martinibuster - 8:15 am on Aug 9, 2010 (gmt 0)
I have found ehow to be as reliable (if not more) than Wikipedia for the searches I run into it.
I agree. :)
The writers for eHow are professional writers whose job is to expertise lies in researching then writing content. eHow writers are not generally experts on the topics they are writing about, so the authority of the content suffers.
About.com is head and shoulders more reliable than either eHow or wikipedia. The content at About.com is generated by actual experts. eHow deploys writers who are not necessarily experts to generate content. The content at About.com may not be generated by computer algorithms, but knowing the experts there really are experts make me feel confident about the content there.
Worst of the group is wikipedia. It sinks to the lowest level of authority by relying on anonymous contributors of questionable expertise to generate their content.
Getting back to the topic, how much of the revenue is based on search traffic? How sustainable is it?