So I actually took the time to click on an ad that might be relevant. I chose the Userplane ad.
They have an intro-page! Wow, I didn't think anyone did these anymore. I can't believe they're paying for advertising to take people to an intro-page. Who's running the show over there?!?
True - not many. I probably wouldn't suggest it for an advertising client of mine, unless it was a page designed to intro and then capture user information.
You still see these in a lot of consultancy and design firm pages, though.
Rick
· 1 year ago
Their Alexa ranking is 1256 average. Page views per user are 18.
So it seems to work for them.
Wouldn't you call Microsofts home page an intro page?
Good blog btw - click, click, click lol
Thanks Mark.
allen
· 1 year ago
thanks for the link Mark!
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 1 year ago
No problem. Your pieces on blogging have been really grabbing my attention lately.
Web2Marketing
· 1 year ago
well - this is online begging! *gg* i think you should see your blog as a showcase of your products and services! the problem is: if your blog IS the product! then you surely have a problem today...
Mark
· 1 year ago
The reason I block ads on Mashable is because theres so many and the animated ones really bug me when I'm reading posts. I'm not sure what the way to go is, but its really for content providers to work out, and find what works for them. It would be interesting to know how much income Mashable, Techcrunch and Centernetworks makes from ads each year and if its fallen or grown?
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 1 year ago
I only know broad and inaccurate figures (i.e. what my salary is, and multiplied across how many employees i know of here at mash. :-p ) - those are questions for Pete. I'm not sure that we make public disclosures of that data though.
coxy
· 1 year ago
I don't even take notice of ads on web-pages anymore and focus them out. I use Opera, which has a built-in adblock feature - but I haven't ever needed to populate it with URLs to block.
I do click on ads though if I'm a regular reader to a site - because I understand it supports the site. Granted, it's screwing the advertisers a bit, because I'm not actually interested in their product or service, but it helps the site that I'm a reader to.
This is one of the reasons why I don't use Google; they have enough money already, so I tend to find myself searching with Clusty (http://clusty.com), Ask (http://ask.com) or one of the other smaller search engines. I never seem to have a problem with the results they're providing and I click on the Sponsored Search results once in a while to generate revenue for the site.
WoNoJo
· 1 year ago
Many BEGGARS have gone online, boosting traffic ranking for Blogspot, Wordpress and Friendster etc. higher in Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, the Philipines & Iran etc.) than in USA -- They are called "PRO/proFIT BLOGGERS!"
Biggest employer for unemployed university graduates and HS dropouts in these countries is now US-based Google (under its Adsense program, co-created / launched by among others, a Malaysian - or so I've heard). Google however has not disclosed on how much the company spent paying these 'part-time marketing Internet consultants' every month - some of whom to have claimed to be the #1 in Malaysia, Singapore, Asia, world respectively, based on Google's search result ranking on keywords like "money", "make money online", "internet marketing asia" etc.
Who would want to slave their asses for $500/month jobs (entry engineers), when you could just stay home, writing craps especially boast your income (showboating cash money, especially US dollars) and earn 5-10 more?
Just like a Malaysian (ala US-gangsta) RAP group put in one of their popular songs, "Money, money, money, make the world go round..."
HolyGhost
· 1 year ago
I have to say that video really got under my skin.
Since time began users have blocked ads. People hate advertising. Get used to it. Its forced upon the audience/user whether its TV, Radio or Internet and 99% isn't relevant to the consumer.
If a blog has value to me I'm happy to pay a couple of pounds or dollars to the site/blog/author. And I have done. In fact I'd rather a blogger had a passive link to donate or join the site as a member than he offensive advertising that we see everywhere.
See John Gruber's DaringFireball.net. If you value his content you can join as a member to support him or buy a T-shirt. He knows his audience and his ads via the deck are relevant to his audience. I'd bet conversion rates on his site are high.
What the video suggests is that consumers click on the ads to support the blogger but as one of the previous comments suggested, you end up screwing the advertiser and when they figure out its not working that pot of money will disappear for everyone.
Perhaps you should consider whether your blog has any value to your audience.
Michael Kimsal
· 1 year ago
I'm guilty of throwing generic ads on some sites, even knowing it doesn't work very well. I just put a few on a couple sites, and will likely remove them in a couple weeks if there's not decent activity. Also likely is I'll add a 'donate' button and simply rely on some type of goodwill from readers.
The problem, as I see it from both sides, is that ads aren't relevant. Yes, even Google's 'targetted' adsense, is rarely that relevant to *me*. They might be relevant to the content of the page, but not really to me. The content I'm reading may or may not be relevant to me. Given all the tracking Google does, I'm suprised they can't take my habits in to account more than they apparently are.
I've come to Mashable for the past several weeks and seen a 'userplane' ad. I've not yet clicked it. 'Branding' aside, how many more times do I need to register a view as a visitor and *not* click the userplane ads before my non-interest is taken in to account and a different ad is shown? What? I can't do that? That's part of the problem.
Another problem is the same damn ads all over the place. Even if something's relevant to me, I may have clicked it 2 weeks ago on another site. It's not really fair to the advertisers for me to click and visit their site multiple times. Certainly not fair on me to have to buy the same thing multiple times just to 'show support' to every site I like.
While not 'broken', the model is seriously flawed for the types of things we (bloggers) want it to do (provide us money). Invidual donations are a bit of a pain to do, both to remember to do on each site that you read, and also to manage for bloggers. Receiving money's easy, but going beyond that (identifying paid readers, sending a thanks, etc.) is harder.
Perhaps an aggregating service that helps people to make donations to groups of bloggers would be useful? Maybe that's my next project! :)
MichaelW
· 1 year ago
Targeting ads based on social networking user demographics violates the 7 laws of identity. First one is user control and consent. Users provide information for the purpose of sharing it with their contacts. Sharing that with advertisers without the user's consent is unethical. Typically there's a difference in outlook in the US to Europre on this.
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 1 year ago
I don't think behavioral networks are currently illegal in America, though they're working on making it that way.
ListensToYou
· 1 year ago
Good point, MichaelW.
This is the problem with using online profiles for advertising - I cannot choose what information I trade for things I value. I gave my birthday to Facebook (actually it was required "as a safety precaution") so that children will not use Facebook without supervision - i.e. as a safety precaution. I gave my education information so I can network, not so I can get ads for "Nerdwestern" t-shirts. It isn't just the consumers who are getting the bad end of the deal. Marketers, brands and publishers all look bad when readers feel mis-targeted or stereotyped or feel that their private information has been abused.
I like the theme of this blog post, but I cannot agree that it is primarily the fault of the advertiser. It is also the fault of the ad network (or the ad serving methodology) and the publisher (or blog). I would like to see all of these constituents take responsibility, listen to consumers and give them some control over the ads they see online.
jeff
· 1 year ago
If you're not making money, maybe your business model has some problems. I wouldn't blame the customer. You offer your content for free.
If you are unhappy, charge a fee for your service, don't try to guilt-trip viewers into responsibility. If that and other ideas don't work, then you don't have a business.
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 1 year ago
Don't underestimate the power of the guilt business model.
Al Gore may not have created the Internet, but he did usher into existence a whole industry that preys on eco-guilt.
Sheraz Mahmood
· 1 year ago
Forcing users to click on AD's because we like the Blog isn't good for you, in fact all it does is yield short term revenue. Revenue will be lost in the long term when the advertisers see your blog doesn't yield acceptable ROI.
Jeff is correct, maybe the model needs to change.
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 1 year ago
You're right on the short term benefit, and your right about the model needing to evolve.
Mark Stevens
· 1 year ago
Lambasting your readers for not clicking ads or using adblockers isn't the best way to go about building a loyal readership. Playing the Tiny Tim card doesn't help matters either.
If you rely on your blogging for a living, but also rely on click-through ads for financial compensation, then you seriously need to investigate alternative revenue streams.
I also resent the implication that people who use adblockers somehow have attention deficit disorder. Unfortunately, the vast majority of web sites that reserve space for advertisers are cluttered, badly designed abominations. Those web sites that successfully integrate ads into their design framework, with a seamless aesthetic but nevertheless high click-through rates, are few and far between. Besides, by establishing a web site you should be accepting of the notion that most people who read your content will be drive-by readers pushed there by a Google query. They want to read your article then high-tail it out of there, not have to wade through garish banners to get to what Google told them you had. If your content's good enough, you'll be able to convert casual readers into loyal readers. That's where the real opportunity to make money lies.
Personally, if I become a loyal reader of a blog or web site, I whitelist that site in my adblocker. I think it's only fair to allow them the opportunity to open up their advertisers to me. Whether I click on an ad is another matter entirely. If it offers goods and services I feel may be useful to me, I'll check them out, but I don't go on a guilt-purging click-fest simply because the web site owner says I should.
Subtle requests for financial aid are fine. Whine-fests that amount to little more than describing your potentially loyal readers as ADHD-suffering freeloaders really isn't.
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 1 year ago
Are you really offended by my off-handed snark?
It isn't really a great accomplishment, nor is it particularly as cool as people think it is to have blocked ads. It's really the height of entitlement, to be quite honest.
I respect your right to do so, but don't be offended when we design something that advertises to you your ad blockers can't defeat. You declared war on advertising by installing it, and opened the doors to far more invasive and sneaky methods of advertising.
These words don't pay for themselves.
Jon
· 1 year ago
I'm working on a solution as hard as I can.
Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins
· 1 year ago
Cool! Let me know when you have something.
Kent
· 1 year ago
I do agree on the sponsorship part..
The magic word is still traffic.
The solution to traffic is content and networking.
Lucas Brill
· 1 year ago
Moving back to the model where consumers pay for content is not in the best interest of anyone.
Publishers being forced to charge consumers will result in far less readers. With so much content on the internet, even if some is a fan, when a blog or website starts charging then users disappear. In response to a few of the comments above, I'll believe you when you cough up the dough. It's easy to say that you'll way today and when they start charging tomorrow, you're no where to be found.
Advertising on-line offer unprecedented targeting, ease, and conversion - unlike other forms of traditional advertising. Are we forgetting about that?
Personally, I don't love ads but I often click on them - especially on niche sites that I enjoy. Ads oftentimes reflect new products, companies, events, or promotions, that are relevant to me as a reader and consumer. It's not like Mashable, CN, or Techcrunch, are plastered with "What year did you graduate" or "Shoot the monkey" ads. Get real people.
Mike, I enjoyed your post and your insights as a blogger. Consider me a new reader over at CN and I won't be bashful when it comes to clicking on ads that appeal to me with products and services that I'll enjoy, need, or want. Peace.
How to earn money from the Int
· 1 year ago
Quality content attract traffic and traffic drive sponsors.
cheapsuits
· 1 year ago
I posted this over at centernetworks: The post is spot on in talking about the need to be compensated for content. However, clicking on an ad just to help the author of the site is ultimately disingenuous to the advertiser. Maybe it's time we realize that internet ads are passive advertising more like billboards,magazine ads or televison commercials requiring no action from the reader. As an advertiser I like page views and RSS subscribers not clicks. Its the only real gauge to the blogs popularity. (RSS ads a twist I know).I see a theme of sponsorship in some of the comments. I ultimately think the answer is sponsorship. I do not see why blogs and or bloggers can't become like NASCAR drivers. I personally think the ad model was broken from the beginning on the internet and needs a sea change to a new paradigm.
techeek
· 1 year ago
Stumbles! Thanks.
Michael J Pratt
· 1 year ago
I have grappled with this dilemma for awhile now. We have a subscriber model on our main sight. I am in the camp of liking my content on the web (consumable reading type content a la online magazines, etc) to be free and ad supported. The reason is, there is just so much of it I try to consume, paying for it in the way I'd pay for a copy of Time at a news stand isn't practical - esp the way it is delivered in small chunks. On the other hand, I look to businesses like Club Penguin, et al who charge < $10/mo and are able to acquire 100's of thousands of subs. Their "content" is consumed very differently and the model seems to make sense to everyone. I think of ads on ad supported sites as part of the content, in a way. If the publisher wants to junk up their site with trashy ads, they will reap what they sow. If they try and include ads into the design and aim of their site, success will be achieved.
Ferris Ferguson
· 1 year ago
I like money. Anyone can give it to me.
Flat Panel Televisions
· 1 year ago
For instance, myspace, these guys bring in a lot of traffic just like blogs do. Someone can drive a lot of targeted customers to a blog/website, and sell it that blog/website for whatever it's worth...just like the big guys do. It takes time , but well worth it!
Are you trying to find information on how to make more money? If so please check out my blog http://www.manageyourcash.blogspot.com/ It has alot of information on investing money, saving money and budgeting money. $$$$$ Check it out and let me know what you think. I have useful info for all ages $$$$$
Rick
· 6 months ago
Ok, I have a question, I have an employment site that I am attempting to market. The site is http://www.freegovtjobs.com. Would creating a blog assist me in increasing my site's internet presence? And if so, how? Thanks.
All Comments
They have an intro-page! Wow, I didn't think anyone did these anymore. I can't believe they're paying for advertising to take people to an intro-page. Who's running the show over there?!?
http://www.userplane.com/?utm_source=mashable&a...
You still see these in a lot of consultancy and design firm pages, though.
Page views per user are 18.
So it seems to work for them.
Wouldn't you call Microsofts home page an intro page?
Good blog btw - click, click, click lol
Thanks Mark.
I do click on ads though if I'm a regular reader to a site - because I understand it supports the site. Granted, it's screwing the advertisers a bit, because I'm not actually interested in their product or service, but it helps the site that I'm a reader to.
This is one of the reasons why I don't use Google; they have enough money already, so I tend to find myself searching with Clusty (http://clusty.com), Ask (http://ask.com) or one of the other smaller search engines. I never seem to have a problem with the results they're providing and I click on the Sponsored Search results once in a while to generate revenue for the site.
Biggest employer for unemployed university graduates and HS dropouts in these countries is now US-based Google (under its Adsense program, co-created / launched by among others, a Malaysian - or so I've heard). Google however has not disclosed on how much the company spent paying these 'part-time marketing Internet consultants' every month - some of whom to have claimed to be the #1 in Malaysia, Singapore, Asia, world respectively, based on Google's search result ranking on keywords like "money", "make money online", "internet marketing asia" etc.
Who would want to slave their asses for $500/month jobs (entry engineers), when you could just stay home, writing craps especially boast your income (showboating cash money, especially US dollars) and earn 5-10 more?
Just like a Malaysian (ala US-gangsta) RAP group put in one of their popular songs, "Money, money, money, make the world go round..."
Since time began users have blocked ads. People hate advertising. Get used to it. Its forced upon the audience/user whether its TV, Radio or Internet and 99% isn't relevant to the consumer.
If a blog has value to me I'm happy to pay a couple of pounds or dollars to the site/blog/author. And I have done. In fact I'd rather a blogger had a passive link to donate or join the site as a member than he offensive advertising that we see everywhere.
See John Gruber's DaringFireball.net. If you value his content you can join as a member to support him or buy a T-shirt. He knows his audience and his ads via the deck are relevant to his audience. I'd bet conversion rates on his site are high.
What the video suggests is that consumers click on the ads to support the blogger but as one of the previous comments suggested, you end up screwing the advertiser and when they figure out its not working that pot of money will disappear for everyone.
Perhaps you should consider whether your blog has any value to your audience.
The problem, as I see it from both sides, is that ads aren't relevant. Yes, even Google's 'targetted' adsense, is rarely that relevant to *me*. They might be relevant to the content of the page, but not really to me. The content I'm reading may or may not be relevant to me. Given all the tracking Google does, I'm suprised they can't take my habits in to account more than they apparently are.
I've come to Mashable for the past several weeks and seen a 'userplane' ad. I've not yet clicked it. 'Branding' aside, how many more times do I need to register a view as a visitor and *not* click the userplane ads before my non-interest is taken in to account and a different ad is shown? What? I can't do that? That's part of the problem.
Another problem is the same damn ads all over the place. Even if something's relevant to me, I may have clicked it 2 weeks ago on another site. It's not really fair to the advertisers for me to click and visit their site multiple times. Certainly not fair on me to have to buy the same thing multiple times just to 'show support' to every site I like.
While not 'broken', the model is seriously flawed for the types of things we (bloggers) want it to do (provide us money). Invidual donations are a bit of a pain to do, both to remember to do on each site that you read, and also to manage for bloggers. Receiving money's easy, but going beyond that (identifying paid readers, sending a thanks, etc.) is harder.
Perhaps an aggregating service that helps people to make donations to groups of bloggers would be useful? Maybe that's my next project! :)
This is the problem with using online profiles for advertising - I cannot choose what information I trade for things I value. I gave my birthday to Facebook (actually it was required "as a safety precaution") so that children will not use Facebook without supervision - i.e. as a safety precaution. I gave my education information so I can network, not so I can get ads for "Nerdwestern" t-shirts.
It isn't just the consumers who are getting the bad end of the deal. Marketers, brands and publishers all look bad when readers feel mis-targeted or stereotyped or feel that their private information has been abused.
I like the theme of this blog post, but I cannot agree that it is primarily the fault of the advertiser. It is also the fault of the ad network (or the ad serving methodology) and the publisher (or blog). I would like to see all of these constituents take responsibility, listen to consumers and give them some control over the ads they see online.
If you are unhappy, charge a fee for your service, don't try to guilt-trip viewers into responsibility. If that and other ideas don't work, then you don't have a business.
Al Gore may not have created the Internet, but he did usher into existence a whole industry that preys on eco-guilt.
Jeff is correct, maybe the model needs to change.
If you rely on your blogging for a living, but also rely on click-through ads for financial compensation, then you seriously need to investigate alternative revenue streams.
I also resent the implication that people who use adblockers somehow have attention deficit disorder. Unfortunately, the vast majority of web sites that reserve space for advertisers are cluttered, badly designed abominations. Those web sites that successfully integrate ads into their design framework, with a seamless aesthetic but nevertheless high click-through rates, are few and far between. Besides, by establishing a web site you should be accepting of the notion that most people who read your content will be drive-by readers pushed there by a Google query. They want to read your article then high-tail it out of there, not have to wade through garish banners to get to what Google told them you had. If your content's good enough, you'll be able to convert casual readers into loyal readers. That's where the real opportunity to make money lies.
Personally, if I become a loyal reader of a blog or web site, I whitelist that site in my adblocker. I think it's only fair to allow them the opportunity to open up their advertisers to me. Whether I click on an ad is another matter entirely. If it offers goods and services I feel may be useful to me, I'll check them out, but I don't go on a guilt-purging click-fest simply because the web site owner says I should.
Subtle requests for financial aid are fine. Whine-fests that amount to little more than describing your potentially loyal readers as ADHD-suffering freeloaders really isn't.
It isn't really a great accomplishment, nor is it particularly as cool as people think it is to have blocked ads. It's really the height of entitlement, to be quite honest.
I respect your right to do so, but don't be offended when we design something that advertises to you your ad blockers can't defeat. You declared war on advertising by installing it, and opened the doors to far more invasive and sneaky methods of advertising.
These words don't pay for themselves.
The magic word is still traffic.
The solution to traffic is content and networking.
Publishers being forced to charge consumers will result in far less readers. With so much content on the internet, even if some is a fan, when a blog or website starts charging then users disappear. In response to a few of the comments above, I'll believe you when you cough up the dough. It's easy to say that you'll way today and when they start charging tomorrow, you're no where to be found.
Advertising on-line offer unprecedented targeting, ease, and conversion - unlike other forms of traditional advertising. Are we forgetting about that?
Personally, I don't love ads but I often click on them - especially on niche sites that I enjoy. Ads oftentimes reflect new products, companies, events, or promotions, that are relevant to me as a reader and consumer. It's not like Mashable, CN, or Techcrunch, are plastered with "What year did you graduate" or "Shoot the monkey" ads. Get real people.
Mike, I enjoyed your post and your insights as a blogger. Consider me a new reader over at CN and I won't be bashful when it comes to clicking on ads that appeal to me with products and services that I'll enjoy, need, or want. Peace.
Anyone can give it to me.
Jay
mortgage estate
mysapce