commerce]], [[Internet security|security]], productivity, and [[social media]] solutions.<ref name="IBD">{{cite news|title=Web Host Endurance International Bulks Up with Buys|url=http://www.nasdaq.com/article/web-host-endurance-international-bulks-up-with-buys-cm463276|accessdate=June 27, 2016|work=[[Investor's Business Daily]]|date=April 8, 2015}}</ref>
The company has offices in: Burlington, Massachusetts; Orem and Provo, Utah; Tempe, Arizona; Austin and Houston, Texas; Vancouver, Washington; Brazil; India; and Leeuwarden, Netherlands.<ref name=Bray/><ref>{{cite web|title=Our Locations|url=https://endurance.com/our-careers/our-locations|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Leeuwarden Office|url=http://endurance.com/our-careers/our-locations/leeuwarden|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=October 3, 2016}}</ref> Endurance also has offices in Waltham, Massachusetts, Loveland, Colorado, and New York City, following its 2015 acquisition of [[Constant Contact]].<ref name="Heltzell">{{cite news|last1=Heltzell|first1=Dallas|title=Loveland layoffs follow closing of Constant Contact sale|url=http://bizwest.com/loveland-layoffs-follow-closing-of-constant-contact-sale/|accessdate=September 15, 2016|work=BizWest|date=February 16, 2016}}</ref>
Endurance brands and affiliated businesses include:<ref name=Brands>{{cite web|title=Our Brands|url=http://www.endurance.com/our-company/our-brands|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=June 27, 2016}}</ref>
{{Div col|colwidth=15em}}
* A Small Orange<ref name=IBD/><ref name="DN">{{cite web|title=Endurance International Group Reveals Purchase of BuyDomains.com from NameMedia|url=http://www.dnjournal.com/archive/lowdown/2014/dailyposts/20141104.htm|website=DN Journal|accessdate=June 27, 2016|date=November 4, 2014}}</ref>
<nowiki>* AccountSupport<ref name="BBB">{{cite web|title=BBB Business Review: The Endurance International Group, Inc.|url=http://www.bbb.org/boston/business-reviews/internet-services/the-endurance-international-group-inc-in-burlington-ma-76863/|publisher=[[Better Business Bureau]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref>
* ApolloHosting<ref name=BBB/>
* Arvixe<ref name=IBD/><ref name=DN/>
* BigRock<ref name=Brands/><ref>{{cite web|title=Management Team|url=http://www.bigrock.com/bigrock-management/|publisher=BigRock|accessdate=June 29, 2016}}</ref>
* BizLand<ref name=BBB/>
* BlueDomino<ref name=BBB/>
* [[Bluehost]]<ref name=Bray/><ref name=IBD/><ref name=Warren>{{cite web|title=Bluehost, HostGator and HostMonster Go Down|url=http://mashable.com/2013/08/02/bluehost-down/#xbhXRBJf_Eq3|website=[[Mashable]]|accessdate=June 27, 2016|date=August 2, 2013|first=Christina|last=Warren}}</ref>
* BuyDomains<ref name=IBD/><ref>{{cite web|last=Allemann|first=Andrew|title=Endurance continues to roll up, acquires BuyDomains|url=http://domainnamewire.com/2014/11/04/endurance-continues-to-roll-up-acquires-buydomains/|website=Domain Name Wire|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=November 4, 2014}}</ref>
* Constant Contact<ref name=Giant/><ref name="Engel">{{cite web|last=Engel|first=Jeff|title=Constant Contact Cuts 15 Percent of Staff After Its Acquisition|url=http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2016/02/12/constant-contact-cuts-15-percent-of-staff-after-its-acquisition/|website=[[Xconomy]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Gagliordi|first=Natalie|title=Constant Contact acquired for $1.1 billion by holdings group Endurance International|url=http://www.zdnet.com/article/constant-contact-acquired-for-1-1-billion-by-holdings-group-endurance-international/|website=[[ZDNet]]|publisher=[[CBS Interactive]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=November 2, 2015}}</ref>
* [[Directi]]<ref name=IBD/><ref name=DN/><ref>{{cite web|title=Endurance International Group Expands in India and Beyond - Completes Directi acquisition, expanding international reach|url=http://www.endurance.com/press/press-releases/endurance-international-group-expands-in-india-and-beyond-completes-directi-acquisition-extending-international-reach|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref>
* Domain.com<ref name=Bray/><ref name=Heller/><ref>{{cite news|title=Domain.com Issues "Brand Better" Challenge at TechCrunch Disrupt|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-385474738.html|accessdate=June 29, 2016|work=Marketing Weekly News|date=September 27, 2014|subscription=yes|via=[[Highbeam Research]]}}</ref>
* DomainHost<ref name=BBB/>
* Dot5Hosting<ref name=BBB/>
* Dotster<ref name=BBB/><ref>{{cite web|title=Registrar Information|url=https://www.dotster.com/dotster/about/registrar-info.bml|publisher=Dotster|accessdate=June 28, 2016|quote=We are a wholly-owned subsidiary of Endurance International Group Holdings, Inc.}}</ref>
* EasyCGI<ref name=BBB/>
* eHost<ref name=BBB/>
* Emailbrain (defunct)<ref>{{cite web|title=Emailbrain: Trademark Coverage|url=https://inventively.com/search/trademarks/77317840|website=Inventively|publisher=Inventively Inc.|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Emailbrain: Smart digital marketing|url=http://emailbrain.com|publisher=Endurance International Group|accessdate=June 28, 2016|quote= Emailbrain is no longer accepting new customers. For the best email marketing, we recommend trying Constant Contact.}}</ref>
* EntryHost<ref name=BBB/>
* FastDomain<ref>{{cite web|title=About Us|url=https://www.fastdomain.com/about_us.html|publisher=FastDomain|accessdate=June 28, 2016|quote=Fastdomain Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Endurance International Group Holdings, Inc.}}</ref>
* FatCow<ref name=Bray/><ref name=Heller/>
* FreeYellow<ref name=BBB/>
* Globat<ref name=BBB/>
* Homestead<ref name=Brands/><ref name=BBB/>
* [[Homestead Technologies]]<ref name=BBB/>
* HostCentric<ref name=BBB/>
* HostClear<ref>{{cite web|title=HostClear Privacy Policy|url=https://www.hostclear.com/privacy|publisher=HostClear|accessdate=June 28, 2016|quote=As a part of the The Endurance International Group, Inc. ("Endurance"), HostClear is able to provide a variety and range of products and services to help customers with their technological needs.}}</ref>
* [[HostGator]]<ref name=Bray/><ref name=IBD/><ref name=Warren/>
* HostMonster<ref name=Warren/>
* HostYourSite<ref name=BBB/>
* HyperMart<ref name=BBB/><ref>{{cite web|title=HyperMart's Privacy Policy|url=http://www.hypermart.net/legal/legal_privacy.bml|publisher=HyperMart|accessdate=June 29, 2016}}</ref>
* IMOutdoorsHosting<ref name=BBB/>
* Impress.ly<ref name=Fourth>{{Cite news|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-449035267.html|title=Constant Contact Announces Fourth Class of Startups Selected for the Small Business Innovation Program; Participants to Take Up Residence at the SMB InnoLoft April 1|date=April 16, 2016|work=Marketing Weekly News|subscription=yes|via=[[Highbeam Research]]}}</ref>
* [[iPage]]<ref name=Bray/><ref name=Heller/><ref name=IBD/>
* Intuit Websites<ref>{{cite web|title=Endurance International Group to Purchase Intuit Websites Business|url=http://investors.intuit.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2012/Endurance-International-Group-to-Purchase-Intuit-Websites-Business/default.aspx|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=August 15, 2012|publisher=[[Intuit]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Endurance International Group to Buy Intuit Websites Business|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-33507063.html|accessdate=June 29, 2016|work=Manufacturing Close-Up|date=August 23, 2012|subscription=yes|via=HighBeam Research}}</ref>
* IPOWER<ref name=Brands/>
* IPowerWeb<ref name=BBB/>
* JustCloud<ref name=Brands/>
* JustHost<ref name=Warren/>
* MOJO Marketplace<ref name=Brands/><ref>{{cite news|title=Mojo Marketplace Launches 'Do It for Me' Services|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-367230435.html|accessdate=June 29, 2016|work=Entertainment Close-up|date=May 7, 2014|subscription=yes|via=Highbeam Research}}</ref>
* MyDomain<ref name=BBB/>
* NameMedia<ref>{{cite web|title=Highland-Backed IPOs and Acquisitions|url=http://www.hcp.com/content3782.html|publisher=[[Highland Capital Partners]]|accessdate=June 28, 2016}}</ref>
* Netfirms<ref name=BBB/>
* Networkshosting<ref name=BBB/>
* PowWeb<ref name=BBB/>
* PureHost<ref name=BBB/>
* ReadyHosting<ref name=BBB/>
* ResellerClub<ref name=IBD/><ref name=DN/><ref>{{cite web|last=Gite|first=Akshay|title=EIG’s Acquisition of ResellerClub – Update|url=http://blog.resellerclub.com/eigs-acquisition-of-resellerclub-update/|publisher=ResellerClub|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=February 4, 2014}}</ref>
* SEO Gears<ref name=Brands/><ref>{{cite news|title=Uspto Issues Trademark: Seogears|url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-3019954911.html|accessdate=June 29, 2016|work=US State News|publisher=[[HT Media]]|date=July 16, 2013|subscription=yes|via=Highbeam Research}}</ref>
* SinglePlatform<ref>{{cite journal|title=Constant Contact Acquires SinglePlatform, Bolsters Online Marketing Business|journal=[[Forbes]]|date=June 15, 2012|url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2012/06/15/constant-contact-acquires-singleplatform-bolsters-online-marketing-business/#200f1dbe6851|accessdate=September 15, 2016|issn=0015-6914}} Note: Constant Contact acquired SinglePlatform in 2012, and Endurance International Group acquired Constant Contact in 2015.</ref>
* Site5<ref name=Reports>{{cite web|title=Endurance International Group Reports 2015 Second Quarter Results|url=http://www.marketwatch.com/story/endurance-international-group-reports-2015-second-quarter-results-2015-08-04|website=MarketWatch|accessdate=June 28, 2016|date=August 4, 2015}}</ref><ref name=Hamilton>{{cite web|last=Hamilton|first=David|title=EIG's Acquisition of Verio and Site5 Nets 86,000 New Subscribers|url=http://www.thewhir.com/web-hosting-news/eigs-acquisition-of-verio-and-site5-nets-86000-new-subscribers|accessdate=June 28, 2016|website=Web Host Industry Review}}</ref>
* SiteBuilder<ref name=Fourth/>
* Spry<ref name=BBB/>
* StartLogic<ref name=Brands/><ref name=BBB/>
* [[Typepad]]<ref name=Brands/>
* USANetHosting<ref name=BBB/>
* Verio<ref name=Reports/><ref name=Hamilton/>
* VirtualAvenue<ref name=BBB/>
* VPSLink<ref name=BBB/>
* WebHost4Life<ref name=BBB/>
* Webhosting.info<ref name="ForbesIndia">{{cite journal|last=Thakur|first=Angad Singh|title=How Hari Ravichandran built Endurance through the inorganic route|journal=[[Forbes India]]|date=June 1, 2016|url=http://forbesindia.com/article/work-in-progress/how-hari-ravichandran-built-endurance-through-the-inorganic-route/43361/1|accessdate=June 29, 2016}}</ref>
* Webstrikesolutions<ref name=BBB/>
* Webzai<ref name=IBD/>
* Xeran<ref name=BBB/>
* YourWebHosting<ref name=BBB/>
Thanks, and do let me know if you have any questions. Melanie from Endurance ( talk) 16:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
I removed the following section from the article since it had been flagged as irrelevant for nearly two years. I'm outside my area of expertise, but happened accross this article, and this felt very much out of place. This wasn't a significant enough event to make major news sources and it isn't apparent that it has had long-term impact on the company, so I don't find it notable enough for inclusion in this article. I welcome opinions from others. Sondra.kinsey ( talk) 22:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
In April 2014, a major network issue at the data center in Provo, Utah, affected customers of Bluehost, HostMonster and JustHost, and took down many of the dedicated servers owned by HostGator customers. [1] relevant?
References
After acquiring Web.com in 2021, it seems Endurance International Group was rebranded to Newfold Digital by its parent. [1] It was reported on by a handful of tech-biz-oriented outlets. Thanks. - 71.209.163.100 ( talk) 19:39, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
References
First off, I would like to acknowledge that I am an employee of Newfold Digital, as disclosed in my profile. I have been working with editors I connected with on the Teahouse to create a new article draft for Newfold Digital. A major impetus for this was the issues with this article. The first is that Endurance International Group no longer exists. It was merged with Web.com Group to form Newfold Digital. This page was previously renamed to Newfold Digital, but that wasn't a good solution, because Newfold Digital is not just a continuation of EIG, nor did it solely originate from EIG. It is a new company, formed by the merger of EIG holdings with Web.com Group holdings, and this new company has since acquired several other companies. Rather than extensively editing and renaming this article, I propose leaving it as a historical record and moving forward with Newfold Digital, to simplify things and create a better and clearer experience for the interested reader.
There has been some confusion about why there should be a Newfold Digital article when this article already exists, and I am leaving this comment for any editor who happens to take a look, so they can get some idea of the problems with this article. Here are the issues as I see them:
1) The aforementioned issue of Newfold Digital vs. EIG. EIG no longer exists, but this article mentions several of the brands owned by Newfold Digital as if they were owned by EIG, including some brands that were acquired by Newfold Digital after EIG ceased to exist. This is factually inaccurate.
2) This article probably should not be simply renamed to Newfold Digital, because Newfold Digital is not solely comprised of former EIG holdings.
3) This article suffers from WP:PROSELINE. Newfold Digital was written to avoid this problem and provide simple, clear information about the parent company of these brands for the interested reader.
4) The basic company information in the article is inaccurate and muddled because of confusion between the former company and the new company. The new article would rectify this issue, and this article could link to the new article for clarity's sake.
5) Some of the content is not sourced properly. As an example, consider, "The CEO and all but one "C-level" officers from Web.com were retained after the merger, although EIG was much larger than Web.com." The source for this links to the Newfold Digital leadership page, but this page does not include any information on the size of EIG relative to Web.com. The following line is not sourced at all and appears to be speculative: "Web.com's strategy, like EIG's, was to grow through acquiring brands which they continued to operate, although they generally did not relocate the infrastructure of their acquired brands."
---
I have zero interest in using Wikipedia as a marketing tool for Newfold Digital. But I do want to see accurate, up-to-date information included on Wikipedia, and I believe that having inaccurate, outdated information live, such as this article, is detrimental to Wikipedia. To this end, I am looking for assistance with Newfold Digital, to hopefully get it approved, so that this article can be updated and linked to the new article, resolving many of the aforementioned problems. Zach at Newfold ( talk) 18:49, 28 December 2022 (UTC)