Forum Moderators: martinibuster
For the month of June I am expecting to receive $14,653 dollars (and 27 cents to be exact!)
Here is a list of my earnings for the last 21 months with Google!:
June 2005: $14,653.27
May 2005: $13,157.44
April 2005: $12,693.79
March 2005: $13,104.18
February 2005: $11,561.06
January 2005: $10,138.73
December 2004: $10,954.02
November 2004: $ 9,560.35
October 2004: $ 8,706.15
September 2004: $ 8,033.99
August 2004: $ 7,064.21
July 2004: $ 5,887.94
June 2004: $ 4,983.53
May 2004: $ 3,202.77
April 2004: $ 2,837.63
March 2004: $ 1,542.09
February 2004: $ 991.10
January 2004: $ 605.61
December 2003: $ 399.42
November 2003: $ 178.11
October 2003: $ 63.84
TOTAL: $140,319.23
To make $10,000 dollars a month you need to make ~$320 a day. Most of my adsense revenue comes from two sites that do well in traffic terms, but they focus on low cost keywords (~$0.12 a click). If they were closer to $0.25 a click it wouldn't take me much longer to make $10K a month.
BTW April this year I was lucky to make over $10 a day. Had my ads in a white area of the heat map, CTR was pathetic add that to the low cost per click and even though the sites got a lot of traffic they didn't make much.
Changing the position of the ads isn't all I've done since then, have added a lot of new pages which on one of the sites took the daily visitor numbers from about 3,000 to 10-15,000 visitors a day (almost 4,000,000 page views in July).
The sites also make money from other affiliate programs which together make about $200-$250 a day. So what the OP has said is more than possible, I expect to do much better long term (now I've realized how much you can make) and have dozens of new sites (with higher paying content) just waiting for the day Google ranks them well (that ranking delay for new domains is a real pain in the butt right now).
David
I registered a few domains at the end of May (about 2 months ago). I've place good content on them, added content, and news feeds, etc.. The traffic is still very low - like 5 visits/day. Seems like they are lost in space.....
Can anyone say around how long it takes for Google and the other top search engines to rank new sites?
I've found for a site to do well in Google after optimizing the content/site structure etc... and adding more than enough links to rank well you will not do really well** for at least 6 months (that's the minimum) from Google indexing a new domain. This assumes you've got everything working in the right direction.
** I've had this discussion with others many times and what always throws the conversation for a loop is what really well means. To me it means getting some semi competitive SERPs, lots of barely competitive SERPs and too many to count easy ones (at least 1,000 visitors a day for a reasonable sized site).
For a small site this means the first 6 months is going to be very dry in traffic terms; ~50 visitors a day, medium site; few hundred visitors a day and a large site: under a thousand visitors a day. These visitors tend to come exclusively from the very easy SERPs, more content a site has more likely it will pick up the very easy SERPs that no real optimization is needed to get.
Obviously this various depending on the content, but the general theme of new sites do badly in Google at first is almost a constant (there will always be exceptions).
After the 6 months if everything is right you start to gain the semi competitive SERPs (you might pick up a small number of barely competitive SERPs before 6 months).
After about a year a new site seems to be treated no differently to any other site and if you've got everything right can be on track for the hard SERPs.
I'm basing this on personal experience of tracking over 60 domains registered last couple of years. Three years ago it was great, 10-12 weeks you could get a new domain to several thousand visitors or more a day without too much trouble (PR5 home page, couple of thousand pages of content).
David
Tech related sites?
I have a directory, which I assume would be considered as a medium to large site? (if that's what Dave meant), but according to my awstats I am getting 800ish visitors a month, and ranked No 3 for at least 3 keywords, I have tons of searchable pages and at least 100 articles to boot. So this 100's of visitors per day is BS. Yes it is a new site, but been online for about 9 months, so where is all this traffic dave just promised?. Okay, I'm no novice when it comes to running websites and know how long it takes to get indexed by the SE's and for the litings to see results, but according to SEO dave everyone should be getting 1000's by now, and that just isn't true.
My last site took 2 years to get 43'000 backlinks to it, so misinforming people on a forum ain't a good idea. That's like giving false hope and it's just not that easy I'm afraid. I'd say a site's visitor level is down to usefulness and popularity - not the juggling of keywords or keyphrases. There are just too many sites out there for keyword manipulation to make a difference. Sticking 2nd or 3rd level typed keywords into a site just won't make millions visit it. I've seen these sites before - yeah, nice high Alexa and PageRank, but naff site. hmmmmmmm
But I guess many are impressed and brainwashed by the foolbar, so...
Just design a useful site people, and promote it via normal means. Tricking the engines can only mean one thing.
Tricky one.
>hmmmmm, I have to disagree with Dave - sorry mate.
No need to apologize for disagreeing :-)
>I have a directory, which I assume would be considered as a medium to large site?
I was thinking in terms of page numbers/content. More you have easier it is (generally) to get traffic.
> (if that's what Dave meant), but according to my awstats I am getting 800ish visitors a month, and ranked No 3 for at least 3 keywords, I have tons of searchable pages and at least 100 articles to boot.
That doesn't sound that big.
I was thinking in these terms-
small; less than 300 pages
medium; well under 5,000 pages
large; ten thousand plus pages
Sounds like yours is the small site range. Also depends a lot on the content, some content will never pull in big traffic numbers.
I've got a site that's over a year old now, has 14,000 pages indexed in Google, home page PR6, has plenty of top 5 SERPs, but only gets 150-200 visitors a day. Reason it performs so badly is the content, it's an obscure authors public domain books that generate little traffic. Even if the site had every page 1 SERP on all engines I doubt it would get to 500 visitors a day. I built it because I like that authors works.
If I added other content to this site, content that can generate a lot of traffic this site would out perform a new site with the same content because it's passed the Google delay for new domains (some call it the sandbox). I won't do this though because it would ruin the feel of the site.
That was my point, the poster asked how long before a domain CAN rank well in Google. In my experience it's a minimum of 6 months before things START to move. That does not mean at 7 months your bandwidth goes through the roof, but the process begins and it doesn't always start at 6 months, sometimes it's 9 months or more.
This assumes you've got content that can gain traffic and have enough links (PR) to make it all work. If you have a 10 year old site with a PR2 home page don't expect the time of day from Google.
>So this 100's of visitors per day is BS. Yes it is a new site, but been online for about 9 months, so where is all this traffic dave just promised?.
Didn't say YOU WILL get X traffic after 6 plus months, but if everything is right the potential to start gaining traffic is there. Before the 6 months period in my experience sites do poorly in Google.
As I said it depends a lot on the sites content, what you've done in SEO terms, what's the PR of the home page etc...
So how many pages (indexed in Google) does the directory site with 800ish visitors a month have, are they content rich, is it the sort of content that can gain high traffic (have you confirmed this with tools like Wordtracker), what's the PR of the home page, is the link structure (anchor text) within the site optimised?
>Okay, I'm no novice when it comes to running websites and know how long it takes to get indexed by the SE's and for the litings to see results, but according to SEO dave everyone should be getting 1000's by now, and that just isn't true.
Takes hours to get a new site indexed in Google, takes 1 link from a reasonable PR page already indexed. Yahoo, MSN isn't much different in that respect.
It's not difficult to get thousands of visitors a day to a site if you get things right (as above). That does not mean all sites will gain thousands of visitors though or that it's going to be over night.
>My last site took 2 years to get 43'000 backlinks to it, so misinforming people on a forum ain't a good idea.
Where is the misinformation?
What is it with people not believing stats!
PM me and I'll temporarily remove the password from the basic Webalizer stats for a site of mine that gets over 10,000 visitors a day. That site is well under 2 years old then you can admit you are wrong.
>That's like giving false hope and it's just not that easy I'm afraid. I'd say a site's visitor level is down to usefulness and popularity - not the juggling of keywords or keyphrases. There are just too many sites out there for keyword manipulation to make a difference. Sticking 2nd or 3rd level typed keywords into a site just won't make millions visit it. I've seen these sites before - yeah, nice high Alexa and PageRank, but naff site. hmmmmmmm
Who said anything about sticking in keywords or keyphrases or any of the above.
>
>But I guess many are impressed and brainwashed by the foolbar, so...
Can't argue with that.
>Just design a useful site people, and promote it via normal means. Tricking the engines can only mean one thing.
>
Who said anything about tricking search engines? The sites that make me money are not tricking anyone, if a searcher finds it's way to one of my sites with a search for Red Widgets they find Red Widgets on the site.
SEO isn't about keyword stuffing, it's about presenting a site in the best way for the search engines. If you need to keyword stuff you lack the right content.
David
Sorry the way your post read, it sounded as if you were talking about getting a site Search Engine ready? Just the way you were talking, you made it sound like it's easy.
It's not that easy to get 1000's of visitors per month without advertising. My situation:
Site has been redesigned. Old site had a PR 4, new site has a PR 1 (homepage). So I guess Google now thinks it's a new site, even though it still has the same content. Has 3000 pages of basic company info, and not including search results. It needs more content, which I'm working on at present. Content is highly specialised and connected to an industry worth £8 million in the UK alone.... Like I said, this is highly sought after info. Page numbers are not a problem.
Not currently advertising it yet, due to outstanding webby work to be completed. Visitors are bookmarking it like crazy, about 30 per month currently, and Search bots visiting and indexing pages like crazy - thousands being spidered every month. So it seems I have a medium sized site at present (medium; well under 5,000 pages) - 3000 at least to be exact!
I have 212 links in SE's and General Directories currently, but that's about all I'm doing on the promotional front.
Sometimes good things take time! I totally agree that sites can take a while to be indexed, which is understandable with the amount of new web pages coming onto the web. But at 9 months and counting, it just seems a bit long that's all. So things should have started moving at 9 months, wouldn't you say? I didn't mention anything about my stats going to the moon, but 50,000 visitors per month should be achievable, and I kind of expected at least 30K per month by now, through natural serps...
It has some useful content in the form of articles, and a ton of company info. Over 50% of my visitors return every month, so I must be doing something right.
SEO work is good, keywords and hard coded text gets picked up by the majors - no problems there.
Link structure has just been checked and works perfectly.
Keywords for content was checked before site was constructed. All pretty high as possible.
takes 1 link from a reasonable PR page already indexed
I don't know what you mean by that.. My PR Pages or another site's PR Page?
I didn't think traffic to a new site would happen over night, I think we are all intelligent enough to realise that one. Search engines grrrrrrr lol.
PM me and I'll temporarily remove the password from the basic Webalizer stats for a site of mine that gets over 10,000 visitors a day. That site is well under 2 years old then you can admit you are wrong.
Think I know why I'm not getting the numbers - no advertising might have something to do with it. But I thought we were talking about natural free SE traffic here, or did I get that wrong.
Who said anything about sticking in keywords or keyphrases or any of the above
Isn't Serps always incorporated/assumed when forum members talk about traffic results and optimisation? You did mention SEO tactics in your original post, yes.... and that involves the inputting of keywords and keyphrases to help drive traffic from the SE's.
SEO isn't about keyword stuffing, it's about presenting a site in the best way for the search engines. If you need to keyword stuff you lack the right content
Ah yes I know. I'm not into that kind of practice. One thing I don't understand is this Google sandbox thing, er could you please explain further.
Ta.
regards
If anyone knows what happened with Amway, and how much money they made!Billions.........
I didnt get abord and do that but I sure am going to do this.
If Mostafa did or didnt really make that money?
I know Im going to.
I personally believe him......millionaire's are being made all over the internet.
Just think of all the (neg) stuff that was spoken over Bill Gates when he was still working in his garage.
thats where I view myself now.
anyone who sits around with a negativity probably wont see this kind of fortune.
And I thank God for all he is going to do as well in my life, and Google also.
I know there are others reading these posts that are probably making double the $14k a month.
but may be a little more private.
Mostafa.....You Go!
And be sure you make up a follow up post in the future from your $6,000,000 home on Hawaii, with the new yellow or red Ferrari in the drive way.
I'll be right behind you, unless I beat you there.
God Bless You All, and see you at the Top!
Jacob
It is easy in the sense of what you do, it's not like brain surgery where only some can learn the skills etc... so potentially anyone with basic HTML skills and a reasonable amount of spare time can get a site to rank well.
>It's not that easy to get 1000's of visitors per month without advertising. My situation:
Depends on the industry, some it's quite easy, others not. A client of mine gave me a site to work with about 9 months ago. Wasn't newly registered, but had no content or links to it. Now it's got just shy of 6,000 pages of content selling affiliate products and just hit the 3,000 visitors a day mark (all organic search engine traffic).
>Site has been redesigned. Old site had a PR 4, new site has a PR 1 (homepage).
Sounds like you changed the home pages file name. You should either keep the same file name or at least redirect the old to the new, the PR will be transferred to the new page then.
BTW PR4 isn't that high, generally to do well you need a minimum PR5 home page. You can do well with PR4, but only if you get everything right. For example lingerie.com (which I don't own or have any affiliation with) used to have a PR4 home page (recently moved to PR5), yet over the last three years has always been in the top 10 for the Lingerie SERP. Didn't have many links, but had everything right for that SERP. PR4 sites doing really well are rare, PR5 and PR6 is where the action is.
>So I guess Google now thinks it's a new site, even though it still has the same content. Has 3000 pages of basic company info, and not including search results. It needs more content, which I'm working on at present. Content is highly specialised and connected to an industry worth £8 million in the UK alone.... Like I said, this is highly sought after info. Page numbers are not a problem.
I would say the main thing missing is reasonable PR links (or a lot more low PR links). One good link can take a home page to PR5, so shows you how 'low' quality the links you have must be.
If the 3,000 pages include some good keyword rich content, the type people search for you would get many more visitors if your site had the PR (links to it) to rank well.
I've seen this many times, the content is right, but there just isn't enough links of quality (high PR) to say "this is a popular site, give me some Google traffic".
>Sometimes good things take time! I totally agree that sites can take a while to be indexed, which is understandable with the amount of new web pages coming onto the web. But at 9 months and counting, it just seems a bit long that's all.
Indexed means a search engine spider has spidered the pages of a site and are now in the search engines database.
Do this search in Google-
site:domainname.com
This will show every page that's indexed under domainname.com including sub-domains.
If you find a significant number of pages missing there might be something wrong.
Ranking is where a page that's indexed is placed in a search engine. You can have every page of a site indexed, but none rank highly.
>So things should have started moving at 9 months, wouldn't you say? I didn't mention anything about my stats going to the moon, but 50,000 visitors per month should be achievable, and I kind of expected at least 30K per month by now, through natural serps...
Without seeing the site I'd say it's mostly lacking links.
>>takes 1 link from a reasonable PR page already indexed
>
>I don't know what you mean by that.. My PR Pages or another site's PR Page?
To get a page/site indexed in Google it takes one link from an existing page that is already indexed in Google. The spider follows the link to the new page/site and indexes it. The reason I said reasonable PR (meaning PR4, PR5+) is the higher the PR more likely the spider will find the link to your page and index it.
When I create a new site or a new page I want indexed fast I add a link to it from a PR5 or more page(s) or add multiple links from other pages already indexed. I have about half a million pages indexed in Google, so can get a new site/page spidered in hours if needed (usually show up next day with a site: search).
>I didn't think traffic to a new site would happen over night, I think we are all intelligent enough to realise that one. Search engines grrrrrrr lol.
It used to, 2 or so years ago what you've described could easily pull in a couple of thousand visitors a day within 3 months. Now it's 6, 9 and even 12 months. This assumes you have enough links (PR5 home page and OK optimisation through the site tends to be enough).
>>PM me and I'll temporarily remove the password from the basic Webalizer stats for a site of mine that gets over 10,000 visitors a day. That site is well under 2 years old then you can admit you are wrong.
>
>Think I know why I'm not getting the numbers - no advertising might have something to do with it. But I thought we were talking about natural free SE traffic here, or did I get that wrong.
All my traffic is organic searches, I haven't paid for a visitor in over 3 years (since learning SEO). I don't keep track of exact figures, but I know two important sites of mine get about 17,000 to 23,000 visitors a day between them with the vast majority from organic search.
>>Who said anything about sticking in keywords or keyphrases or any of the above
>
>Isn't Serps always incorporated/assumed when forum members talk about traffic results and optimisation? You did mention SEO tactics in your original post, yes.... and that involves the inputting of keywords and keyphrases to help drive traffic from the SE's.
You don't have to change content to optimise a site. I have many literature sites listing public domain works (Shakespeare etc...) as you'll appreciate you can't start adding extra keywords into the middle of a Shakespeare sonnet just to rank better since it will ruin it :-)) So you optimise the sites linking structure, make sure page titles best reflect the SERPs you want for the page etc...
I create stores from Amazon's XML feed, again due to the nature of the feed you can't change the product names or descriptions, so are stuck with what the affiliate (Amazon) gives you. So you optimise the menu, the link structure, file names etc... and this is enough to get good targeted traffic.
>>SEO isn't about keyword stuffing, it's about presenting a site in the best way for the search engines. If you need to keyword stuff you lack the right content
>
>Ah yes I know. I'm not into that kind of practice. One thing I don't understand is this Google sandbox thing, er could you please explain further.
>
The sandbox is a bit of a mish mash of different SEO theories, the original one was a new site would gain some SERPs quickly and then they would just as quickly vanish for no apparent reason, "your sites been sandboxed".
I've never seen a site do this and think what the people who saw this really saw was the change over between a Google algorithm that could rank new sites quickly and a new algorithm (the one we have now) that will not rank a new site highly for any competitive SERPs for at least 6 months. When the switch occurred there would have been new sites that was getting some competitive SERPs which suddenly vanished with the new algo.
Now we only have the new algo, so sites created now don't get the perceived initial boost in rankings, their ranks are delayed for at least 6 months.
Anyway, some people will now use the word sandboxed for any site not doing well, which isn't very helpful. At the best of times not all sites can do well since some will lack things, if your site doesn't have enough links it won't rank well, this has nothing to do with any Google delay in rankings.
Personally I don't use the word sandbox to describe anything for the above reasons, instead I describe the effect, new sites don't rank well even if you get everything right. Get everything right and wait 6+ months and it should come together.
David
But...
I would guess my java is stronger than his, and that I consume much more of it :)
BINGO! But, try adding it daily.
That and daily indexing by Google... That is the real key.
