Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.108.40.206
Anyone doing AM/Adsense as a business, where do you set your bar of quality with regards to the tens or hundreds of sites you may own?
is quantity automatically irreconciliable with quality? what do you trade off when you're creating multiple sites (maybe one every week, or one every six months, it's irrelevant), instead of dedicating your heart and soul into a single one, or a couple of them?
How do you juggle the need for a certain dispassionate view of your sites subjected to business factors of audience and revenue, vs truly original and innovative content that pulls you into your site and from which you can generate very nice revenue as well, but that creates such attitude that it may be impossible to see it as a true business venture? the difference between a business person who builds sites vs a webmaster who monitizes the ones he's got.
This is not about type A vs type B sites - but maybe more about if you choose type A, where and how far can you go in trying to make them be type B - and, if you don't do that, aren't you just creating semi re-hashed content repeated 100's of times in other sites? is that really that different than all the spam out there already?
Hope I didn't bore ya. Feel free to comment.
Type A: business sites, topics chosen in order to create revenue
Type B: passion sites - topics chosen from your own pool of interests that you hope to monetize.
joined:Mar 10, 2004
aren't you just creating semi re-hashed content repeated 100's of times in other sites? is that really that different than all the spam out there already?
If it ranks, I don't care... :)
Can't say I'm passionate about any of my sites. I enjoy making them (well, autogenerating them), but passion? Not sure about that.
I've changed mindsets a lot recently. I'm in this game for the money. If I help people get to where they want to go via a referral link, then that's great! They win, I win, merchant wins.
I used to be from the school of thought that says "make a site you're passionate about". Now, I try to make sites that make cash. I have plenty of passions outside the web that cash can help me enjoy.
[Disclaimer: Nothing at all wrong with making a "passion" site. They can do very well. I just don't particularly enjoy writing about my hobbies, I'd rather *do* them]
You could say my passion is in the process, not the sites themselves.
I speak with a little bit of experience. Two of my three most successful sites have been very high quality sites. The third was a relatively low quality site that had a large quantity of database-generated pages. It made very good money for a short while, but now makes almost nothing. My two quality sites continue to increase in earnings.
As for business vs. passion, I lean slightly toward passion, but I think it's not as necessary. You usually grow a passion for the site as you develop it. You have to have enough passion to understand what people in that niche want.
Most of my sites start out when I'm looking for something very specific and I can't find it. Since I was looking for it, I had a degree of passion. Since it's supplying a specific need, it's a quality site.
For instance, I might be looking for information on cholesterol-lowering supplements. A site that would give a list of supplements sorted by the efficacy in reducing cholesterol (perhaps with links to studies) with the price and a link to the cheapest place to buy it would meet that very specific need and should generate a decent profit. It would get a lot of word of mouth from blogs, forums, and webmasters. It would also be very easy to promote PPC. It might take a few days to a week to properly research, design, build, and promote initially. It would only take perhaps an hour a week to maintain. It could easily be extended to other health concerns.
But if the same site was built by just throwing together a datafeed from a drugstore merchant, it would provide virtually no value. It would get no word of mouth and would have to rely almost entirely on SEO.
Dispassionately making Type A business sites in areas where I have no interest or expertise has no appeal to me, especially if they're canned, me-too sites that contribute nothing of real social value.
For me, it's Type B "passion" sites, or it's nothing.
I have things I am passionate about, other things that I am merely interested in.
Ardent passion is not necessary. At least mild interest is. I would require *some* interest in a topic before committing to making a site on that topic.
This man does not live by bread alone.
You also make the Internet a better place when you build quality sites.
Yes, 100% agreed. Crummy datafeed sites that provide little to no value are, I believe, not a good path to go down. Why? Because you are an unnecessary middleman. You are an inefficiency in the system. I don't think such sites have long-term viability and I find the ethics questionable. Also, these are the sites that SEs pay teams of employees to tweak their algos against, catching innocent webmasters in the ever-widening nets in the process. It is, I believe, the seedy side of AM... the scammy, spammy "get rich quick" side. The side that gives all of us a bad name.
Yes, those sites make money. I realize that. They can make a lot of money, in some cases. But it's sort of "get it while you can" money, and that's not a strategy I'm personally interested in.
I have to have some passion for the sites I create. And the sites have to have some inherent value. It's the more difficult route to take, but also a more solid long-term strategy. Plus, it's more enjoyable for me, and more useful to my visitors. Make no mistake, I don't consider AM to be an afterthought. My newest sites are designed with AM in mind at every step of the process. But it is balanced with questions like, "What content would my visitors like to see if they are clicking around on this site?" and "How can I build something that people will want to spontaneously link to or refer their friends to?"