Forum Moderators: martinibuster
I love reading the site. Good Luck all in 2006.
ricey
If you then added 10 times as much content - same quality - would you expect 10 times the return.
Maybe - maybe not. It depends on a number of factors. For example, could you get visitors to all the 1,000 pages?
Or would you be better setting up another website and expanding on a particular niche of the 'widget'?
Again, the key factor is getting people to your web pages. Some people say large sites are favored by search engines. Others prefer a network of niche sites. You'll probably find discussions of this topic on the search engine optimization section of WW.
FarmBoy
If the new pages draw additional visitors the rate of income growth could be more consistant with the rate of site growth.
If the new pages primarily result in more page views per existing visitor, the income growth might well be a bit lower than the rate of site growth. In this case I'd think the key to keeping growth rates closer together might be in whether they new pages showed different ads than the old pages.
In either case I wouldn't think the growth rates would be exactly the same. The site growth may always have a tendancy to be greater than the income growth, but that's just my current thinking, and I haven't carved it in stone.
Another thing to consider is that an existing site might well generate traffic to new pages much faster than a new site.
Also, a lot of people have the idea that repeat visitors don't click on ads. That may be true of some sites (especially forums and other community sites), but on sites where users are researching ways to spend their money, user behavior is likely to be quite different. And repeat customers--or customers who move from page to page within a medium to large site--can produce revenues not only from AdSense, but also from CPM banner ads, affiliate sales, etc.
IMO in is always better to diversify with multiple sites than it is to focus on one site only.
That may be true if you're cranking out made-for-AdSense sites, but if you're publishing real content, you're better off developing a site that will reach "critical mass" in terms of content and readership. After all, it's easier to build audience and attract revenues by building on an existing foundation than it is to start from scratch.
Unless you have an extremely narrow topic, you can achieve diversification within an existing site by having a broad range of topics and subtopics.
On my own travel-planning site, for example, I have pages about many large and small destinations, ocean cruising, rail travel, auto travel, river cruising, accessible travel, travel products, etc. This is good for my readers, but it's also good for revenues because my pages attract targeted ads from many different kinds of advertisers--and in the rare cases where targeted ads aren't available, more general ads that fit my site's overall topic will generally display.
I suspect that most publishers who complain about revenues not keeping up with growth are racking up a lot of page views on a limited range of subtopics. (This can obviously happen with a forum, for example, or with an SEO-driven site that focuses on a handful of keywords.)
Maybe it would be different if you are just starting out.
That may be true if you're cranking out made-for-AdSense sites, but if you're publishing real content, you're better off developing a site that will reach "critical mass" in terms of content and readership. After all, it's easier to build audience and attract revenues by building on an existing foundation than it is to start from scratch.
I also disagree with the common opinion that if you have more than one site then they must be "made for adsense" and low quality.
I don't think it's impossible to have more than one worthwhile site, but I do think it's unusual for a solo operator to have more than a handful of worthwhile sites.
I don't think it's impossible to have more than one worthwhile site, but I do think it's unusual for a solo operator to have more than a handful of worthwhile sites.
I agree with efv - it is highly unusual to see one person handling several very active/worthwhile sites. Don't get me wrong - you can do a lot of juggling and just work on each site a few times a week, but over time it can be difficult to maintain a high-tempo.
You also come right back to the age-old question - do you want three-four quality sites with lots of content, or do you want a bunch of sites with little content?
The OP's question ties into this - does adding 10 times more content equal 10 times the return - I would say not right off the bat, but over time, with 10 times more content, you will not only create more entry points in the SE's to your site, but you will increase the chances of people linking to your site. Most quality sites won't link to a site with little content. All of that will lead to much more long-term, stable revenue.
Unfortunately, many people don't understand this - they want results right then and there - if they add 10 times the content, but don't get 10 times the traffic and revenue right away, they consider it a failure.
And simply for this reason: a site that's heavy on original content typically involves a LOT of work. Which is why you find relatively few sites online that produce a substantial amount of worthwhile and unique content. And the ones that do are the targets of far too many adsense scammers.
Which is why you find relatively few sites online that produce a substantial amount of worthwhile and unique content. And the ones that do are the targets of far too many adsense scammers.
Ownerrim, I don't understand what you mean by "targets of...adsense scammers."
Unlike writing long articles for print magazines where there are several barriers to wholesale scraping, long articles online can be scraped in just a few keystrokes, and without the accountability, people will post your content alongside Adsense ads.
Making it even worse, is the lack of response from certain corporate entities, including Google.
It's a cliche, but you just have to work that much harder to get linked, etc., and make sure that you rank higher than the scrapers, because the advertisers are not going to help you.
small sites get indexed faster and get proportionately far more traffic, higher eCPMs. I have a website with nearly 500 pages of 100% unique content, Google shows only 170 pages, and it has the lowest eCPM of all my websites.
I don't understand how your having 170 pages of a 500 page site indexed by Google establishes that small sites get indexed faster? Aren't there a lot of other factors involved, such as what is on those other 330 pages?
FarmBoy
Unlike writing long articles for print magazines where there are several barriers to wholesale scraping, long articles online can be scraped in just a few keystrokes, and without the accountability, people will post your content alongside Adsense ads.Making it even worse, is the lack of response from certain corporate entities, including Google.
My experience has been that if someone takes your content and you follow the DMCA procedures outlined by Google then forward the information to AdSense, they are very responsive.
I'm as frustrated as others concerning other areas where they do seem to be non-responsive, but not when it comes to copyright violations.
FarmBoy
I agree with efv - it is highly unusual to see one person handling several very active/worthwhile sites. Don't get me wrong - you can do a lot of juggling and just work on each site a few times a week, but over time it can be difficult to maintain a high-tempo.
Most businesses, once they reach this point, will simply hire employees or contractors. Anyone here?
FarmBoy
but I do think it's unusual for a solo operator to have more than a handful of worthwhile sites
I run 5 different theme oriended sub domains on my main domain.
But it's real hard to not neglect one of them while creating new content for the others.
don't understand how your having 170 pages of a 500 page site indexed by Google establishes that small sites get indexed faster? Aren't there a lot of other factors involved, such as what is on those other 330 pages?
Anecdotal evidence tends to be more about anecdotes than evidence. :-) Still, for what it's worth, Google has no problems crawling and indexing my own 5,000-page site, and new pages are generally indexed within 24 hours.
Other advantages to having one's content under a single domain include:
1) Less likelihood of a "sandbox" delay in indexing.
2) No worries about crosslinking penalties if your standing navigation links are within the same domain (as opposed to creating inter-domain linking patterns).
If you want to have a site about dogs and another about surfing beaches in Hawaii, it makes sense to have separate domains. But if you're just covering surfing beaches in Hawaii, creating a separate domain for each beach is likely to be less productive (and less useful for the reader) than having a single "surfing beaches of Hawaii" site.
Regards
ricey
- if you have a concept for a site that you can build and don't have to update it very regularly, or a community will continue building it, definitely consider creating it.
- if you have a competitor that's much larger that you, it means there's still room in the marketplace - you can keep eating their lunch, especially if you're still growing. You might want to continue focusing on your single site.
- as you get bigger, you build a brand identity that you can use to leverage other projects. For example, publish books with similar content, marketing them to your built in audience.
At the end of the day, though, the only way to find out is to test test test.
Do I add more content to my first site? Adding pages there is like printing money. I would also assume that adding more and more content helps my site's prominence in the SERP's and in getting links.
Or do I add more pages to the newer site where my effort is not rewarded financially. But if content really is king adding pages should help to improve traffic and links over the long run (and if this site ever did start making good money it would help to diversify my web income sources).
It's hard. The right answer is to do both. That's difficult because it is so time consuming.
