Raising Prices in a Recession? WTF ;)

The #1 SEO Community

Since the end of last year (when we started working with Conversion Rate Experts) we went from sorta not caring too much about conversion rates to making it a priority. Part of the reason we originally did not worry about it was just because I wanted to keep adding value to the service and make sure that the quality of the site was far better than any competing site. That goal has been achieved, and recognized by our customers and in the marketplace amongst SEO experts. Today I just saw Wiep Knol write this, and it motivated me to write this post.

Small & Tight Knit > Big & Bloated

After improving conversion rates we started growing briskly, and we are getting close to our upper limit of 1,000 subscribers. Since we are a small(ish) company we don't want to grow too quickly, or get bloated to the point it harms the quality of our customer experience.

Many competing services want to act like a Wal-Mart or McDonalds, and have 10,000's of customers that they quick serve. But I like to keep things small and cozy. We want maintain the current atmosphere where we have established a more limited and higher value site where we have the ability to interact directly with our customers every day to create a deeper, richer, and more valuable experience.

Our Customers Love the Site

Last week one of our customers made this video, which helped up realize that our customers are seeing the site the way we hoped.

Under-pricing

Originally we under-priced the site to ensure we could get enough people through the door to build a strong and sustainable community. If you fail the launch its hard to get a second try. But given that we have one of the 5 strongest brands in the space and that we work directly with our customers it does not make a lot of sense to be priced as a value play, especially after our membership has been growing so rapidly.

Most SEO firms take $10,000 (or more) and then do virtually nothing with the money. There are some good ones on the market, but very few of them are looking for customers. Almost every week I hear another story about $10K or $15K down the drain and it only further reminds me how little we charge for the value we offer.

Our site educates webmasters and is interactive to ensure returns. When customers participate on the forums the value they get will exceed what most get for $10,000 at the average SEO firm.

Unlike most large SEO firms, we do not have 1 person working the conference scene to generate leads and send them back to interns and fresh college graduates. When you join our site you interact ***directly*** with us. In a little over a year I have made over 10,000 posts in the forums.

"You saved my site, seriously, I don't know if this ever would have been solved otherwise - every SEO company I have been in touch with (50+) over the past six months was unable to identify the problem and you picked it apart in five seconds.

I'll be recommending your site to everyone I know in this business! Thanks so much again Aaron, you saved my site"
- Daniel E. from Toronto

On the value for money scale this site is just the opposite of most SEO firms...we pour our hearts and souls into it and go out of our way to be helpful. And many of our members are amazing SEOs who are gracious & share a lot of great tips & strategies.

"I wanted to learn, so I could see what they were doing, having spent over a grand!! I can now see they have really done very little.

In a couple weeks with your training program I'm actually starting to see results, and I've not even started the link building side. It makes me wonder what on Earth my SEO company have been doing for the last 6months!!! I'm going to go it alone and just use the seobook.

So thanks for producing such a great site to help people like me : ) " - Michelle

Price as a Signal of Value

There are a lot of $1,000 and $2,000 info-products on the market that are watered down re-hashes of what we offer, and most of them come with no customer support and no interactivity. Given that price acts as a signal of value and quality, currently we are way under-priced, particularly for the level of customer service we offer. Inside the forums when asked if we should increase our prices 100% of the responses were yes.

The good thing about increasing price is that the more something costs the more people respect it and act on it since the opportunity cost is higher. And when people listen to our advice they get a strong ROI.

"Everyone knows I love to razzz the black magic snake oil SEO industry but honestly out of the very small handful of guys that give a lot of value Aaron is at the top.

I HIGHLY recommend you check out his SEO training program."
- Jeremy Shoemaker

Aren't You Being Greedy? We Are in the Worst Recession Since the 1930's

Publishing a network of sites is a competitive strength we have over most SEO websites. We have real market data from a number of sites in many competitive markets, keep launching new sites, and have many commercial successes - driven through a wide array of strategies. This makes our understanding of the web far richer than a company which only runs a site about SEO.

Running this site is part of our competitive advantage for our other sites (because SEO is core to many of our marketing ideas), but when you adjust this site's returns for opportunity cost, this site's earnings are far below our other top websites. And sometimes the magnitude of difference is almost unbelievable. Sites we started many years after this site make similar amounts on far less effort with far less maintenance cost. This site is over 90% of my work time, but at most about 1/3 of our profits.

Higher Prices Increase Customer Quality

When I sold the ebook by itself the $79 price point was high enough to filter out pikers while still being accessible to many people. But when the get rich quick and make money online email list spamming internet marketers started hyping SEO it polluted the customer pool and was a big part of why we had to change our business model to deeper relationships with our customers at a higher price-point.

When we shifted our business model from ebook to a membership site our average customer quality increased sharply. We already have great customers, but figure that the best way to slow down & manage growth is to increase price. In August we will increase our prices to $150 a month. Search is a market worth $10's of billions of dollars a year, and SEO can provide amazing returns. But if this site is to keep consuming most of my work time then I need to increase its earnings.

We plan on adding lots of new content features and tools to the site throughout the remainder of the year. Current customers keep their current subscription rates, but subscribers after the August 1st date will have to pay 50% more than our current rate.

Peaceful Coexistence: 6 Reasons to Love Google

I tend to be somewhat cynical toward Google because I generally do not trust authorities and they CAN and DO kill many web based businesses that are too reliant on search. But to offset such posts I figured it would be cool to do a counter post on reasons to love Google

They pushed search. Back when search was unprofitable they believed in making it better rather than being at least 80% as good as the next portal. Search was eventually going to become big no matter what, but they largely are who pushed it becoming so big so fast. And search makes marketing more efficient because users feel they are in control when they search for information, even if in doing so they find your advertisements & offers. A search driven marketing strategy also allows you to build relationships by people finding you while looking for topics you published content on. This enables genuinely useful sites to bolt on services for sales without needing to worry about having to get as much value out of each person as a hyped up salesman because the website with real utility will typically reach far more people.

In time Google may become more self-serving with their search result biases, but for now they still do not have a paid inclusion program and they are nowhere near as self-serving as some competing companies like Yahoo! are.

They make SEO somewhat challenging. About a month ago a friend of mine launched a site and ranked it in the top 3 for some money keywords in Bing. Unless you are the U.S. government you typically can't do that in Google. The complexity of SEO presents a barrier to entry to new market participants, but once you are already established that barrier to entry helps protect your profit margins. And if you sell SEO products and services you know that there is going to be a market in need for a long long time.

In 2003 when I started SEO I was broke, in debt, new to marketing, unemployed, and within 6 months of opening Dreamweaver (to create a rant site rather than a marketing site!) I ranked in the top 10 for keywords like search engine marketing. I believe similar things are possible today with sweat equity, but the time delay is typically much longer and/or you need to operate at a much higher level than the stuff I did back then. In a way, this barrier to entry causes a lot of the worst parts of the web to disappear because it requires more commitment and/or investment to compete.

AdWords = instant market feedback. AdWords allows you to test a business model idea before building the business. And it gives you instant feedback from relevant market channels that you may not be reaching. It is one of the cleanest distribution channels with one of the smallest overlaps with other marketing channels:

Consumers who buy after clicking a competitive (non brand) paid search ad are the least likely to have been to the site previously through a different channel. In our research, only 10 to 20% of buyers who touched a PPC ad last came through any other channel previously. Compare this to affiliate traffic, where 60 - 75% of buyers came through another channel first.

Once you can convert cold leads from search it is much easier to convert warmer leads that are recommended via word of mouth marketing, affiliate arrangements, and other editorial & marketing channels.

Google furthers the value of this channel by baking a/b split testing directly into AdWords, creating valuable tools like their Website Optimizer, making their Analytics tool (somewhat) free, and even putting free conversion optimization presentations online:

AdSense offers a fast and easy baseline revenue stream. Many years ago advertisers had a big advantage over smaller publishers due to asymmetric information. While contextual ad networks have depressed the CPM rates of many large bloated "premium" publishers, they have also gave smaller publishers the ability to easily, quickly, and automatically test monetization potential. From that baseline publishers can look to improve the model by...

  • using custom AdSense channels and/or tying AdSense into Google Analytics to get more data to learn what sections of their site earn more
  • use that data to work on optimizing + promoting high earning content and/or creating more content covering similar themes
  • advertising similar offers that are advertised on their site

Vastly improving productivity. Like search, email was a vast wasteland of non-innovation (at least amongst the mainstream providers) until Gmail came out. They made it larger, faster, and more convenient. And they made obvious improvements (like adding search to email). A lot of my productivity that I take for granted comes from features in Gmail. Without Gmail evolving email I doubt I would be able to service nearly 1,000 customers while also having time to do marketing, work on building other sites, spend time reading, and have a bit of time for playing and working out.

Their document collaboration is great, and the recent addition of forms (that you can embed into pages for free) is killer.

A Free MBA Marketing Course. If you follow Google, know where they are moving, and understand the intent behind many of their moves it is better than any marketing course you could take.

Some recent examples.

  1. Appealing to geeks by using Tri Force in their logos.
  2. Making it easy to insert a directions widget directly into web pages. (And then being smart enough to market it directly to commerce webmasters through existing channels).
  3. Marketing their maps offline by creating pointers of favorite locations of celebrities. This is perfect marketing because the recurring cost is $0, and it spreads virally by promoting the egos of well known people, and makes other businesses look more credible. Win win win.
  4. Marketing to young people + making their software suite a default by giving it away to schools: "For more than two years, Google has approached colleges and universities with a near-unbeatable offer: provide unlimited hosted e-mail and other applications, all branded by the institution and delivered free of charge."
  5. Striking deals with people who influence large audiences.

And what is more remarkable about the above 5 points is that all of them are reasons to talk about Google and they are things that were mentioned just from this past week. There is a reason to talk about Google every day, even if it seems like some of us publishers are becoming broken records in doing so.

Hating Google in context. I do disagree with many of their policies, but I think a lot of blame goes toward Google when market forces commodize existing business models. But they are just another market force pushing the evolution of media. That means they will commoditize a lot of businesses and business models. When it is done hypocritically (I could write another post on this topic!) I think it is fine to complain, but it is typically more profitable to keep evolving your business model to make it keep adding value and make it less reliant on search.

And the less reliant you are on search the more reliant search becomes on your content. If you keep adding value every day then your business is not likely to see any risks with search traffic. If you were more like Google (to where people had new reasons to talk about you every day) you wouldn't need search traffic to build a sustainable business.

It is Time to Regulate Ignorant Anonymous Guest Posts on TechCrunch

TechCrunch published an anonymous attack piece on search engines...both the organic and paid side. Lets deconstruct some of it, shall we?
techcrunch.com/2009/07/13/the-time-has-come-to-regulate-search-engine-marketing-and-seo/

"It’s now conventional wisdom that search engine optimization, representing the organic result sets on any search query, is more voodoo than science."

And it was conventional wisdom that you needed to own tech stocks because "this time it is different". And it was conventional wisdom that housing goes up forever. We didn't care when fraud was looting trillions of dollars, but now you need to be compensated for your own intellectual sloth & laziness? Please.

Most of the market is willfully ignorant and mislead. Just like in most big money markets. Nothing new there.

What about public relations and branding and other forms of marketing? Most people are ignorant of the influence, so should we just ban marketing? Without marketing do consumers get more or less choice in the marketplace?

If strong search rankings are an unfair advantage then are good domain names and memorable 800 phone numbers also worth regulating out of the marketplace?

To most people rocket science and evolutionary biology and even basic economic literacy are more voodoo than science...does that mean we should shut them down? Shall we run society based on the will of the handicapper general?

"In addition, consumer behavior dictates the top three results on any search page are all that matter. "

They may be most important, but you can still build a real business by ranking a bit lower on the search results. Also people search for billions of unique search queries each month, so its not hard to rank in the top 3 for something.

Keep a lean business if you want to use search as your primary distribution channel. Invest in slow sustainable growth as opportunities present themselves.

The line "all of your eggs in 1 basket" also comes to mind. If search bounces around then try to offset that risk by building other distribution channels including offline, word of mouth marketing, repeat customer sales, affiliate marketing, building a strong brand, etc.

"And at any one time, the controller of these borders (that is, the search engine itself) can change and manipulate those rules – and that can substantially decrease or destroy all organic traffic coming to your website, without notice and without your knowledge."

Use analytics to track your search traffic. If your site has its rankings destroyed and you do not notice then you either didn't have much of a business, or are not investing properly in knowing your market. Either way you would deserve failure if you were reliant on a traffic stream and were not actively measuring it.

"Because the rules of organic and paid search change frequently – and remain undefined — agencies and other traffic brokers can win big; through their experience, they’re capable of reverse-engineering these rules. This means that, as this market matures, individual businesses have a diminishing chance to actually compete and gain search market share. That, in turn, puts them in a position of not only needing to hire an agency in order to find any traffic, but also making it more expensive overall to build businesses on the web."

The same analogy could be stated for businesses buying up key real estate locations and building efficiencies into their supply chain model - like a Wal Mart or a McDonalds. The same analogy can be made for huge online networks that cross promote new sites. The same can be said for banks that are too big to fail while smaller ones are slaughtered off and sold to the big ones.

If business owners are too lazy or cheap or ignorant to invest in one of the highest ROI business functions of the last 100 years then how can anyone have sympathy for them? There are millions of dollars worth of tips on this site shared freely. And people can get direct help with their site for as low as $100. If they can't afford that, then they should not be on the COMMERCIAL web.

"The only real solution is disclosure. Transparency. Those traffic generators that use rule-based algorithms to determine result sets must publicly disclose their methodologies. That is the means by which all businesses can compete freely in the organic and paid search marketplaces."

Except this is not true. For numerous reasons

  • as the algorithms grow more complex, the transparency of them would still only benefit a few key players while setting a high barrier to entry for small businesses. all this would actually do is drive small businesses out of the marketplace faster. we outrank corporations worth $10s of billions of dollars for keywords that are important enough that they target them on their homepage titles. make the algorithm transparent and there is no way we could compete at that level.
  • if algorithms were transparent automation and testing would be abused by larger established trusted websites. some news companies already use robots to write content. give them a high PageRank, offline distribution, algorithmic immunity, and the source code to the algorithm and I can't imagine how I would be able to compete against them.
  • media and marketing are rarely if ever transparent. and when they are it often backfires because people feel they were influenced and/or used. manipulation in the traditional media world goes on all the time. I suppose it is time to write another post about media transparency

Can Hyperbole Generate $50,000 Corporate Speaking Engagements?

Lots of people are writing about the economic secret that is the free pricepoint:

As Anderson himself says, “I’ve got a lot of kids and college isn’t getting any cheaper.” His own strategy, one outlined by Dyson way back when, is to charge little or nothing for his writing and use it to generate lucrative speaking gigs. “You can read a copy of this book online (abundant, commodity information) for free,” he writes (not noting that the free offer expires shortly after the printed book’s publication), “but if you want me to fly to your city and prepare a custom talk on Free as it applies to your business, I’ll be happy to, but you’re going to have to pay me for my (scarce) time.”

But much of the debate is only on a philosophical level by career journalists trying to make extreme claims to get enough publicity to justify overpriced corporate speech fees. Hey, it worked for Tim!

The problem is that even when you look at the canonical examples for the argument for free, they don't always follow suit.

Is Google "Free"?

Google's free search results? They aren't free of self-serving bias, and that bias is expanding.

During an upgrade test of their Google Apps landing page (attempting to improve conversion rates on the PAID version) Google "accidentally" lost the link to the free version. After that issue got exposure the link came back, but it still shows the limits of free. The free option becomes more obtuse/confusing/obscure to make the paid option more appealing.

Free remains readily accessible if their are great hidden costs. But many services start off free, give people the perception they are transparent, and then start monetizing.

Free Can Be a Dangerous Word

Free is only free when you ignore the hidden costs!

McAfee analyzed the first five search results pages of 2,600 popular keywords across five search engines: Google, Yahoo, Live, AOL, and Ask. They analyzed both organic and paid listings and counted the number of links that led to pages that McAfee’s SiteAdvisor tool flagged as dangerous. The study ultimately reviewed more than 413,000 unique URLs.

McAfee’s study also found that certain categories of keywords were more riskier than others. Searches related to “lyrics” and “free” had both the highest average risk and highest maximum risk.

Tragedy of the Commons

Free is good at gaining awareness & distribution and in commoditizing competing products & services. Free also works if you are creating a platform you want others to build off. But it also sets the barrier to entry really low. Either you want to have meaningful value added relationships with paying customers or you don't. When you mix free and paid too closely the free people provide so much pollution that they destroy value.

  • look at the blog comments on any dofollow internet marketing blogs that do not require registration
  • look at the free SEO forums that have been polluted to bits, some of which where people sell stuff they don't have permission to sell
  • consider how Google ended supporting their free search API in flavor of promoting a useless one.
  • URL shortening services removed a bit of friction and became a huge spam tool

Free often promotes classic cases of the tragedy of the commons.

Copyfraud

Many people point at Wikipedia as a sign of the future. But Wikipedia takes content with significant costs, rewrite and/or directly plagiarizes it, and then wrap it in Wikipedia goodness. Unsurprisingly, the book Free re-wrapped a lot of Wikipedia in a hardcover and sold it for $27 (without attribution, naturally). Copyfraud for the win!!!

It is basic hedonistic economics 101: everything should be free except whatever pays ***my*** income. ;)

The Next Big Thing

Free quickly escalates a business up the user adoption curve, but it also leaves the business vulnerable because it is hard to build deep relationships, continue to add value, remove marketplace friction, stop spam, and do it all for free. As a free company gets bloated it creates opportunity for the next big thing:

There will always be a company that replaces you. At some point your BlackSwan competitor will appear and they will kick your ass. Their product will be better or more interesting or just better marketed than yours, and it also will be free. They will be Facebook to your Myspace, or Myspace to your Friendster or Google to your Yahoo. You get the point. Someone out there with a better idea will raise a bunch of money, give it away for free, build scale and charge less to reach the audience. Or will be differentiated enough, and important enough to the audience to maybe even charge more. Who knows. But they will kick your ass and you will be in trouble.

Most People are Short Term Focused & Greedy

Not only does free suck as a sustainable business strategy, but donation based systems rarely work well because most people feel entitled and ignore reality until it smacks them in the face. In the grocery store a few weeks ago I gave $5 for colon cancer research and the cashier was floored and wanted to announce it. Something that a huge portion of people will have problems with is not worth giving $5 for unless we can see the immediate return. Meanwhile the crooked US healthcare system charges you 10x normal rates if you don't have health insurance. Pay up, now or later!

Entitlement

Activate the mindset on the free pricepoint and entitlement comes about. And the perception of value is lower.

I remember an email I got about 6 months ago about a blog post I offered 18 months or so ago where I gave people free personalized SEO tips. The person commented in the email that most of the people who got the advice never implemented any of it. And why would they respect it? They got it free so they assumed it was worthless. Basic economics I guess.

If it is free people assume it lacks value and that you owe them free support.

At some point after you have enough exposure it makes sense to erect barriers to entry to cleanse the bottom 10% to 20% from your pool of potential customers. Will some of them complain? Absolutely. But in many cases they were not going to have a positive business or social value anyhow. Better to cleanse them out early than waste hours of your life dealing with those types of people.

What is a "User"?

Last week 1 person wrote a blog post about how I lost them as a free user when I required logging in to download our Firefox extensions. This person already had a free user account but did not remember their password and was too lazy to do a password reset. They wrote about "that’s where you lost me as a user" to which Sugarrae responded "And who cares. You’re a USER. Customers are who make him money. Considering you’re too lazy to reset a password and you believe you deserve this free tool as much as you deserve to breathe, you’ll never be worth keeping around from a business standpoint. People like you don’t go places." Harsh, but true.

Structural Change

There has been major structural change which leads to lower distribution costs and increased competition for attention. Both of which are driving down the upfront cost of consuming information.

But with the lower costs come hidden costs.

Hidden Costs

Media relying on free means that it needs a lot of exposure to keeps the lights on. This increases noise, hype, misinformation, and investments in culturally constructed ignorance. The fair price for free knowledge will be lots of hidden costs. Most free news won't be worth the price, but the trend has already been set. And the average person's view of economics and media are short-sighted and simplistic.

Buy tech stocks. This time it's different. Houses always go up in value forever. Follow the crowd. Eye on the buzz. Lemmings off the mountain.

We are creating a media ecosystem that is looking a lot like Idiocracy:

Media businesses based on "free" typically build a brand by offering unique high value content, charge premium ad rates, bloat out their content & water it down to try to goose the ad revenue & appeal to a bigger user-base, and eventually end up creating something that has no lasting value.

Maybe some forms of structured knowledge like college textbooks and science publishing are due for some type of major disruption. But sifting through the garbage online is not getting easier (unless you are quite sophisticated). Especially when you consider that the tools to do so are aligned with advertising interests. Trusting machines that are set up to exploit your personal flaws is a non-trivial cost which you will likely never be able to understand fully or calculate.

Economics to the Rescue

Real relationships still have cost. Once you have an imbalance between supply and demand price is the natural way to sort it out. Make it better than free and charge for it. You can further segment by offering a variety of products & services across the price spectrum and packaging it for different markets.

There are plenty of people out of work with plenty of attention but not enough income to live on. What is holding back many of them is thinking that they have to do everything for free. The web rewards free stuff with recognition, comments, links, emails begging for free personalized consulting, and lots of other noise...but then what?

Maybe rather than debating free there should be a few more articles on how to build small work at home businesses using the web. And maybe a few more on how to transition "free" attention into real profits. That part is just assumed by the career journalists/speakers, but what do they ever sell beyond articles, books, and speeches? Not everyone is going to be able to give $50,000 corporate speaking gigs.

There are lots of legitimate ways to make money using the web, and they rarely get any coverage unless they are hyped or mischaracterized. Tell us how we can make a living shooting videos of our "mean kitty" and debate the philosophy of free. But then again what else should we expect from FREE media?

Who is the #1 Domainer in the World?

Obama has been known to use domain names to go after emotionally charged empty words that are easy to support (like change), but now the government is going after commercial keywords like cars.

Cars.gov was launched on June 30th and is already ranking #3 in Google for cars!

What does it do to the value of cars.com when cars.gov is a co-opted business deal between the government and select auto companies (which the government may have confiscated some of your money to prop up and is now propping them up again via rebates and direct marketing to compete directly against you once more)?

Who has a link network large enough to compete with the United States government when they are at the core of what Google considers to be the clean & trustworthy parts of the web? In 2007 Matt Cutts stated:

But, certainly, all of the things that have good qualities of a link from a .edu or a .gov site, as well as the fact that we hard-code and say: .edu or .gov links are good - and when there are good links, .edu links tend to be a little better on average; they tend to have a little higher PageRank, and they do have this sort of characteristic that we would trust a little more.

(Update: Google's Matt Cutts stated there was no hard coding of .edu and .gov links & stated the above quote sorta came out of a mis-interpretation or transcription error on a run on sentence.)

Imagine launching a 1 word domain name late into 2009 in a multi-billion dollar field and ranking it above the fold in less than 2 weeks. The government just did that. And they can do it at will. Over and over again. For free :)

Now if you invest in a big keyword rich domain name you not only need to worry about Google and the market, but now you have to worry about how the government might start competing against you.

What might happen to the value of mortgage.com or credit.com or health.com when the government launches the equivalent government portals co-sponsored by whatever relevant multi-billion dollar corporations pitch the idea to a congressman from their district?

If the equivalent .com sites are thin arbitrage sites they will gain value as misdirected visitors stop by. But longterm the trend has to corrode value of domain names. If they are real sites they may lose out by finding themselves below the fold for their own brand if the government pushes hard enough.

Once politicians realize the value of domain names how long will it be before there are .gov domain names for every aspect of life? Diet.gov anyone? Are you ready for love.gov?

Interview with Rae Hoffman AKA Sugarrae

I have been a longtime fan of Sugarrae's blog (and some of her old posts back in the day on WebmasterWorld). She has been on the to interview list for a few years and we just recently finally did one. :)

How did you get into publishing and affiliate marketing?

In 1997 I had my first child and a few weeks later he suffered a massive bilateral stroke (he had a stroke on both sides of the brain at once, instead of on only one side as with usual strokes). My dad sent me an old office computer to research treatments and I built a small webpage on Homestead that told his story. I started to get emails from other parents who were searching for information on pediatric stroke (at the time, there was little information out there). Long story short, I founded the first international support group for parents and families of pediatric stroke survivors. I was spending a lot of time on the site and started to investigate the possibility of making some side money with it and stumbled into affiliate marketing. I built my first site and everything clicked from there. I loved the whole process of creating and marketing (via organic SEO) an affiliate site – and luckily for me, it seemed I was pretty good at it. I’ve got zero formal training... but I’ve got a decade of experience behind me now.

You have been pushing hard for people to evolve the affiliate model and add value. What are some of the easiest ways affiliates can do that? What are some of the most creative and intensive things you have done to increase the quality and value of your sites?

I’m a big believer in longevity. It’s no secret that I’ve dabbled in the blacker side of things in the past, but as the engines got smarter, it became clear to me that building a site that ranks because it should (meaning it is the best resource on the topic) and not because I’ve manipulated that weeks algorithm was the key to being successful long-term in the organic listings. That said, I still focus a lot on SEO and the algorithm, but the core of what we do is build good sites. It is a lot easier to get links when you deserve them. Campy? Yes. Supports myself and my entire company? Yes.

I wish I could say there were “easy ways” to add value to an affiliate site. But, that ability to create a POD is what separates the few from the many, in my eyes. Scour the sites you’ll be competing with and see what they are offering and then decide how you can make it better. See what they’re missing and create it. Maybe you’ve found a site with great information, but no way for the community to become involved with it. Re-create that good information, add even more to it and then add a community aspect. Every site is different and sometimes it takes us a long time to find our POD for them.

For instance, I’ve been in the telecom market for a long time. It was my first commercial industry. When we decided to build a site about prepaid wireless, we looked around at the competition. CNet had short reviews of only the major companies and no user reviews (at the time), About.com’s info was a bit of a mess and hard to understand. So we built a site that offered editorial reviews of twice the number of providers CNet did, with information broken down into layman’s terms and that were three times as detailed as the information of either fore-mentioned big brands. We also added the ability for users to leave reviews of every provider. Today we have editorial reviews of 25+ companies, we have over 3000 user generated reviews (more than any other site with prepaid information to our knowledge), we have a comparison tool, we run a blog focused on the prepaid industry and we even moderate panels at the Prepaid Press Expo. We have the best and most complete site on prepaid cell phones in existence. We rank because we should.

With BB Geeks, we focused on the “newbie user” while all the other sites focused on providing BlackBerry news or information to BlackBerry pros. It allowed us to find a crack in a competitive market and build ourselves a very loyal following and a very strong brand in the space. We also made early use of Twitter and targeted the same segment of folks – people looking for help using their BlackBerry.

Going Cellular was a bit trickier. I was stumped for a while. So many cell phone sites... How do you take on Engadget Mobile and Howard Forums? I admittedly shelved that project for a long time – I couldn’t find our POD. Then one day, something a friend said to me earlier about a project he was working on sparked an idea. We have a TON of reviews between all of our telecom sites – 4000+ in total. And everyone always focuses on the reviews by provider. But, we all know that sometimes, T-Mobile may have great coverage in one area and crap coverage in another. So, I got the idea to take our large database of reviews and make them searchable by geographic location. It is a hard thing to replicate if you don’t have the review volume to pull from. But we did (and get more daily). So it works. We just released the tool so let’s hope it works well.

I’ve always maintained that Google doesn’t hate affiliate sites. They hate thin affiliate sites. We’ve done our best to create the type of value add Google, and consumers, are looking for.

Do affiliates need a lot of money to compete in the market? Or can they win with little investment provided they are willing to put in a lot of effort?

I don’t think you need a lot of money to compete. Granted, it was easier to say that five years ago (if only I’d worked even harder then), but the opportunities are still there. But, if the less money you have to invest, the more time you’re going to need to put in. People sometimes wrongly think that I had all this money laying around when I started. I hear “Well, I’d love to do that, but I don’t have the money to build those kind of sites.” I didn’t either in the beginning. I was the designer (in spite of being what I like to call artistically impaired), programmer (even if I barely scraped by – and nowadays, with WordPress, it is much much easier to “get by” in that department), content writer (I knew crap about telecom when I started – I learned, learned, learned the field) and marketer (please sir, can I have a link?). I was a one man band in the beginning. I still like to think people can claw their way into any market they choose with the right plan and right dedication. I have employees now, but that was because I couldn’t scale without them.

Do you see offline networking as being a key component of affiliate marketing strategies? Do you do it to promote any of your brands?

We network offline all the time. We run ads in targeted offline publications for our very niche sites (the ad prices tend to be lower and the return higher). For our telecom sites, we attend the major conferences like CTIA, WES, the Prepaid Press Expo, etc. It makes it a lot easier to develop contacts in the industry. Just like SEO’s go to SMX, PubCon, etc. You have to network face to face sometimes for better results. There is a cost associated with it, but we usually get a good ROI on attending. And if we don’t, we don’t return.

Google's Eric Schmidt made a public comments about "brands being how you sort out the cesspool" ... does this statement concern you? Has Google done anything over the past couple years that made you view them differently from a competitive standpoint?

I didn’t really get too concerned about it. As I mentioned, we build our sites to BE affiliate brands. If we’re doing things right, we should come out okay. As for Google and competitiveness, they’ve made it a lot harder on the smaller guys and the up and comers. But, that was to be expected. They haven’t made it impossible by any means. But they have made it harder.

Given Google's 2-tier justice system (penalizing smaller webmasters while giving big brands a pass), why do you think some well known SEOs still publicly out websites?

My number one answer would be “fame”. Too many people in this industry play the fame game. I personally have never outed a site, publicly or privately for doing anything against search engine guidelines and never will. The other reasons people tend to “out” sites is for competitive sabotage (my opinion is that if you’re being beaten by someone, fight harder... In the end, you’re site will be better and stronger for it) or because they think they’ll impress engine reps and make connections. The engines are not our friends (though I truly like a lot of the engine reps themselves). I’m a strong believer in Omerta in this industry [waves to Matt].

What makes you decide to start a new site? Do you have to love the topic, or can you make a profitable site around a topic where there is $ even if you do not care for the topic?

I always say you don’t need to love the topic, you need to learn TO love the topic. To make the best site, you have to be willing to either immerse yourself or pay to immerse someone ELSE in a topic. I find industries where I see opportunity.

Do you try to make money off every site you build? Or do you invest more in the sites that really take off, while spending less capital and effort on the lower end sites?

If the industry is small and the site will only make 3 or 5K per month, then we build a site that will only take a day or two or three a month to maintain after the initial build to keep the ROI in position. For sites with much higher revenues, we put in a lot more time – but for a much higher return. I personally like the smaller niches. It takes more sites to hit bigger numbers, but the competition and upkeep is relatively low.

Do you ever view sites as self-sustaining and stop investing into them? If so, how do you decide when?

It depends on the industry. We don’t have any “active” site that we don’t at least spend a few days a month on. We do have some sites we deem “inactive”... Meaning they didn’t do what we hoped so we shelved the site. We might come back to it later or we might let it earn whatever it does until it dies a slow death. I don’t ever want to get complacent with a site we consider a “winner”. That’s when you give the competition the opportunity to do what we’ve done to our competitors in various sectors. Donald Trump talked about that in Think Big and Kick Ass. He got comfortable and lost his A-game. You can’t do that. We never stop trying to make “active sites” even better. We have to do it before our competition does.

You dub AdSense as "webmaster welfare" and seem to much prefer affiliate revenues to AdSense revenues. Do you have any sites in illiquid affiliate markets? How do you monetize them?

I try my damndest to keep AdSense at less than 20% of our revenue. I don’t like being dependent on one company, who doesn’t even tell us what rev-share we’re getting. It makes me nervous. I also don’t like to be dependent on one affiliate program either. Diversity is a good thing. We have a few in illiquid affiliate markets. Some are “future plays” meaning that they don’t have affiliate programs now, but we think the topic will eventually get big and the monetization opportunities will come. But we don’t spend heavy time on those. We usually research before we dive in to make sure affiliate programs are available.

Some of your tweets, blog posts, and past interviews have showed a bit of a distaste for all in one webmaster solutions. What tools (cms, ads, design, seo, etc.) do you consider to be key to your successful fast growing publishing enterprise?

Our CMS was built in house, as our most of our internal reporting tools. I’m actually pretty simple. I like to look at a lot of things by hand. It probably isn’t the most valuable spend of time, but, it works for me. I’m a big evangelist of the Thesis Theme and we use that on several sites (and hybrid it with the CMS) and the folks who we hire to skin them do sexy work. I think we use Open Ads for the CPM based advertising. I use some of your tools too. I also use Compete (for competitive intelligence) and Basecamp (to organize everything). Like I said, I’m pretty simple on the tool front.

It seems a lot of the SEO discourse at the public level has dropped off sharply in quality (but not in quantity) over the past couple years. Some people (like me) have created private sites, but a lot of the old timers that I consider mentors have sorta disappeared from the public discourse. Do you think this is a temporary shift, or a trend that is likely to continue? Are many of these other people moving on to other private communities?

A lot of the old timers have a distaste for the fame game. If I wasn’t now also running an Internet marketing company, I’d probably be underground too. It’s easier to just do your thing and make your money. They work on pushing their sites and not themselves. I still meet with a lot of the folks you probably consider old timers, but at non-conference gatherings and small meet-ups. With so many people willing to out someone to get their blog to the Sphinn homepage, you become very careful with who you trust. Just like the engines have made it harder for small brands, fame-seekers have made it harder for people to make it into many folks “inner circles”. SEO Bloggers are like reality TV stars... Most don’t have the talent, they just have the platform to pretend they do.

Do some of the cultish behaviors in the SEO industry surprise you? What can the industry do to clean up such behavior, or is it just a fixture?

I don’t read many blogs or belong to many communities, so I tend to shield myself from a good portion of it. The rest, I’ve learned to mainly ignore. Every once in a while, someone will really get under my skin. I don’t think we will ever be rid of the behavior to be honest. We just have to learn not to react from it or be distracted by it.

A lot of new webmasters have a remarkable sense of entitlement while being exceptionally lazy. Do you think this new breed of webmaster has been led astray by get-rich-quick scammers, or do you think the game getting harder and more expensive is causing more people to beg for short cuts?

I think it’s a combination of both. Sometimes I wonder if people realize the amount of time and effort it took for the “bigger guys” to get where they are. Get rich quick schemes are like “amazing weight loss pills”. You know they don’t really work or everyone would be rich and skinny. But, you like to believe it, because it means you can ignore the fact that the real answer for achieving anything you want in life is actually hard work. Not everyone deserves a trophy.

What books, blog posts, forum threads, offline events, etc. were key to you becoming so successful with your online business?

Wow. Well, Steve Krug’s “Don’t Make Me Think” was instrumental for me early on. It really helped me learn to monetize. The “game changer” for my career was probably “E-Myth Revisited”. That book was what made me decide to scale from my kitchen to an office in downtown Guelph with a staff. WebmasterWorld was also a big source of training for me in the early days, along with a private forum I belonged to back then. My first PubCon also was a game changer, because it made me see that I really did have a career and was good at what I did. It gave me a lot more confidence.

Recently you moved back into the consulting model a bit, which sorta surprised me because I always saw you as the super-affiliate type who would avoid client work because you loved doing stuff your way. What brought you back to the client model?

It surprised me too LOL. I’ve taken on occasional consulting clients over the years... It was interesting to see mistakes and issues I don’t deal with day to day in my own sites. It also helped keep me sharp with working on site types Sugarrae and MFE doesn’t build. I don’t have a lot of patience, so dealing with a lot of client work has never been my style.

Back in January, Lisa Barone and Rhea Drysdale decided to head out on their own and create a consulting firm. They contacted me because while Lisa is an expert in blogging, branding and social media strategies and Rhea specializes in ORM and social media with a very strong SEO base, they both felt they lacked the business experience of running their own company. They were both becoming first time entrepreneurs and felt my experience with running companies, in addition to my expertise and “brand” in affiliate marketing, monetization and SEO, was something they needed/wanted in addition to their own skill-sets. Being able to leverage my talents to create a consulting firm and create strategies for client sites, without having to be the person managing clients on a day to day basis, was what made me decide to give it a go. We’ve been very successful thus far, especially considering everyone said we were nuts to launch in the middle of a recession. I expect pretty big things for the company.

Given how well you do with affiliate stuff, I would imagine you are quite selective with client work. What type of client is ideal for Outspoken Media?

It’s funny you mention that. When we first launched the company, we immediately started getting leads from potential clients. I’d decide to turn down half of the leads (one of my responsibilities with Outspoken is business development – AKA, deciding who we work with) without ever even speaking to the potential clients. Of the 50 percent with did speak with, we’d usually end up referring half of those out. I think Rhea thought I was insane at first. One of the first lessons (based on my own feelings) in entrepreneurship I gave her was that we didn’t want to take any client willing to shell out cash. We want to work with good sites, where we think we can make a big impact and with good people. I didn’t want to fill up our roster with “anyone willing” and not have room to take on the clients that would keep us challenged and be awesome to work with down the road. Of course, it was likely easier for me to be calm with taking that route since Outspoken isn’t my sole source of income. But I think Rhea and Lisa have seen that the leads haven’t slowed and our client roster keeps filling and trust that strategy now. So yeah, we’re pretty picky.

That said, it doesn’t mean anyone we’ve turned down or referred out was a “bad client”. Sometimes we turn down clients due to conflict of interest (either with current clients or sites that are direct competition to any sites owned by Sugarrae and MFE Interactive), ROI reasons or for budgetary reasons.

The ideal client for Outspoken Media is someone who believes in us and trusts us to do what we do best.

----

Thanks Rae. To read more of her latest thoughts on marketing, affiliate business models, the internet, or life in general subscribe to Sugarrae and her consultancy PushFire.

1 Page, Many Modes of User Interaction

We launched our SEO training program close to a year and a half ago and are still flush with optimization opportunities from a conversion standpoint. Working with Conversion Rate Experts got me much more motivated about fixing a lot of the holes. Over the past 6 months we have probably made an average of about 1 conversion improvement per day.

A lot of stuff does not need to be hard to do...it just takes a bit of time and a bit of creativity, and a willingness to respond to customer feedback and conversion data.

Conversion Oriented Graphics

In the past all of our conversion oriented links were simply text links. Recently I picked up a nice set of buttons and am enjoying using them where it makes sense to. :)

Maybe I should put one here

Maybe that is not the perfect graphic, but it is a conceptual upgrade, and a position we can build from.

Optimizing User Experience

Erm... lets see. Where was I. Oh yes, the homepage of our training section in the past was almost the same if you were logged in or not. That confused some people as to their account status and probably cost us some members who did not like it. And since it was the page we ranked #1 in the organic search results for seo training it did not do us any favors with prospects who discover us via a search on that keyword. We were simply wasting traffic for one of our most valuable keywords. :(

But due to the magic of PHP's wonderful elseif there is a different user experience for each of the following:

  • logged in subscriber - welcome page and link to modules
  • logged in free account - upsell to paid account
  • not logged in - login box in case they are already a subscriber, followed by an upsell to paid account

Each of the above groups of people has a different set of goals. One wants to access what they bought, while the other 2 are more interested in learning more about becoming a customer. This is something we should have done long ago, but I have always been so focused on answering forum threads, keeping up with news, and trying to create new tools that it took till now to get around to it.

Packaging Value

When you look at the user interaction on a site there are lots of ways to package and re-package ideas that don't have to be spammy or cheesy, but add legitimate value to the strategy. If you have made hundreds or thousands of blog posts there is probably some value that can be reformatted, recycled, and repackaged.

In the past people could download SEO for Firefox, the SEO Toolbar, and our Rank Checker for free and we got nothing in return (except for thousands of customer support emails on free products). That's not entirely true. We got links & rankings, but we likely got more support emails than links and we were wasting an opportunity to establish a lasting relationship and drive people toward conversion.

People still can download those tools for free, but now we require them to set up a free account and log in to get the download links. This type of strategy helps us by...

  • giving some people the option to get a free auto-responder with the tools
  • allows us to remind people of the value of the free tools (which also increases perceived value)
  • allows us to cross-market the free extensions at the same time to increase the actual value of the user experience (more tools = more value)
  • puts a barrier to entry between us and the worst freeloaders (no more thousands of support emails from non-customers!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
  • gives us another chance to sell our premium services (on the download page)

There are lots of ways we could further enhance perceived value. Giving people the option of buying the tools for $100 each would really help a lot more people see the value in installing them for free. So many opportunities and ideas, yet so little time. ;)

Toward Relationship Marketing

As data continues to get commoditized and competition increases many savvy marketers are moving towards relationship marketing. Rather than selling right away people try to pull you into a sales funnel. The guys who only wrote pitchfest hawkish emails now have blogs. A blog is one effective way to help establish a relationship, but why not have 5 or 10 different conversion paths that lead to the desired goal?

The cool thing is that our current user experience (while still being far from perfect) looks and feels much better than it did when using the brute force pop up we tested for a few months. The experience is much more soft-sell and value driven while creating more conversions. Win win.

Appearing Transparent is Profitable, Being Transparent is Not

Are Microformats the Next Big Thing?

John Andrews has a great post about structured data & SEO. My take on the idea (for most businesses anyhow)?

It is an arbitrage play. If you are the first person in a space to do it really well and can parlay that into testimonial links and case studies that is great. But give it 5 years and the search engines will have sucked even more blood out of most businesses.

A while back I wrote about marketing that it is "packaging and the stuff that don't matter" because increasingly packaging is becoming one of the most important ways to create / build / add value.

Standards Based Structure Commoditizes Data

The more you structure your data in standard formats the more value you give away to the intermediary, which will display it all in their search results without giving you much value. Which will also make it easier for well funded competitors to steal your work - without attribution, of course. Rather than giving away tons of raw data it makes sense to put it in a format that is both branded and harder to copy without giving attribution - like an image with your logo on it.

People Steal

I recently saw a person try to promote a tool they made to me which was carrying an image that I made without giving attribution to me. That had a 0% chance of being successful without attribution. I saw another person push marketing one of our web scripts that he stole off of one of our site. Because of how we made the JavaScript accessible, we created more competition for ourselves. How much worse would that competition be if it was just raw verified data?

Where Radical Transparency Has Value

Some customers claim they want radical transparency, but being transparent rarely has any business value beyond

As Seth put it

Radical transparency often excites people because of the radical part (it’s new! it’s scary!) than the transparent part. Playing poker with your cards face up on the table might get you some attention at first, but in the long run it’s unlikely to help you win a lot of hands.

Given that, it is far more profitable to appear transparent than it is to actually be transparent.

Transparency as a Marketing Angle

Tim O'Reilly was excited to announce a new government transparency program that claimed "In making this data publicly available, we are providing unfettered access to investment performance to its true owners - the American people," but as I commented on his post

Nice claim in theory. And yet the Treasury and Federal Reserve didn't want to admit how they were spending our money AT ALL. They sat in congress with bogus "I don't recall" statements that would make Alberto Gonzales proud.

Transparency out front while brazen looting is occurring out back is sorta pointless. Its dishonest marketing.

Tim responded with "Applaud their efforts and help them, don't sit on the sidelines and complain. ... These guys aren't accepting the status quo. They are trying to change it." If you looked at the trillions of Dollars that were recently looted by the bankers you wouldn't notice any change, except for the fact that the US Dollar keeps losing value and is now worth change.

Are those bankers pushing for greater transparency? No. They are pushing in the opposite direction.

Once some of those career criminals in the banking system go to jail then I will start to applaud the government's efforts.

Creating Value vs Building a Business

As search engines continue to consume the web I think that trend of commoditization highlights the increasing importance of social networking & branding & building direct trust in the minds of prospective customers.

If the only way a person adds value is through creating perceived value then they are still miles ahead of the person creating tons of value and giving it all away.

Update:

Google Maps is now a leading real estate destination - overnight!

Copywriting guru Michael Fortin is more eloquent than I am, and recently published a related post titled Don’t Be Transparent, Be Authentic Instead.

Your FICO Credit Score Follows You Around the Web

In one of the more absurd public privacy invasions online, Google has announced they are going to use FICO scores to help advertisers target ads at consumers in different credit buckets.

I wonder if at some point in time if AdWords advertisers selling the scammy government grand & biz-op offers will get to use this data to target poor people with low credit scores. It only makes sense that Google would spin this positively stating that it is good for brand advertisers to find credit-worthy customers, which is the story that was marketed in the above linked piece:

Consumers with high FICO scores demonstrate some unique attributes that show they shop carefully for the best cards. For example, shoppers begin using search earlier in their application process, they use the term "best credit cards" at three times the rate of lower FICO shoppers, and they are more likely to use branded terms.

Consumers with high FICO scores use non-branded search terms more than branded -- approximately 60% of high FICO searchers. They tend to search on terms, such as "travel rewards," "low rate," and "balance transfer."

From a marketer's perspective this makes a lot of sense. Smart people who manage their credit well look for tangible benefits in their financial choices...they don't just blindly buy the brand.

The problem is that (so long as the current bankruptcy "reform" remains in tact and taxpayers bail out any banking losses) bankers have little to no incentive to reach people with good credit scores. People who pay their credit cards on time are seen as deadbeats while the least credit worth are the profitable market segment because they use credit ignorantly and accrue billions of dollars in unneeded fees every year:

Overall, we find that debt literacy is low: only about one-third of the population seems to comprehend interest compounding or the workings of credit cards. Even after controlling for demographics, we find a strong relationship between debt literacy and both financial experiences and debt loads. Specifically, individuals with lower levels of debt literacy tend to transact in high-cost manners, incurring higher fees and using high-cost borrowing. In applying our results to credit cards, we estimate that as much as one-third of the charges and fees paid by less knowledgeable individuals can be attributed to ignorance. The less knowledgeable also report that their debt loads are excessive or that they are unable to judge their debt position.

Bankers have historically hidden these fees in illegible 30+ page contracts, as mentioned by Elizabeth Warren

I teach contract law at Harvard Law School and I can't understand my credit card contract. I just can't. It's not designed to be read. Read the Government Accountability Office (GAO) study on this. The GAO looked at credit cards and they said: "Nobody can understand this stuff." Are you kidding me? And understand when you've got terms that say: "In effect, we'll charge anything we want any time we want for any reason or no reason at all," what's the point of reading it?

She later commented on the ideal credit card customer

Every credit card for a credit card company is like a lottery ticket. They're just waiting to see who's going to maybe stumble a little. Maybe get into trouble on a car loan. Maybe nothing at all except they just look vulnerable. They're just in the right zip code. They're just the right profile for people who won't be able to run any place else. And those are the ones you slam. Those are the ones you hit with the 29 percent interest rate, the 35 percent interest rate, the new fees. And then, because of course if you can't pay it, then you get hit with a fee for not paying or for paying late, for going over limit. And the game is afoot. With any luck at all from the credit card company's perspective, these people will become little annuities that will just keep generating profits for the credit card companies for months, for years, maybe forever.

The idea of only servicing legitimate debt needs of customers that can afford their credit card bills has made banking industry executives so angry that they are threatening hitting consumers with lots of bogus new "conveninece" fees:

Now Congress is moving to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers, who have become a prime source of billions of dollars in fee revenue for the industry. And to make up for lost income, the card companies are going after those people with sterling credit.

Banks are expected to look at reviving annual fees, curtailing cash-back and other rewards programs and charging interest immediately on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period of weeks, according to bank officials and trade groups.

This new consumer-credit profiling Google is offering will be far more profitable to use on the poor, the weak, the desperate, the ignorant, and the uneducated. In early research Lawrence Page and Sergey Brin stated

Since it is very difficult even for experts to evaluate search engines, search engine bias is particularly insidious. ... We believe the issue of advertising causes enough mixed incentives that it is crucial to have a competitive search engine that is transparent and in the academic realm.

So were they right back then? Or are the right now? They can't be both.

Update: Sandra from Google's PR team emailed me the following

I've included an outline of the research methodology below the body of this note. Please let me know if you have questions or need clarification on any of the below -- or anything else, for that matter.

Best,

Sandra

-----

* Compete conducted a clickstream analysis on their opt-in panel of 2 million US online consumers, to associate FICO score categories with sites in the Google Content Network.
o The analysis took a look at the online behavior of Compete's opt-in panelists who shopped for or applied for a credit card online between January and March 2009, for the 30 days prior to the application and/or research.
+ Compete, via a sister company that provides secure matching of certain characteristics (one of which is FICO scores) to anonymous/anonymized individuals in the Compete panel, segmented the opt-in panelists into one of three categories, based on their FICO score: Super Prime (720 and above), Prime (600 to 719), and Sub-Prime (below 600).
+ Individual scores and personally identifiable information were not used by Compete, nor were they received by Google.
o Google provided Compete with a list of all sites in the Google Content Network.
o Compete compared how panelists in each FICO band searched and where the panelists spent time on the GCN, and ranked each GCN site based on its ability to reach consumers in particular FICO score bands.
o The ranking/scores of the GCN sites were passed on to Google -- not any information about the credit scores of individuals.

How to Make Easy Money on Google

Want To Make a Living on Google Money?

AdAge has a good post about how Google's promotion of fraudulent advertising is undermining their brand...

In a world of double-digit unemployment and old-line industries in mid-collapse, here's a sales pitch tailor-made for the times: "Get Paid by Google."

It's a pitch that's compelling millions of people to visit sites such as Kevinlifeblog.com, Scottsmoneyblog.com, Maryslifeblog.com and Googlemoneytree.com, all promising some variation on one theme: Just buy our guide and we'll teach you how to make thousands from Google, right in the privacy of your own home!

Google's 5-Step Easy Money Process

  1. Find a high paying affiliate program which sells a product about how easy it is to make money on Google.
  2. Ideally the program will just charge for shipping to get the credit card details, and make most of the money through back end reverse billing fraud.
  3. Create a fake blog (or fake news site) complete with fake comments about how you lost your job, this program took you from zero to hero. And it makes you 6 figures a year.
  4. Do keyword research to find freshly desperate and unemployed people.
  5. Create ads targeting those people and market them through Google AdWords.

Drug Dealers ***ARE*** Affiliated With Their Drugs

The surprising thing about this process is that Google claims no affiliation to these ads. From the above AdAge article

"As Google is not affiliated with these sites, we can't comment on individual claims," a [Google] spokesman said.

Nice try, but Google ***is*** affiliated with such offers, since they create the distribution channel. Just as a guy who just happens to have a boat load of cocaine he is distributing to clients ***is*** affiliated with the drugs if he is caught in possession.

Businesses Are Responsible for Their Own Business Strategy

Google gives webmasters this guideline "Your site’s reputation can be affected by who you link to." Why shouldn't it apply to Google as well?

As long as Google has 30%+ profit margins they are making a BUSINESS DECISION to run these fraudulent ads. They could spend 1% of revenue on cleaning up this issue (if they wanted to), but they are making a choice not to. Hal Varian has probably done the math, and the offers stay after repeated media exposure of the issue.

Google keeps running the ads because they want the revenue. And they know exactly how much revenue comes from scamming consumers with these ads:
Get Rich Quick with Google.

Amoral Ad Networks Constantly Promote Fraud

Is risked mis-priced? Is an asset class overvalued due to fraud? Are consumers unaware of a new type of fraud?

It does not matter where there is a bubble in the economy - amoral ad networks will find it. As Jay Weintraub put it:

The truly complex part of the problem comes from the size of the un-branded continuity program market and just how much it is helping certain companies hit their numbers, along with what happens were it to go away. In so many respects, the current fakevertising trend is the 2008-9 equivalent of the mortgage advertising boom from 2002-2006.

Not surprising that yield based ad systems promote the biggest scams in the marketplace. Mortgage fraud was a multi-trillion dollar industry, and even as the market heads south, there is still yet another way to exploit the public with ads by targeting their dire situation and desperation.

Could Fraudulent Ads Eventually Change the Web?

If the central network operators do not police their networks then eventually web users will stop trusting online advertising. That (plus pending affiliate regulation) could eventually lead to a significant thinning of competition for mindshare online. It might also push many media companies away from ad based business models to creating businesses built through actually taking money from real human customers.

Please Help Google Fix This Issue

Since Google has not put up consumer warnings and lots of consumers are getting ripped off, I believe it is our job as marketers to help warn consumers about this brazen looting and fraud. If you have a blog or website could you please write about this topic? Bonus points if you reference this post using keywords like "Google money" and "make money" as the anchor text such that we can try to rank a warning high up in the Google search results.

And if you write about this topic to help consumers and your site does not carry AdSense ads on it, please list it in the comments below such that anyone who comes to this page can see how big of an issue this has become.

Pages