Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

GoDaddy Sells To Investor Group

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the find-out-more-at-skeezy-ads-dot-com dept.

The Internet 96

wiredmikey writes "Domain name registrar and Web hosting provider GoDaddy, announced it has agreed to receive a strategic investment from private equity firms KKR, Silver Lake and Technology Crossover Ventures. The terms of the transaction were not disclosed, but the Wall Street Journal reported people familiar with the deal saying it could be worth approximately $2.25 billion. The Scottsdale, Arizona based company which has built its marketing around scantly-clad women, manages more than 48 million domain names."

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No longer good (1)

pubwvj (1045960) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642680)

I used to like GoDaddy but moved all my domains away from them in the past year.

Re:No longer good (1)

Hylandr (813770) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643780)

Hostgator WINS!

- Dan.

Re:No longer good (1)

lothos (10657) | more than 3 years ago | (#36644128)

There are a lot better registrars out there than hostgator. I prefer dynadot, fabulous, internet.bs.

Re:No longer good (1)

PoopMonkey (932637) | more than 3 years ago | (#36648194)

It was NEVER good.

Silver Lake? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642688)

Scummy domain registrar gets even scummier.

Re:Silver Lake? (1)

Loconut1389 (455297) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642978)

Why don't people like them? I own about 40 domains and have nothing but good service. I don't use their shared hosting though- it was too gloppy/bursty.

Re:Silver Lake? (1)

mcavic (2007672) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643290)

I hate their web site because it's slow and cumbersome. But their prices are great, the DNS is free and reliable, and I trust them not to go out of business.

Re:Silver Lake? (1)

dgatwood (11270) | more than 3 years ago | (#36645192)

I don't use their shared hosting though- it was too gloppy/bursty.

That's something of an understatement, in my experience. About a third of the time, a simple fetch of a static file would take longer than a minute to start sending data. Their servers are so badly misconfigured that you'd think their setup procedure involved copious amounts of alcohol. And after providing them with exact time stamps of when problems were occurring (verified by multiple machines on different networks), they still weren't willing to do anything about the abusers (mostly broken WordPress installations, I think).

And I tried to buy an SSL cert from them once. They eventually refunded my money after determining that even though their website happily sold me an SSL cert with the specified duration, they no longer offered them, and had not for several years. Oops.

It was like working with the federal government, only without the opportunity for a cushy public sector job at the end.

Re:Silver Lake? (2)

DJLuc1d (1010987) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643424)

I will actually be glad when silver lake strips the company, fires everyone, takes their 'vested' options, and sells the ravaged carapace of a once awful company to some sucker.

I have a domain at GoDaddy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642702)

Does there exist a way to have your domain in safer hands, or is this really the best there is?

Re:I have a domain at GoDaddy (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642732)

Try network solutions..

Re:I have a domain at GoDaddy (2)

Loconut1389 (455297) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642982)

What a rip off. They change way more for the exact same thing last I checked.

Re:I have a domain at GoDaddy (1)

cherokee158 (701472) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643338)

You are joking, right?

Re:I have a domain at GoDaddy (5, Informative)

pubwvj (1045960) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642862)

There are several, many, other registrars. Namecheap is what I now use. So far, so good. I liked GoDaddy for a long time having been an early customer with them but their sales tactics are very heavy handed and their web site hard to use.

Re:I have a domain at GoDaddy (1)

mcavic (2007672) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643308)

Yeah, you do have to be careful what you agree to when you check out.

Re:I have a domain at GoDaddy (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36663636)

I used to recommend them to clients until their marketing campaign began to splash commercials all over the place that looked more like Hooters ads than ads for a hosting service. I wasn't going to recommend serious clients to a host whose main page features some bimbo with her tits hanging out. I don't know what kind of horndog runs that company, but he's clearly in the wrong business (I recommend he try a strip club chain instead).

Re:I have a domain at GoDaddy (2)

zonky (1153039) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642916)

MarkMonitor. But you probably can't afford it.

It's good enough for Google, it's good enough for you- but there is a $10-20k minimum annual spend i believe.

Re:I have a domain at GoDaddy (1)

lothos (10657) | more than 3 years ago | (#36644130)

There are many better domain registrars out there. Namecheap, dynadot, and internet.bs are good options.

meh (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642706)

as an employee -- i cringe to see how our "Unique Corporate Culture" will come crashing down around us. Does this mean no more "Mario-Cart" during our breaks?

Re:meh (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642930)

Also, no more hookers during work hours.

Re:meh (1)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | more than 3 years ago | (#36644912)

please tell me this is not true!

Cashout Before Burst (4, Interesting)

cosm (1072588) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642714)

Cashin' out the chips and going home before the inevitable bubble burst. The press release makes it sound like a 'partnership'. Is that just hipster MBA speak for politely saying that we've just been completely bought and that lots uf employees will be hosed to keep the investors happy? Time will tell...

Re:Cashout Before Burst (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642752)

It's KKR.

The barbarians are at the gate.

They will pile the company, emit dividends with wherever cash there's in the company, mass layoff employees, break it up in separate divisions and sell it.

Re:Cashout Before Burst (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642896)

Someone please mod this up for obscure reference justice. This is the same KKR that was featured in the book and HBO movie, "Barbarians at the Gate."

Re:Cashout Before Burst (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36645214)

Makes perfect sense. The company I work at was bought/invested in by KKR 2.5 years ago. We have since never received a decent bonus or salary increment. Company trips and used-to-be-regular annual functions have been cancelled.

Re:Cashout Before Burst (1)

lucm (889690) | more than 3 years ago | (#36645418)

No it does not make sense. There is a huge difference between frugal management (which you describe) and the corporate raider behavior described by the other AC. In those 2.5 years, how many "massive layoffs" and company break up did you witness?

Frugal management sucks from the employees perspective, but it usually allow the company to survive, just like the IMF takeovers are unpleasant but can save a country from bankruptcy.

Re:Cashout Before Burst (2)

makomk (752139) | more than 3 years ago | (#36645740)

Frugal management sucks from the employees perspective, but it usually allow the company to survive, just like the IMF takeovers are unpleasant but can save a country from bankruptcy.

You mean the IMF takeovers that result in things like large proportions of the population losing access to clean water because the IMF forced the government to sell off their water supplies at a knock-down price to a company that decided it only made financial sense to serve the uber-rich? Those IMF takeovers?

Actually, it's probably not a bad analogy - both attempt to improve short-term finances and enrich third parties at the expense of the long-term health and stability of the country or business.

Re:Cashout Before Burst (1)

lucm (889690) | more than 3 years ago | (#36646226)

> You mean the IMF takeovers that result in things like large proportions of the population losing access to clean water

It is a well-known fact that the IMF and its Death Squads of bankers lurk in the dark, waiting for an opportunity to step in and prevent common people from having clean water. I would have to check their website and read the mission statement, but I am pretty sure they also aim to steal organs from orphans and sell them to old rich guys.

If the IMF was not a bunch of crooks, when they take over a country that is almost bankrupt they would hire more civil servants and provide them with job security; they would also provide free healthcare and make sure that everybody in the country has HBO, a pool and a mansion.

> Actually, it's probably not a bad analogy - both attempt to improve short-term finances and enrich third parties at the expense of the long-term health and stability of the country or business.

Everybody knows that taking over a financially ruined country is short-sighted and greedy. What other explanation could there be?

Clearly the next time a country is facing bankruptcy, instead of making a deal with the IMF to erase billions in debt and have someone do the unpleasant things that nobody likes in order to take the country out of the red, they should call you and apply your sound strategy.

Of course you did not reveal this sound strategy yet, you only have posted half-baked critics based on anecdotal evidence. When you have a minute, please enlighten the world with your financial wisdom (and feel free to also cure cancer without animal testing).

Re:Cashout Before Burst (1)

makomk (752139) | more than 3 years ago | (#36648916)

It is a well-known fact that the IMF and its Death Squads of bankers lurk in the dark, waiting for an opportunity to step in and prevent common people from having clean water.

Actually, the worst part is that it's probably not even intentional; the people running the IMF really do seem to believe that there's nothing the free market can't solve and that cutting government spending is always harmless. Well, so long as it's not a country they care about anyway.

Re:Cashout Before Burst (2)

lucm (889690) | more than 3 years ago | (#36645400)

This makes no sense whatsoever. First of all, Godaddy never completed its IPO and private equity firms rarely invest billions of dollars in a private company just to leech on its cash... As for breaking up the company, exactly how do you suggest KKR would do it (supposing that they are a majority partner, which nobody can confirm)? Separate the registrar and hosting departments? Spin-off the IT department to compete the Geek Squad? Completely ludicrous.

As for "Barbarians at the gate": it is a bidding war for RJR-Nabisco that KKR won. It occurred in 1988, involved financial instruments that do not exist anymore, and even then KKR was a sound investment firm, not a corporate raider a la Gordon Gekko. What they did with RJR-Nabisco allowed its strongest components (such as Del Monte) to grow and become profitable.

Re:Cashout Before Burst (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 3 years ago | (#36649426)

It's also mentioned that Silver Lake is also one of the partners here. The same Silver Lake that just fired the entire Skype executive structure prior to the sale to Microsoft to reduce the amount of profit they have to share.

I can see this going badly for GoDaddy. More like GoneDaddy.

Re:Cashout Before Burst (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643018)

A bubble, seriously. How did this happen? Too much money as a result of inflation? I don't know, but......

When people start talking about a trillion dollar valuation for Facebook [wsj.com] , you know there is something wrong. Facebook has good revenue growth, [wikipedia.org] but come on.

Re:Cashout Before Burst (2)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643144)

Most likely this means support jobs moved to a foreign country or outsourced.

The Support/Call center for Godaddy is actually in Scottsdale Arizona.

Re:Cashout Before Burst (1)

lucm (889690) | more than 3 years ago | (#36645478)

If you have money in a 401(k) or RRSP (in Canada), odds are that *you* are one of the happy investors.

This is the fun part in capitalism. You work hard and put a little money aside for your retirement. Since you want this money to grow and at least beat inflation, you invest in a mutual fund. That fund pools money from thousands of small investors and takes huge positions in the stock market - but also in order to mitigate risks it creates partnerships with private equity firms (such as KKR) to have assets that are not bound to the market fluctuations. Being a major shareholder in many companies, your mutual fund will ask for a positive ROI (basically on your behalf) and will not hesitate to fire the management if they don't meet quarterly or yearly expected results. So management cuts costs, keep salaries low, and try to take more money out of its customers to make its numbers.

In the end you get a 6% annual return on your 401(k) but when you go to pump gas you are outraged by the price and when you take a flight from New-York to LA you are pissed because the airline only gives you a peanut bag. And from time to time you curse those greedy Wall Street people and their evil shareholders...

It's the circle of life.

keep the godaddy girl! (0)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642722)

keep the godaddy girl!

Re:keep the godaddy girl! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36643604)

Photo or it didn't happen.

Re:keep the godaddy girl! (1)

Lennie (16154) | more than 3 years ago | (#36645556)

The original owner, Bob Parsons, is also staying. He is now the business manager, so not much should change.

Godaddy Alternatives (4, Informative)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642768)

Namecheap has the best interface I've encountered.

Moniker is so-so. The interface is somewhat clunky, and it doesn't register domains as fast as Namecheap. For multiple domains, it puts them into a batch job that starts executing a few minutes later.

Any other good ones?

Re:Godaddy Alternatives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642850)

Namecheap seems like a quality choice to me. Not sure if there's better, but the domain names were cheap, I've never had any hassle with them, and as you said, the interface is pretty good.

Re:Godaddy Alternatives (2)

Eil (82413) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642860)

I've stuck with namecheap over the years because they offer a lot of services for free that other registrar's charge extra for (DNS hosting, email forwarding, etc).

Re:Godaddy Alternatives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36647708)

I've stuck with namecheap over the year's because they offer a lot of service's for free that other registrar's charge extra for (DN'S hosting, email forwarding, etc).

Fixed that for you.

Re:Godaddy Alternatives (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642880)

Dynadot has definitely won my loyalty. They have bulk registration and a very clean interface. Also, they have a lot of coupons periodically for transfers and certain TLDs. I used to just buy my domains through my web host but I've since transfered them all to Dynadot.

Re:Godaddy Alternatives (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642936)

Namecheap is the firm I went to when I switched from Godaddy. Godaddy, from their behavior, seemed to think that they owned my domain and I was just leasing it. Not cool with me.

I find it much easier to use the namecheap interfaces. It is possible to order a domain through a shared hosting provider, but I prefer to order the domain and web hosting seperately.

enomcentral.com (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642954)

enomcentral was a former enom.com reseller. enom doesnt sell to retail. it sells to resellers like web hosts, domain registrars etc. but when a big reseller flopped (enomcentral) enom took over the control of the outfit with agreement in order to prevent domain owners from going down. now it belongs to enom. in order to not compete with its resellers, enom charges quite high prices at enomcentral. but, enom is the most reliable domain registrar on the internet. in everything ranging from renewals to copyright/dmca issues etc.

Re:enomcentral.com (1)

qpqp (1969898) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643718)

Could you get into a little more detail about what you mean by "reliable" in regard to "copyright/dmca issues?"

Re:enomcentral.com (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#36644026)

godaddy had the habit of speedily confiscating your domain without even giving you a chance to reply (as per law) against a dmca request. enomcentral, not as such.

DreamHost (1)

loimprevisto (910035) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643270)

I had a good experience with http://www.dreamhost.com/ [dreamhost.com] a few years ago. Employee owned company with good prices, good service, and active forums that DreamHost's employee's participated in regularly.

Nearlyfreespeech (1)

Chemisor (97276) | more than 3 years ago | (#36644318)

www.nearlyfreespeech.net [nearlyfreespeech.net] will register your domains, host your website, forward your mail, and do it all without the soul-sucking experience you get everywhere else. Speaking as a satisfied customer.

namesilo.com (1)

caffeinejolt (584827) | more than 3 years ago | (#36645116)

http://www.namesilo.com/ [namesilo.com]

Re:namesilo.com (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 3 years ago | (#36651444)

Thanks for this, it seems to have some good features, and it beats even Namecheap on price.

Have you used the interface? Is it easy to make mass updates (select the domains you want to change, and then update nameservers en masse?)

Re:Godaddy Alternatives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36645426)

I'm using namecheap, but there are 2 problems with it:
1- less domains supported.
2- no dnssec support :(

apart from that, it's a good service

Re:Godaddy Alternatives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36645720)

what about alternatives with dnssec support?

Re:Godaddy Alternatives for DNSSEC? (1)

baerm (163918) | more than 3 years ago | (#36648066)

I have no points to mod up the parent, but I would like to ask the same question.

Does any other registrar support DNSSEC?

I've looked at register.com, 1and1, and dyndns, but godaddy was the only one that supported DNSSEC (and it was even simple to configure).

You say that like it's a bad thing (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642772)

I've built my entire life around scantily clad women

GoDaddy Girls (5, Interesting)

DKirk (2315490) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642790)

I've used GoDaddy for many years but have started to shy away from them recently due to the girls being just a little over the top for a professional business. I found it awkward too many times dealing with businesses and their comments regarding the plastering of girls everywhere on the site, especially when I'm dealing with a female executive and the awkwardness when the girls display on the screen front and center. Another issue with GoDaddy is their site always feels sluggish, as if they are running their site on 10 year old servers.

Re:GoDaddy Girls (1)

Meshach (578918) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642818)

I've used GoDaddy for many years but have started to shy away from them recently due to the girls being just a little over the top for a professional business

And those commercials with the elderly lady doing a strip tease did not do anything for me.

Re:GoDaddy Girls (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642856)

I've used GoDaddy for many years but have started to shy away from them recently due to the girls being just a little over the top for a professional business

And those commercials with the elderly lady doing a strip tease did not do anything for me.

Real soon now: GoGranny.

Re:GoDaddy Girls (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642882)

You didn't feel awkward by pronouncing GoDaddy? How was anyone surprised by the aggressive marketing turn?

Re:GoDaddy Girls (1)

todrules (882424) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642928)

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Re:GoDaddy Girls (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642964)

I still use them and I still recommend them on account of their excellent telephone customer service. But I'll definitely be keeping an eye on how things turn out with this.

Re:GoDaddy Girls (1)

sco08y (615665) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642976)

Plastering everywhere on the site?

Just checking their site: on the front page, there is one image and a few videos with girls. And the commercials, the merchandise and the blog highlight the girls.

But there are no girls on the major nav sections, except for domains, and none on the support or account creation. Most of the site has no models at all, not surprising since they probably charge per page.

Re:GoDaddy Girls (1)

Mean Variance (913229) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643492)

Well one of the GoDaddy girls at least has a day job if they change marketing themes: Danica Patrick, Indy Car/NASCAR racer.

Re:GoDaddy Girls (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36643258)

It's not nearly as bad as you indicate. I find it kind of silly that you shy away from GoDaddy because a few girls on their general webpage, but nowhere when it comes to the important parts of the site that you will actually frequently use.

Re:GoDaddy Girls (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 3 years ago | (#36648864)

3DPD.
'nuff said.

Re:GoDaddy Girls (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36663840)

I had the exact same experience. I don't know who their CEO is, but I suspect he got his career start running strip clubs. Their marketing is way too embarrassing for anyone to recommend them. I got to where I was scared of copping a sexual harassment allegation for even directing anyone to their website.

The key to their success (1)

shoehornjob (1632387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642806)

"The Scottsdale, Arizona based company which has built its marketing around scantly-clad women" There it is. Now we do the traditional Wall street dance known as the hump and dump. Send the Go Daddy girls in.

Always respected GD because... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642814)

To my knowledge they were one of the very few SSL providers which immediately revoked (and redistributed) every SSL certificate made with openssl when the Debian SSL disaster struck in 2008.

And well; coming from Europe I have to say that the continuous examples as to how prude the US actually is always makes me chuckle. The banned superbowl commercials for example; when looking at those I often have a hard time understanding what the fuss is all about.

Re:Always respected GD because... (1)

Solandri (704621) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643544)

And well; coming from Europe I have to say that the continuous examples as to how prude the US actually is always makes me chuckle. The banned superbowl commercials for example; when looking at those I often have a hard time understanding what the fuss is all about.

I doubt the commercials were really banned. Marketing just says they are to pique people's curiosity and get them to visit the website. There's a rather wide gulf between watching a commercial for a website on TV, and getting people to actually visit the website. The "banned ad" is just a tool to entice people to cross that gulf. It worked on you, didn't it?

Re:Always respected GD because... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36644562)

To my knowledge they were one of the very few SSL providers which immediately revoked (and redistributed) every SSL certificate made with openssl when the Debian SSL disaster struck in 2008.

That is utterly WRONG and FALSE!

I was one of the people that was affected by Debian OpenSSL screwup. I had an SSL certificate with GoDaddy. I had revoked the certificate and asked if I could reissue another, for the duration of the original at least. I was flatly told NO by GoDaddy support.

So, it is utterly INCORRECT that GoDaddy reissued every certificate for people affected by Debian OpenSSL security issue.

Re:Always respected GD because... (1)

cavebison (1107959) | more than 3 years ago | (#36650056)

The banned superbowl commercials for example

No, they were banned because if fat, Dorito-munching Americans thought they could get girlfriends, they wouldn't be sitting in front of the TV watching the Superbowl.

Genius investment. (1)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642832)

scantly-clad women,

By which, I presume, they mean SCANTILY-clad women?

Also, this seems like investing in MySpace. People already were tired of a lot of GoDaddy practices, including the crap site full of attempts to pile on "value-adds" at the end of a purchase. Those who weren't tired of that were getting tired of the CEO's antics. All this will do is coax those who have meant to get around to switching registrars to finally do it. The only people who will still keep using GoDaddy will be a rank similar to those who still use Network Solutions -- the group of people who even in 2011 may still not know you can register domains elsewhere and for less than $70/yr.

Personally, this "investment" is hilarious. This is even funnier than Zynga (a marketing and spamming company masquerading as a gaming company entirely dependent on 2011's version of MySpace for its success). This is going to be fun to watch in the next three years.

Re:Genius investment. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642894)

More money than you, beeyotch.

I love the slashtards who act like they have all the insight in the world but probably have never staked their own claim anywhere let alone actually been successful in the business world.

Oh well. Keep living in your mother's basement and dreaming that your GTA money is real and that you're all gangsta and shit.

Re:Genius investment. (1)

shoehornjob (1632387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642900)

This is going to be fun to watch in the next three years.

My thoughts exactly. So much drama.

Amount of domains (1)

Lord Lode (1290856) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642948)

This is somewhat off topic, but I found this part of the article interesting: "The Scottsdale, Arizona based company [...] manages more than 48 million domain names."

According to http://www.domaintools.com/internet-statistics/ [domaintools.com] , there are now 95 million .com domains, 14 million .net and 9 million .org.

Given that there are 7 billion people in the world (of which a lot use the internet), and afaik many of them register domains, not to mention all the squatters and companies, I find this a surprisingly small amount of domains.

What do you think of this?

Re:Amount of domains (1)

Hermanas (1665329) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643542)

Don't forget the millions and millions of local domains (.co.uk, .us, .it, .co, .za, etc.).

Also, 100 million domains translates to about 1 .com domain for every 10 people using the internet (assuming 1/6 of the world population uses the net at least once a year, I didn't look it up now, but it's around there) - which means the average domain has 10 unique page views per year (that's really, really few), is it still really so hard to believe?

Re:Amount of domains (1)

Hermanas (1665329) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643546)

Sorry, that's 10 unique visitors per year, not page views, and hopefully more, since every person does not just visit one website.

Damn! (1)

dadioflex (854298) | more than 3 years ago | (#36642962)

Now all my GoDaddy... oh... okay.

Weren't worth the money! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36642986)

I looked at GoDaddy many times for hosting, but I could always find a better deal with more features somewhere else! I don't know how they are now, but they used to be behind the times with PHP, video hosting, things like that. I also heard a lot of people complain that their servers sere always down.

I'll be glad to be rid of them. (0)

LoudNoiseElitist (1016584) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643220)

Fuck GoDaddy and their shitty business practices. One more month and I'm free of them. I can't wait.

Ill tell you exactly what this means (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36643346)

Going from relatively (about 3k employees) small company with dominant market share to a global small business IT company. Formula for success has been found for English speaking countries, they will probably start looking overseas for new customers. Don't think they are dumb enough to outsource support, keeping call centers in the US has been a major factor of their success. More locations will probably be built to cater to those local customers in their native languages. They wouldn't have 3 major investors if there wasn't a huge opportunity for growth. Remember, they host 1/3 of all the internet. Love/hate them, it will be interesting to see how they invest all that money.

Daaammiiitttt (1)

SuperCharlie (1068072) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643368)

Now to go thru the hell of domain transfers with private domain name servers. faaaaakkkkkkk Ive got over 20 of them.

Re:Daaammiiitttt (1)

lothos (10657) | more than 3 years ago | (#36644154)

I've transferred domains a ton of times and never had an issue. Your nameserver settings will remain the same, unless you're transferring a .eu domain. For .com/.net/.org you won't have any downtime.

Portfolio malfunction? (1)

InsectOverlord (1758006) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643406)

it could be worth approximately $2.25 billion

I wonder if they will suffer another new kind of malfunction - cash malfunction, value slipping down.

As a previous employee, this makes me sad... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36643412)

I worked for GoDaddy in the past and it was an awesome company to work for. As a company, they seemed to actually care for the employees. Pay was decent, benefits were good, and they went out of the way to show that they appreciated us as workers and understood that the ground floor workers are, literally, what makes or breaks a company.

I can't imagine that environment being sustained through the buyout.

To bad, it was a good time.

Re:As a previous employee, this makes me sad... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36644472)

As a current employee, I can tell you that Bob is still the majority shareholder, and the investors repeatedly said they don't want to mess with the "secret sauce". My feeling is they're looking to grow the company internationally. We just opened a data center in Singapore, and a data center in the Netherlands earlier. We developers are being told to start looking at internationalization for some of the products, my product included. (thankfully, I already had that in mind when we wrote it) I do hope they bring some new blood into the executive spots, namely the CTO position. The lack of vision and leadership in that area is stifling.

You can check godaddy's record here: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36643554)

For people who want to know about GoDaddy, an excellent site which details their behaviors is closing their doors soon --

http://www.Nodaddy.com

Who is KKR? (1)

iiiears (987462) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643578)

For your clicking convenience - lol
KKR Pioneer in leveraged buy-outs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlberg_Kravis_Roberts [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome_Kohlberg,_Jr [wikipedia.org] .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Kravis [wikipedia.org]

Silverlake Partners
also tech investors
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Lake_Partners [wikipedia.org]

SKYPE
Silver Lake, Andreessen Horowitz and the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board announce the acquisition of 65% of Skype for $1.9 billion from E-Bay, valuing the business at $2.75 billion

From the Wikipedia

"Early investors in KKR included the Hillman Family and the Griffith family (who are also large shareholders in MGM and Time-Warner)[6] By 1978, with the revision of the ERISA regulations, the nascent KKR was successful in raising its first institutional fund with approximately $30 million of investor commitments.[7]"

This is a very selective selection of links and is in no way comprehensive.
What do you think?

TAKE THAT !!! (1)

Chuby007 (1961870) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643662)

I knew this would happen, After the Elephant incident I moved all my 5 domains to namecheap TAKE THAT GODADDY !

Go with the best (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36643710)

PairNIC.
Pittsburgh based. And awesome.

Why no, I didn't read TFA (-1, Offtopic)

Legion303 (97901) | more than 3 years ago | (#36643752)

Didn't Google bid more than that, $3.1415 billion? Odd way to run an auction.

Re:Why no, I didn't read TFA (1)

Kalriath (849904) | more than 3 years ago | (#36649450)

Google bid for Nortel, what the hell does that have to do with GoDaddy?

Cost Per (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36644074)

So if the numbers are right, that comes out to $46.87 per domain. That seems like a LOT of money, given the normal cost of registering is about $12.00 a year....

When will this mindless overpaying and consolidating trend ever end?

Wake Up America!! We will be left with two companies providing all goods and services before two long... and no competition is NOT a good thing.

This wasn't a buy out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36644488)

Bob Parsons, for better or worse, is still the majority shareholder in the company. The investment groups mentioned several times they don't want to mess with the "secret sauce" at GD. I believe, and this is due to actually working there, that they're gearing up for some reorganization and the goal is internationalization. I think these investors are smart enough to see the potential GD has with its dominant share of domain names and hosting. Yes, I do hope we drop the up-selling crap in the main purchase path(doubtful). I hope our commercials start advertising our products and tone down the GD girls(doubtful). I hope we get a CTO with experience, vision, and leadership skills. It's what we lack most.

Crappy service, it's a racket; Hope it's disolved. (2)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 3 years ago | (#36649052)

I've had the displeasure of setting up hosting for people who've purchased their domains from GoDaddy.

There's always some problem or another; Some basic task will just not work for no reason until you transfer the domain away from their greedy little paws.

Most recently it was the MX records of a local non-profit's site. The .com MX records would simply not correctly point to the hosting provider's MX records. Thankfully I quickly purchased the .org companion domain in the non-profit's name via their hosting provider, and we used the .org site's mailing instead (until the .com was transferred -- the hosting plan included 3 domain names). GoDaddy tech support said they were aware of the issue, had their techs working on the problem, and would notify me when it was fixed -- It didn't get "fixed" for 6 months.

I once searched and searched for a short catchy name to use for my software product that wasn't taken yet... I actually came up with a fitting name that didn't turn up any Google results or whois queries. I was already had the GoDaddy site open in a tab -- managing a client's domain -- so I quickly searched with GoDaddy to ensure the domain wasn't taken -- GoDaddy showed the domain was available, and at the lowest standard price too!

That night, at home, I couldn't register the domain via a different Registrar. I gave up after trying 3 other hosts, frustrated and upset. Two days later, I was at GoDaddy, and just impulsively entered the domain name I wanted -- It was shown as available?! However, the price had risen -- a 10 fold increase! I scratched my head, and a phone call interrupted me.

About an hour later I tried to register the domain from GoDaddy and it had already sold.

Apparently if you search for a domain on GoDaddy, they immediately reserve it. This prevents you from using another Registrar to purchase the domain, but it keeps others from snatching it away -- This benefit is utterly destroyed as they then advertise the domain you searched for as a "premium" domain to other shoppers and allow them to "back-order" it in the event that you don't complete your purchase before your "grace period" expires. Thereby ensuring that if you search for your domain on GoDaddy, you must purchase it via GoDaddy. (I've added their site to my hosts file blacklists at home).

Ultimately I tried contacting the registrant -- They turned out to be domain squatters who auctioned off domains via automated online auction sites, and wanted to sell it to me for even more money than they were auctioning it off at. I refused on principal; I would not fund such a practice.

As with other items that have a demand and (artificial) scarcity, a market was formed around the domain names. This is why new URIs are typically terrible...

I suppose I could register WhereHaveAllTheDomainNamesGoneDamnIt.com, but I think I'll just start spam searching crappy names like that to drive up their prices and cause some mischief instead.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>