Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Now, this is what really made me open my eyes:
"AdSense revenue nearly doubled, to $650 per day."
I clicked the link, and got to -what I call- an ugly site.
(If the owner of this site reads this, I'm very sorry to call your site ugly, but in my opinion it really is, and by the way, I guess I can call your page whatever I want, as long as you earn $650/day.)
I have to say I'm confused. How on earth would this be possible? I've spent about 3 months now on a new site, brand new design, which is good.. Yep, I'm making a great looking page, which also is very userfriendly. But I'm thinking: Should I just drop my design, start all over, make a crappy design, or a "none-professional design", and just don't give a damn about what my visitors thinks of it?
I still remember the discussions we had over this guy who makes what? $10.000 / day with adsense, this dating-guru from Canada.. Everyone was talking about his badly designed page, and I agreed. It was simple, and kind of ugly.. But still! $10.000 a day!
Does anyone of you have any comments on this?
Do you know of more "ugly" sites which brings in tons of silver for the owners? Please let me know, so I can have a few more ideas for my new page-design.
I clicked the link, and got to -what I call- an ugly site.
As many of us dislike Alexa, did you check the traffic for this site?
If I had this much traffic and was still earning pro-rata, then they'd be featuring me bigger than Markus007's dating site!
Goes to show that if you choose the right topic that the traffic is there...and yeah, it's butt ugly down to the font sizing on the info pages.
Ugly but effective comes to mind:-)
Anyone know the secret to more traffic without having to pay PPC? I'm at the top for many keywords, have lots of content especially for an ecommerce site, just need some tips to increase traffic. Thanks!
The site has so many ads on the home page that it looks like a spammy MFA on the first sight. IMHO, that's what it makes it look a bit ugly, not the design ...
I agree fully on that one! But I wouldn't even call that design a design.. it's links and ads on a boring background. But if that's what it takes to be able to quit my job, that's what I'll do!
I'll go to open my Word.exe now.. time to earn some money doing web publishing.
At a guess I'd say that many users of the site are clicking the ads without realising they are ads. They see a bit of text on the right hand side which says "how to clean a shiatsu" and they assume it is an article by the dog site rather than an ad for shiatsu cleaning lotion.
I wonder if the advertisers see 'ad / site blending' as popular - have the advertisers seen their returns double....
[edited by: Frank_Rizzo at 9:28 pm (utc) on July 18, 2006]
At a guess I'd say that many users of the site are clicking the ads without realising they are ads
I think this hits the nail on the head. Whether it's deliberate or just inept, the strategy in use here is 'make the actual navigation so difficult to find that users have no choice but to click all over the damned place'.
2,750,000 visitors and 15.5 million pageviews in Jan.'05. It's now a year and a half later. I wonder how their traffic is now?
Lets assume their traffic only increased to 3 million monthly visitors and about 16 million pageviews. That's 100,000 visitors a day and a little over half million pageviews.
$650 a day is like (approx) $1.17 ECPM
That's pretty freakin good for a high traffic site.
Ugly or not, that's some nice play money. I'd uglify my sites if it meant a purse like that at the end of every month.
So it's true. Ugly pages DO perform well with adsenseIt has been true with advertising in general since it exists. 15 years ago I worked for a national television channel and our viewers were complaining about poorly made commercials (ads) for washing powders; these ads were indeed so appalling that we were ashamed of running them. After consulting the washing powders companies and their advertising agencies, it turned out that they knew how to make nice ads, but their studies had shown that ugly ads are more efficient, so they were sticking to them.
Click through increased two-fold but I'm sure conversions for the sap advertisers didn't, pretty lame example by google, I'm surprised they even show it.
2,750,000 visitors and 15.5 million pageviews in Jan.'05
I measured his Alexa reach against mine, and I am doing many MULTIPLES higher traffic than he does, my estimate for him is nothing over 300k monthly visitors.
One more thing to observe,
He says his earnings doubled by just removing ad borders
So this review is about blending
Now imagine his page with ad borders!
(sorry had to go throw up, I'm back)
So here's what we know :
- He does tons of ad views
- He cannot be converting at all with those kind of ads
- His CTR can never be high with all those ad and link units per page
So my conclusion again is that this is only a blending case study..
He used to make $100 to 300 daily max
Did blending, had a traffic boost for one month, earnings shot to the roof, got contacted by Google, did the interview..
Right now he is most probably suffering from a SmartPricing bite below the tail, and struggling to make $100 daily again.
Or should be if there is any justice in the world.
I wouldn't say that site is ugly tho. To a degree, yes. But i've seen much MUCH worse. Case in point, the site i'm refering to is #1 for it's search term. But if you look at the visits vs. page views, you can clearly see that people come in, and leave.
I was hoping that Google would somehow add this into their algorythm. A site with X amount of sub pages should have at least 3 page views to be considered valuable... or something like that.
A site that appears non-profesional, non user-friendly, and has the obvious traffic numbers to prove it; should then be taken down a notch in the SERPS, imo. Otherwise, in the end, Google is supporting a site that offers nothing to the public, except optical tumors.
I'd post a link to the site, but I don't wanna get in trouble.