Just need your opinion.
Comparing few things, UK hosting is expensive compare to USA. So if website is related with UK, do we need to buy hosting from UK servers or servers in USA are fine.
I would say that USA hosting would be fine, unless it is an image/file sharing etc website. For a general community, USA would be my recommendation if you would rather not pay a bit more - but there are some cheap uk hosts out there.
As I've mentioned in other threads, it's fairly common to have European clients hosted on American servers - both mainland and in the UK. Unless you are specifically targeting a European market, web hosting the US should be just fine.
__________________ Denver Hunter Logically Connected to Idologic, Inc. | Coupon code to save 5%: denver Reseller and Dedicated Web Hosting since 2001 Visit the web's best Christian Forum.
either location are fine with me. but if you said it, that "website is related with UK" then host with UK servers for sure needless to say you want to attract UK citizens and it's best that your site is fastest for them at any time.
What are the feastures you check if best web hosting or not? Speed? If so - it depends on location.
__________________ ServerPoint - a true hosting company offering online presence solutions since 1998 Web Hosting, colocation, dedicated servers, virtual private/dedicated servers Wholly owned multi homed network, servers and facilities
Why not using a web hosting company that has their datacenters both in US and UK. I know that MarbleHost.com provide their services both in those countris and price range is the same.
I would say that it generally shouldn't matter. If you're worried about speed, the difference is negligible and isn't worth the extra cost, in my opinion.
I believe it's very convenient when the company has datacenters in different companies. I think the clients may switch from one datacenter to the other one. Is it possible to do with say MarbleHost.com?
Most US-based hosts offer more affordable plans than most of their UK counterparts, but it is still the best if the servers of the web site's host are located in the region/location where its targeted visitors are located. Many say that server location provides the search engine the location of a business. Therefore there is a higher chance that the website will have a higher ranking if searched from the same location as its host servers.
I think it's not quite fair to compare hosts just on the basis of their geographical location, I'd say that there are excellent hosting providers with servers either in the USA or in UK.
So choose a company preferably in the district where are site visitors located, if you have visitors from all over the world, then I think it makes no difference where your site is located.
I think that for a mission-critical site you should go for a vps plan at least to guarantee srability of the site, and EuroVPS.com or Solidhost.com can offer fully managed deals, check if they tun any discount deas at the moment.
Many of the international hosting companies are now using servers located in the United States. If you do decide to go with a UK host, be sure to check the actual server location. Paying the fees that a UK host might charge for servers hosted in the US defeats the purpose.
Having a local Ip would help in SEO. If hosted in UK, you may get better rank in google.co.uk which matters if you are targetting UK audience. Otherwise US would be cost effective.
yes, location of the datacenter matters as mentioned above.
I prefer US hosts but thats because my geo. As mentioned if you pick the US stay with the (north) east coast because of weather. My current host has data centers in both US and Japan.
As I am working on a site that will be targeted for UK and Ireland I am still not sure should I go with a US host or a UK host.
If I pick UK then who do you reccomend?
The plan is to attract around 50k uniques a day after half a year. So the host should have good plans(preferably plans that can be upgraded)
Simplicity and Superiority. 
