rustyrack_grag
Member
OP
- Joined:
- Jun 2024
- Posts:
- 68
- From:
- Tallinn, Estonia
Live price-match negotiation report: five hosts, five approaches.
• Contabo: quoted $48/month VPS. Mentioned OVHcloud matched at €42. Contabo declined to match. Cited TOS section 14.3: "promotional rates are non-transferable between accounts."
• Vultr: quoted $55/month. Asked twice, separated by 48 hours. Second request granted 45% reduction to $30.25. No explanation provided.
• InterServer: quoted $62/month. Mentioned Vultr beat their rate. InterServer matched at $30. No further negotiation attempted.
• Hostinger: no response to initial ticket in 72 hours. Escalated via email. No response.
• KnownHost: declined to discuss pricing outside stated tiers. Referenced "pricing integrity."
Preliminary observation: asking twice outperforms competitive framing. Documenting further.
RR
if it ain't broke, rust it
pam3
Member
Latency Witch
- Joined:
- Aug 2024
- Posts:
- 74
- From:
- Melbourne, Australia
Observed latency to Vultr edge: 2.3 × 10^1 ms during negotiation window, 4.7 × 10^1 ms post-match[1]. No correlation established between response time and discount magnitude.
RFC 2544 throughput testing not applicable to billing systems.
[1] Sample size insufficient for statistical significance. N=1.
https://www.vultr.com/pricing/
100% packet loss at hop 3
pauloserver
Member
- Joined:
- Jun 2024
- Posts:
- 117
- From:
- São Paulo, Brazil
Cara rustyrack_grag you going to ask three times next kkkkk
Véi I tried this with HostHatch, tell you now
First ticket: no cara we dont match
Second ticket 3 days later: checked with manager
Manager come back: 30% off but only 6 months
I going to try again next week kkkkk
Pam3 you measured my patience in scientific notation too cara
chill infrastructure for chill people 🦫
SingaporeRep
Member
Benchmark Addict
- Joined:
- Jul 2024
- Posts:
- 227
- From:
- Singapore, SG
45% off just because you asked twice? Sus
fio, iperf, geekbench. results or gtfo.
pam3
Member
Latency Witch
- Joined:
- Aug 2024
- Posts:
- 74
- From:
- Melbourne, Australia
CarlosBilby there are no RFC 2544 results. I pinged Vultr Melbourne twice. That is the extent of the measurement. The notation was a joke about how little data I collected.
45% off just because you asked twice? Sus
Not sus, just asymmetric information. First-line support has discretionary bands. Second ticket may route to retention queue. Vultr has Melbourne POP; they care about APAC market share more than margin on one instance.
100% packet loss at hop 3
rustyrack_grag
Member
OP
- Joined:
- Jun 2024
- Posts:
- 68
- From:
- Tallinn, Estonia
Preliminary results continued, since I hit character limit:
• Hostinger: still no response at 96 hours. Ticket auto-closed as "resolved" with no agent reply. I reopened. Awaiting.
• KnownHost: I pushed back, asked if "pricing integrity" applies to annual prepay. They said yes. End of thread.
I will run a second round with HostHatch and CloudCone based on pauloserver and priya's reports. Will use 72-hour gap between asks.
This matches my theory. Contabo cited TOS because they have no retention desk. Vultr has one.
if it ain't broke, rust it
SingaporeRep
Member
Benchmark Addict
- Joined:
- Jul 2024
- Posts:
- 227
- From:
- Singapore, SG
Asymmetric information my foot. You got lucky with a lazy first agent.
I benchmarked Vultr Singapore against Contabo Singapore last month. Same price tier, Vultr wins on CPU-bound, Contabo wins on disk sequential. Neither worth 45% premium over the other.
Numbers:
- Vultr: 7-Zip 18000 MIPS, fio seq read 450 MB/s
- Contabo: 7-Zip 12000 MIPS, fio seq read 850 MB/s
Your discount made Vultr competitive. Without it you overpay for boot time.
fio, iperf, geekbench. results or gtfo.
