# SwiftVM Shutting Down



## D. Strout (Jul 13, 2013)

I just got an e-mail from SwiftVM, a company offering VPSes out of San Diego (AIS) run by Christopher Easton and Jordy. Unfortunately, it seems they are shutting down. They opened just in March, which is unfortunate as I really liked their services. They had SSD and (towards the end) SSD-cached VPSes starting at $2.50/month or $15/year. They ran well, had good connectivity, excellent speed due to the SSDs, I was consistently impressed by their support, and they had a well-designed website. Unfortunately, I guess not enough people jumped on board, and now they are closing due to financial reasons. The only thing I am unimpressed about is the fact that they are leaving only 6 days for people to get their data out. I hope not too many long billing periods were cut short.


----------



## XFS_Duke (Jul 13, 2013)

I would wonder if it's due to their low price and possibly higher costs.


----------



## MannDude (Jul 13, 2013)

Never heard of them, but that's quite unfortunate. Looks like they made the mistake of trying to compete on price and targeting the wrong market.

They should have tried to sell to another company so their clients could remain online.


----------



## NodeBytes (Jul 13, 2013)

MannDude said:


> They should have tried to sell to another company so their clients could remain online.


Agreed. Although if the profit margins were too low that could have proven difficult.


----------



## SkylarM (Jul 13, 2013)

Always unfortunate to see web providers close due to financial reasons. Just gotta play smart with your price point and what you offer. It can be tricky with higher grade equipment, especially if you don't own it.


----------



## MannDude (Jul 13, 2013)

It sounds like they were offering a solid service, wish they would have planned better and targeted a better market.


----------



## Francisco (Jul 13, 2013)

Anyone have a copy of the email?

Francisco


----------



## TheLinuxBug (Jul 13, 2013)

Dear valued client,
Unfortunately after some internal discussion and long thinking we have decided it is
better for you, as a client, for us, as a company, to seize operations and close
down. Unfortunately due to some financial issues and budget issues we have been
making a loss lately, meaning we have been unable to provide you as a client with
the great support promised, and the great services as promised. We therefor think it
is better for our clients to find a new provider as SwiftVM will be closing by the
end of this month.

We will give a partial refund for the outstanding period to all clients with an
active service. Please open a maximum of one support ticket to help speed up the
process and not put additional load on our support staff.
We will begin terminating virtual servers on the 19th of July, 2013. Please BACK UP
and data before this date as we cannot guaratee that data recovery is possible after
this date! SwiftVM will finally seize it's operations on the 2th of August, 2013,
and it's websites and contact possibilities.

We apologize for the inconvenience and short notice.

Thanks,
SwiftVM Team

I think they mean CEASE but instead they decided to use SEIZE which makes it sound weird.

Seize

a *:* to take possession of *:* confiscate

Cease

a *:* to come to an end <the fighting gradually _ceased_>

Anyhow, that is the e-mail I received...

Cheers!


----------



## concerto49 (Jul 13, 2013)

This is why we never offer  such low prices etc so we don't crash. A solid business plan backed by long term running finance is important. We've been making a loss for quite a while sadly (in the past). You don't expect to return to profit instantly. Feel for them, but things happen.


----------



## shovenose (Jul 13, 2013)

Hehe my completion went bye bye.


----------



## NodeBytes (Jul 13, 2013)

@shovenose - That's a mature answer


----------



## TheLinuxBug (Jul 13, 2013)

shovenose said:


> Hehe my completion went bye bye.



Ya, I hate having completion to deal with. :huh:

I prefer for everything to be incomplete my self.


----------



## shovenose (Jul 13, 2013)

TheLinuxBug said:


> Ya, I hate having completion to deal with. :huh:
> 
> I prefer for everything to be incomplete my self.


Damn tablet I meant competition.


----------



## jarland (Jul 13, 2013)

Well, can't be mad at them for being honest. They gave it an honest try, obviously learned a lot in the process, and never left their clients without notice.


Best of luck to them in their futures.


----------



## D. Strout (Jul 13, 2013)

I had two IPs in the same /24, one from SwiftVM and one from Shovehost at one point. Now I just have the one, and by the 29th, I won't have either  Really I thought they'd be able to sustain those prices. I see a lot of companies operating at the $5/mo for 512MB memory price point. I suppose with SSDs it's a different story, and I'm certainly not familiar with colo prices at AIS. To be honest I feel a little guilty; the VPS I had with them was sponsored, so I wasn't paying for it. I'm sure I'm not the sole cause of their demise, but still...

BTW, *@**TheLinuxBug*, I take it you had service with them? What did you think?


----------



## Nick_A (Jul 13, 2013)

They could not have been making much money loading up rented servers with 4x512GB SSDs. I told Chris (or Jordy, I forget) that it was overkill upfront but they were committed to the idea. As I said on LET, people trying to undercut their way into this particular niche should pay attention when such happens.


----------



## Francisco (Jul 13, 2013)

Nick_A said:


> As I said on LET





Nick_A said:


> people trying to undercut their way into this particular niche should pay attention when such happens.


Francisco


----------



## drmike (Jul 14, 2013)

D. Strout said:


> I see a lot of companies operating at the $5/mo for 512MB memory price point. I suppose with SSDs it's a different story, and I'm certainly not familiar with colo prices at AIS.


 

Yeah saw these folks on LEB.

 Intel Xeon E3 1270v2 CPU, 32GB ECC DDR3 RAM and 4 X 512GB SSD RAID10 (Samsung 840Pro drives). 

512SSD LEB, 25GB SSD $5/mo

1024SSD LEB, 20GB SSD $7/mo

Neither of those packages are competitors for the lowest price awards at Lowend.

The problem is the pure SSD offer.   4 x 512GB in RAID10 = 1TB usable?

Compare that to RamNode who is the SSD market leader in these parts:

512MB = $7.50/mo

1024MB = $15/mo

Big price difference.

Pure SSD play with just FOUR drives = overselling and impending doom.  Not saying that is what happened here.  Clearly their costs were too high and sales too low.

Big question is IF they are ceasing all operations or just the San Diego location.  San Diego was pure SSD-only, while Buffalo is a SSD cached setup.  Yeah more Colocrossing....


----------



## mikho (Jul 14, 2013)

I guess it's all operations by the email sent out.


----------



## blergh (Jul 14, 2013)

Not suprised at all, seeing how they managed business.


----------



## wlanboy (Jul 14, 2013)

One day before they posted a offer at LET.

Not that professional.


----------



## rsk (Jul 14, 2013)

If you are new to the hosting business, I suggest you plan way ahead.

It should be completely normal to operate at a loss for the first 6months or even a year. That should be "part of the plan".

They operated for 5 months, with prices that are very low, trying to be competitive. On a serious note, if I was to start all over again with VPS hosting, it will be premium and not budget priced. I'd rather have clients who can help me sustain my business, than to have 100 clients who pay 2.5/month for a VPS.

Just my thoughts


----------



## Cloudrck (Jul 14, 2013)

A lot of people try to get in the industry by simply having cheaper services than the next business in the market. They soon find out you need to turn a profit just to maintain such services. The more clients you have, the more likely things will go wrong, which is hard to manage with razor thin profit margins.


----------



## Dylan (Jul 14, 2013)

I never felt good about SwiftVM. It seemed like Chris left Nick only to blatantly copy his services but with lower prices.

That's not exactly a sold business plan; nor is it particularly ethical.


----------



## Reece-DM (Jul 14, 2013)

They seemed like quite a nice operation, with those packages in the SSD/Lowend market then its hard to compete no wonder it happened.

However i would of thought they'd fight a bit more to regain control.


----------



## Damian (Jul 14, 2013)

If anyone wants to stay in AIS, we can offer a new home at the same prices and resources. Won't be SSD, but there's not many other people on the server.


----------



## D. Strout (Jul 14, 2013)

Damian said:


> If anyone wants to stay in AIS, we can offer a new home at the same prices and resources. Won't be SSD, but there's not many other people on the server.


No, I'm not too attached to AIS or San Diego. For the sites I was running there, a more central location would be better. As I said, I just went with them because they offered free services. I see some are saying they weren't very "solid" in some if the ways they operated their business, but Chris still impressed me. My billing account got broken in to once by a Chinese IP, and he gave me a phone call to check on it. Nice.


----------



## mikho (Jul 14, 2013)

I'm sure they are nice guys but their business idea must have been tight from day 1.


They are going out of business because they couldn't fill a node with customers !?


Well... Right now it looks like they sold out after all, to SupremeBytes. Let us see how that turns out.


----------



## D. Strout (Jul 14, 2013)

mikho said:


> Well... Right now it looks like they sold out after all, to SupremeBytes. Let us see how that turns out.


I'm not particularly impressed by the takeover considering that the email I received called SwiftVM "SwitchVM".


----------



## azzavps (Jul 14, 2013)

as a provider its really hard to keep offering the low prices. please expect good performing vps's ( which is fair )

This does not come cheap from a node setup point of view.

We will need to review our prices as well.  I think the really cheap vps's tend to attract a client that may not pay on time anyway, or misuse the service.


----------



## DamienSB (Jul 14, 2013)

D. Strout said:


> I'm not particularly impressed by the takeover considering that the email I received called SwiftVM "SwitchVM".


SupremeBytes, LLC Acquires SwiftVM

COLUMBUS, OHIO - 16 JULY, 2013

As part of SupremeBytes continuing expansion, we are pleased to announce the recent acquisition of SwiftVM, a hosting services company. With the advantage of a solid infrastructure, based in Los Angeles, CA, this acquisition of SwiftVM’s will encompass all current customer base and all services within. The new expansion of SupremeBytes, a forerunner in virtual machine hosting services, will continue to provide superb hosting to all SwiftVM's customers.

Both organizations are working side by side to ensure a seamless migration process. A Better Business Bureau accredited company, SupremeBytes understands the quality support SwiftVM’s customers are accustomed to, and will continue to provide top level support.

"The virtual hosting industry is fast expanding, and customers require, fast, flexible, and solid infrastructures. This is exactly what SupremeBytes provides, especially as we continue to grow" - Damien Burke, CEO.

About SupremeBytes

SupremeBytes, LLC was founded in February of 2010 in Columbus, Ohio. Still locally based in Columbus, SupremeBytes provides virtualization, reseller, domain services, and shared hosting solutions worldwide. From a single cPanel dedicated server, SupremeBytes is now a competitive presence on the local and global hosting market, spanning 3 countries, and still expanding today.

SupremeBytes, LLC

P.O. Box 13746

Columbus, Ohio 43213

United States

Toll-Free: +1 (888) 622-2983

Local: +1 (614) 636-4875

Fax: +1 (614) 636-4877

www.supremebytes.com


----------



## D. Strout (Jul 14, 2013)

DamienSB said:


> ...


Now that I look back over my e-mails, I see that the one I'm referring to was sent out by SwiftVM. Highly ironic.



> Dear Customers,
> 
> We have acquired SwiftVM and you can stay where you are! We will continue to operate the servers your virtual servers are hosted on over the next few months as we transfer you all into our infrastructure. We will have more information posted on the website shortly.
> 
> ...


It's worded as being from SupremeBytes though.


----------



## SeriesN (Jul 14, 2013)

HEY! We own switchVM


----------



## DamienSB (Jul 14, 2013)

Sorry SeriesN,

That was a error made by one of our staff members. That email was never meant to be seen at all.

I apologize for the mistake of "switchvm" rather than "swiftvm"


----------



## SeriesN (Jul 14, 2013)

DamienSB said:


> Sorry SeriesN,
> 
> 
> That was a error made by one of our staff members. That email was never meant to be seen at all.
> ...


Cheers man. If you want, you can buy that domain off me , Not in the mode for creating another brand.


----------



## vanarp (Jul 14, 2013)

*@**DamienSB*, I am curious to understand how you want to retain existing customers at those low prices. Are you prepared enough to absorb the losses for a while?


----------



## DamienSB (Jul 14, 2013)

*@vanarp*, Yes we are prepared. We have been operating successfully for 3 years, and have been offering VPS services for a little over a year now. Our decision to acquire SwiftVM was based off of many factors.

Additionally, we have a full cabinet in Los Angeles - and we're fully capable to provide the same-if-not-better level of service in roughly the same geographical area. We expect to maintain operation of all current nodes for at least 1 additional month to allow for a much smoother transition for the customers.

We have already integrated our billing systems and expect to have everything billing and account related sorted out by the end of business tomorrow. As noted previously, we will release more information about the acquisition as time progresses.


----------



## D. Strout (Jul 15, 2013)

DamienSB said:


> That email was never meant to be seen at all.


I thought it was weird that two e-mails were sent out.


----------



## Jeffrey (Jul 15, 2013)

DamienSB said:


> *@vanarp*, Yes we are prepared. We have been operating successfully for 3 years, and have been offering VPS services for a little over a year now. Our decision to acquire SwiftVM was based off of many factors.
> 
> 
> Additionally, we have a full cabinet in Los Angeles - and we're fully capable to provide the same-if-not-better level of service in roughly the same geographical area. We expect to maintain operation of all current nodes for at least 1 additional month to allow for a much smoother transition for the customers.
> ...


How does the specs of your current nodes compare to SwiftVM's?


----------



## Nick_A (Jul 15, 2013)

Dylan said:


> I never felt good about SwiftVM. It seemed like Chris left Nick only to blatantly copy his services but with lower prices.
> 
> That's not exactly a sold business plan; nor is it particularly ethical.


I let Chris go around the time I sold MCLayer since our support needs were really low at that point. I did take issue with what he and Jordy did, but we hashed it out over email way back. He was more than willing to cease all "pure" SSD options in order to regain my respect, but I didn't want to be that guy. I'm not sure how much they were both on the same page since Chris told me before they even started that they had no intention of competing with RamNode. Oh well - doesn't matter in the end.


----------

