martinibuster - 1:28 pm on Mar 23, 2013 (gmt 0) [edited by: martinibuster at 1:44 pm (utc) on Mar 23, 2013]
...instead of learning from them and applying it to other areas being neglected in the AdSense
Which is the point of the Case Study Website Teardown discussions, finding the real reasons why a case study site is successful. I appreciate Google's attempt to help web publishers do better. But the truth is that those case studies are short on details. WebmasterWorld members do a superior job of identifying the missing details to explain why a site improved their earnings. I am truly humbled by some of the responses in these discussions.
It's humorous to point out embarassing points to subvert Google's judgement in making a site a case study. But it's financially edifying to identify why a site is making more money. Ultimately, understanding how to improve our sites and earn more money is why we're here at WebmasterWorld. Just wanted to thank the members once again for the great contributions to these discussions.
For my part I have learned from the previous teardown discussion that my fonts were too small. I increased the fonts and the CTR on the top positioned large banner went up and stayed up. I also tried the 336x280 ad unit and found that it performed less good than the 300x250 add unit that was there previously. However I'm going to test it out in other contexts using detailed channels for a/b testing purposes.
The lesson I learned from MakeupAlley.com is more of an affirmation of the concept of focusing on who your best site visitors are, the idea that too many choices are confusing, and that there is such a thing as money pages.
[edited by: martinibuster at 1:44 pm (utc) on Mar 23, 2013]