Make Money Online

In recent weeks there’s been talk on the blogsphere, especially from a recent ReadWriteWeb post, about the imminent closure of the popular MyBlogLog blogging widget/social network. With the charge being led by bloggers irate that their beloved blog widget might be soon a footnote in Wikipedia’s logs, are they missing the bigger picture?

Looking at Yahoo’s (NasdaqGS:YHOO) financial report for the three months ending 30 September, it’s clear that the troubled search engine is starting to see a ray of light at the end of the tunnel, reporting net income of $186 million on revenue of $1.575 billion, a sharp contrast from last December’s quarterly loss of $303 million.

It would appear that this past July’s tie-up with Microsoft is starting to bear fruit. With Microsoft focused on the technology elements of algorithmic and paid search services,  Yahoo is free to focus on its role as exclusive worldwide sales force for both companies’ premium search advertisers (i.e.: adCenter and Yahoo Search Marketing). This is going to consume much of Yahoo’s “system resources” if it’s going to work out.

With a long way to go to catch up to Google’s coattails, especially with its dominant position in both organic and paid search, the top guns at Yahoo appear to be making a smart move  to focus on search engine and its associated pay-per-click income stream. This also means that “side projects” like Yahoo’s integrated communications portal 360 and social network Mash have been canned before they made it out the Beta stage gates. Next on the cards, possibly MyBlogLog.

Having bought the then-startup for a steal at $10 million, it would be  a waste to close it down now, as it had done earlier  with its “Auctions” portal site.

If there’s any doubt where Yahoo’s priorities lie, I’ve known several experienced Yahoo managers internally transferred from their social media positions to the search engine’s core operations or its developer network over the last two years. The resulting voids in the social media business units have been filled by second stringers or new hires. The consequence? The rollout of new features has slowed significantly, or chugged along with decrepit (by internet standards) features. This has ironically resulted in the archetypal “poor user experience” so despised by the search engines themselves. Every iTom, iDick and iHarry has fired up their blogspot or wordpress blogs to post a rant or two, or three.

But if it’s a matter of the internet’s third largest website survive the current state of economic uncertainty, what’s losing a couple of popular websites among friends? If Yahoo management decides to focus on the company’s core business of providing search engine results and bringing in cash flow to keep the business going, what’s a few rants on a couple of popular blogs, right?

Still, it is a pity to see some key features, like MyBlogLog’s Pro Stats, which provided idiot-proof analytics for bloggers with a simple yet detailed framework, listing referring urls, on-site urls and, outgoing urls that the most technophobic and neophyte blogger could comprehend.

Maybe the MyBlogLog development team could have incorporated Yahoo Search Marketing text or image results within its community site or even within the widget itself. But it appears the MBL might’ve been a branding play, hampered by the lack of a viable business model and difficulty with integration into Yahoo’s core search model. As time will shortly tell, MBL might have overstayed its welcome.

A decade from now, historians will gaze back and determine if it was prescience or foolishness for Yahoo to have dropped the MBL ball, even while Google started incorporating real-time social network updates into its search results. I might even look back at my blog logs to see if they are right.

Disclosure Note: Andrew Wee is a member of MyBlogLog’s advisory board

See the original post here:
Tweet This Post

In theory, URL shorteners make perfect sense in the world of the 140 character status update popularized by Twitter and used heavily by other social networks. It is commonly accepted that shorter headlines and copy tend to have greater pull with the average user than their longer counterparts. At the same time, URL shorteners could be the Achilles Heel that brings about Facebook’s downfall.

But first a brief lesson on how URL shorteners work. By truncating an otherwise lengthy 200 character URL into a short, compact 40-50 character string,  these tweets, short messages, and micro blog updates have more room for other useful stuff, like emoticons or tags.

As an example a possible message over Facebook’s private message system might look like:

Is this you? What happened to your clothes? http://tiny.url/example.

This has increased the ease with which users direct each other to their favorite content. Such tools have become commonplace with Twitter adopting the use first of Tiny.url and currently of Bit.ly. Even Google has gotten into the game with its own shortner.

Now here is where the trouble starts. Enterprising (or dastardly, depending on your point of view) URL shortener marketers have resorted to coupling linkbait-style snippets with links to malware sites. Clicking on a link can send the user to a page where malware, a trojan, or a virus is installed on the user’s computer.

The result? You might get an ad for colon cleansing, a business opportunity CPA offer, or an offer for a free Apple iPhone, courtesy of your friend, or even your BFF. Or you might end up infecting your computer with something more malicious like a keylogger. With a chain reaction of malware installs and redirects to CPA offers, it’s not too cynical to imagine a RTM (Robert Tappan Morris) style worm infection spreading hyper virally through the uber-connected social networks.

The best or worst part of the deal? The user unleashing this worm across their social network might have no idea of the havoc they’ve unleashed. That is, until they receive a torrent of angry wall posts and messages from their former friends. This scenario has played out frequently on Twitter recently as user’s profiles are targeted through phishing shortened urls.

Facebook users are particularly vulnerable to this form of attack as many may be fairly young, use Internet Explorer as a default browser, and fail to install security updates and operating system patches regularly. With Facebook currently testing its own url shortner, the potential for problems on the heal of its Scamville issues seems quite real. While the damage caused by malware distributed via Facebook messaging appears to be limited, having the problem escalate may result in the mass exodus of users as seen with MySpace a couple of years ago with its rampant bulletin spam.

More importantly, since one of the primary distribution centers for the recent flood of malware infections appears to originate via Facebook’s personal messaging and real time chat system, couldn’t the social network screen and whitelist or blacklist suspicious URLs, especially if multiple users are distributing the same URL?

The immediate fix for this is for the end user to practice security management policies when they come across a URL shortened link on a social network, even if it comes from a trusted party. Using a URL shortener preview tool like PrevURL at least gives an idea of the destination URL. The rule? If in doubt, don’t click.

The rest is here:
Boom in URL Shorteners Equals Boom in Malware and Spyware

Tweet This Post

On the face of it, developments in digital publishing have signaled a decisive victory for aspiring and professional authors in recent months, judging by recent announcements:

Amazon recently declared that it’s Kindle e-book reader was its overall bestseller by number of units shipped and total revenue generated. According to a MarketWatch article, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos recently mentioned during the company’s Q3 financial results (ended Sept 30, 2009) call that the Kindle is now the most popular product on its site by unit sales and dollar value across all product categories. Analysts expect that the e-book reader and ebooks will fuel the online retailer’s next stage of growth.

Google announced details of its upcoming Editions service, to be launched next year, which will allow ubiquitous access to books on web browsers and other devices. In a recent announcement,   Google Book Search’s publisher partnership program head Tom Turvey said the new Editions service would kick off with between 400,000 and 600,000 books in the first half of 2010.

Consumer electronics giant Sony has judged the e-book reader segment important enough to take some focus off its television and Playstation projects to develop it’s Reader product. According to the Wall Street Journal’s WSJ.com, Sony had sold about 300,000 units of the product from its October 2006 launch till end 2008. (The WSJ.com post is currently unavailable online)

With e-book readers experiencing a boom, writers might be looking forward to a boom for their wallets.

Whether you’ve already had a few published books under your belt, or you’re working on your first book, you will be wondering: What’s not to like especially with Google Editions’ payout model?

With Google Editions, the revenue split of 55% to Google and its distribution partners and the balance 45% going to your pocket is more than just making about half the revenue from your sales, it breaks the historical monotony long held by publishing houses. Most published authors receive a fraction of the value of books sold. It’s not uncommon for an author to receive a $0.50 to $1 royalty fee for each copy of a book sold. If you’re a superstar author such as JK Rowling, author of the Harry Potter series of wizardry books, or king of horror, Stephen King, you’ll have more room to maneuver.

In fact, the 45% royalty that Google Editions looks set to payout looks like the perfect out for many budding authors to quit their day job and do the “writing thing”.

Before you fire your boss, take note of a couple of big holes in the new business model.

#1 Quality, quality and quality

Someone investing a couple of hours reading a book would prefer a good book, over a poorly-written book in most circumstances (a fetish for spending reading kitschy/trashy romance/potboiler novels notwithstanding).

Yes, the possibility of self-publishing will break the hegemony/monopoly of the publishing houses, especially since manuscript acceptance rates of 1 in 10,000 are not uncommon. But just because you get to publish what’s in your mind, i.e. the “great American novel”, doesn’t mean that anyone else is going to like, or buy it. If your book meet Joe Public’s quality standards, you’ll have the consumer telling you “No”, rather than the publishing house.

The refund policies aren’t out for Google Editions yet, but judging by Sony’s ebookstore policy on refunds: “Please confirm all purchases before you complete them as all sales are final. There are no refunds for digital content.” It sounds like you can’t give a refund for a poorly-written book, but if everyone and his brother is blogging and tweeting about how badly your book sucks, you can expect sales to suffer.

#2 But I only like to write…

Assuming you’re going the self-publishing route and making the decision to avoid giving the publishing houses your fat writer’s paycheck, means having to ensure quality on your own.

There’s a myriad of service providers online to find proofreaders, book editors, designers and other specialists to make sure your novel looks like more than just a Microsoft Word document converted to Adobe PDF. Hint: the lack of a cover and extensive use of Times New Roman size 12 font throughout the book are dead giveaways…

Being able to post an accurate job description, screen service providers, screen competitive bids, and manage the team you’ve hired, will require more project management skills, than just being a dang good writer.

#3 Traffic Generation and The Lesson from Satellite TV

With the launch of satellite TV a couple of years ago, the complaint shifted from “There’s nothing to watch on network TV”, to “I’ve got 500 channels on satellite now, but there’s nothing to watch”. The lesson? Having lots of choice is always a good thing, but being able to stand out from the pack will play a direct impact on your sales.

Remember back in the early 1990s when there were just 20 websites in your niche? And you would make bank even if you had a garish bright yellow website and a couple of typos liberally sprinkled across your site? Google Editions may be that way too…for the first week or two.

Being able to market your book successfully means being able to put together the elements of a cohesive and integrated marketing plan. Almost every blogger or twitter user will be able to publish some content and generate a few random sales, but if you’re planning to make writing a full time gig, you’ll need a whole lot more marketing mojo in your corner.

-
E-Books: The Bottomline
Here’s what e-book have going for them:
* More money in your pocket: The technology has eliminated the brokers and middlemen from the traditional book publishing ecosystem.
* Write what you like: You’re not constrained and restricted like you would have been if you had signed on with a major imprint.

But like Peter Parker’s Uncle Ben would say “With great power there must also come – – great responsibility!”

The balance of power and more importantly, profit, comes with the writer’s responsibility for viral/guerilla marketing skills. If you decide to DIY everything, you’d need to have decent editing, project management and marketing skills (the majority of which most writers lack). If you’re not represented by a publishing house, which invests heavily in a publicity campaign, you’ll have to find alternatives since most bookstores will probably not arrange “e-book signings” (especially if it’s a product which they don’t sell), unlike an author with a published paperback or hardcover novel.

In my opinion, unless self-published writers have the whole package, including management and social marketing skills up their sleeves, they might end up being the biggest losers in the new e-book paradigm.

Source:
Tweet This Post

If the Federal Trade Commission had the intention to spark off a wave of sometimes worried, sometimes angry and often indignant blog posts and forum chatter with their “Final Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising”, they’ve certainly succeeded.

About a week ago, ReveNews contributor Andrew M. Baer, Esq, wrote “FTC Regulates Blogger, Viral Marketing Relationships: Analysis and compliance tips” stating why he’s not concerned about the FTC intentions.

The guides which come into force on 1st December, are aimed at addressing endorsements by consumers, experts, organizations, and celebrities, with the intention of holding bloggers or other “word of mouth” marketers accountable, with the enforcement mechanism of a possible $11,000 fine.

As short-sighted and ambiguous as some bloggers have painted the guides to be, many bloggers’  objections have been equal in the fear, uncertainty, and doubt camp as they accuse their detractors. Many blogs painting worst-case scenarios and posting what-if scenarios with $11,000 fines for receiving cheap paperbacks as a freebie in the mail, writing a positive review and linking it to an Amazon affiliate link.

The Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB), which comprises more than 375 leading media and technology companies is responsible for selling 86% of online advertising in the United States and includes organizations like:
* AOL Advertising
* AT&T Internet Services
* BBC Worldwide
* Google Inc
* Microsoft Advertising
* Yahoo! Inc
* Sony Computer Entertainment America, Inc
* Harvard Business Review
* CNN.com
* FOX Interactive Media
* Nokia Inc

and other technology/internet/news heavyweights in its membership roster. IAB has come out swinging off the ropes with IAB CEO Randall Rothenberg firing off an open letter to FTC chairman, Jon Leibowitz, published on the IAB website and the Huffington Post, expressing his disagreement with the guides on the basis that they are unconstitutional and should be retracted.

In case you’re wondering if the IAB is shooting from the hip, take note that the organization has attempted to start a dialogue with the FTC since March this year, with correspondence detailing(pdf) feedback on the proposed guides. The attempt to have the industry self-regulate appears to have failed, given that the FTC has expressed its intention to keep an eye and active hand in the industry.

In a FTC arranged media call on 14th October to address reporter’s inquiries on the guides, FTC’s Bureau Consumer Protection’s Associate Director for Advertising Practices, Mary Engle, stated:

Although the [Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB)] contends the FTC’s Endorsement Guides are unconstitutional, the Guides apply only to marketing and they attempt to illustrate some of the factors relevant to distinguishing advertising from editorial content,” says Mary Engle, the FTC’s director of the division of advertising practices, in an email statement released today. “If particular communications do not in fact constitute advertising, as the IAB appears to be suggesting, then the Guides do not apply. Where the message is advertising, however, disseminators have an obligation to ensure it is not misleading. This includes, when it is not otherwise clear from the context, identifying when the endorser has been paid for the endorsement. Although IAB may disagree with the policy, nothing in this approach is unconstitutional,” .

From FTC’s Engle terse reply, it’s unlikely to halt the IAB’s attempt to rescind the FTC’s guides.

Even with the FTC contention that the primary targets are advertisers, rather than bloggers, have failed to assuage Rothenberg.

IAB’s Rothenberg contends that even with the FTC’s intention to go after advertisers, rather than bloggers, doesn’t mean that bloggers are off the hook. By it’s “social” nature, bloggers and their blogs are the advertising medium, hence they could still be looking at $11,000 fines.

How will this play out as the December 1st enforcement date draws near?

It’s unlikely that the FTC or IAB are going to back down at the moment, but the IAB’s Washington DC Public Policy office will be keeping very busy till then.

Continued here:
Tweet This Post

As a blogger and an ex-newspaper reporter I have an axe to grind with many of my peers. Please avoid the temptation to distort reality by quoting statistics and data out of context, no matter how linkbait worthy the intended headline or story angle might be.

What raised my hackles? I read this eWeek article and choked when I saw this line:

“Twitter boasted astronomical growth, up 1,170 percent from its negligible .15 percent market share from September 2008″.

I decided to check out the source, Experian Hitwise’s press release on social network traffic, and examine their report using my own calculations:

Twitter September 2009 social network market share of a whopping 1.84% is 12.26 times (or 1,226%) of it’s 0.15% September 2008 figure. This is derived by taking 1.84 divided by 0.15 (1.84/0.15).

Taking a leaf out of a grade school math book, the increase in traffic can be calculated by the following formula:

Percentage Increase = [(new figure - old figure) / old figure] * 100% which should be [(1.84-0.15)/0.15]*100% = 1,127% or an increase of 11.27 times over the previous figure.

So where did the 1,170% figure mentioned in Hitwise’s release come from? Beats me. Maybe someone was a little lax in checking their own stats.

Should we be concerned when a web measurement firm whose bread and butter comes from reporting data, reports it inaccurately? If the reported data is incorrect, how about the validity of the web data contained the report? What happens when a respected media outlet like eWeek publishes data verbatim, without running their own checks to verify accuracy provided by a newsmaker?

Quality control of data is obviously an issue.

Even more interesting is the 1,127% or 1,170% year-on-year growth figure attributed to Twitter’s growth. Everyone loves to see impressive numbers, especially if it’s in multiples of 100%.

Mark Twain popularized the phrase “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

Statistics are powerful because they are viewed as logic based.  In school math was the only subject you could get a perfect score in, and that thinking has carried over into adult life. People like seeing statistics, no matter how skewed, because it makes them feel secure in the information they have been given. When delivered by a smart PR firm, marketing team, or in the media the data is often accepted without question. 

This is because most individuals (internet marketers included) are inherently bad at math and numbers in general. Whether by choice or circumstances, they just aren’t equipped to deal with data critically or intelligently.

I’ve seen more than a few isolated instances where writers cite 500% growth or 1,270% increase in profit, but does this mean anything?

Context is key if you want to make sense of data. A sales increase from $1 to $5 is an increase of 400%, and publishing an article announcing a 400% increase will get you more than your fair share of eyeballs. However, if you consider that $5 would barely pay for lunch, it’s a case where statistics, without appropriate context, can be manipulated to distort reality. What’s important when dealing with data is to look at information against the appropriate backdrop.

If your company is growing at 90%, while comparable peers in the same industry are growing at 300%, you’re lagging behind the industry. By “comparable peers” I’m referring to partners or competitors that are equivalent in size or can be mathematically adjusted to provide a meaningful basis of comparison.

Context and relevance and looking at data in a meaningful way means seeing a $1 billion revenue figure and a net profit margin of 0.5%. Or a 500% monthly sales growth figure from a baseline of $27 in sales. Do these figures mean anything? Only when they’re seen from the perspective of the big picture.

If you want to see the forest and not just the trees, don’t simply swallow the “lies, damned lies, and statistics” they are trying to spoonfeed you.

View original post here:
Are Reporters and Bloggers Guilty Of Using Weapons of Statistical Destruction?

Tweet This Post

At first glance, the credit report/repair niche looks highly lucrative – with high lead generation payouts and search volume at stratospheric levels – one might wonder, “What’s not to like?”. That is, until you factor in the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) keen interest at online marketing practices in the niche.

High search volume + high offer payouts = A perfect niche?
Is the financial niche a strong one? You betcha.

Comparing “head traffic” via a broad keyword like “credit report”, it’s not surprising that it has 7 times the search volume as another high traffic keyword phrase “internet marketing”. The phrase “credit repair” is no laggard either, posting about half the search demand as “internet marketing”.

Couple that with CPA street payouts ranging from $20 to $50 per lead and you can see why consumer credit repair is a great niche to be in.

So where has it gone wrong in the eyes of the FTC?

The key issue the FTC seems to have with the way “free credit reports” are being marketed is how rebill offers and upsells are placed ahead of giving consumers their federally mandated free credit report which is available through a centralized website, AnnualCreditReport.com.

Navigating through an advertisers site embedded with upsells, uninformed consumers may feel they are required to sign up for the CPA advertiser’s premium and/or rebilling services in order to receive their credit reports. The FTC reports in paragraph 4 of the release that they’ve received “consumer complaints about promotions for products and services that confuse and frustrate consumers as they attempt to obtain their free annual credit reports.”

The fact is few people go to these sites to “just check” their credit report.  Most people seek their credit report when they are faced with a big decision: because they want/need / or where denied a home loan, personal loan, auto loan, student loan. When a consumer pulls their report they are probably anxious about an upcoming decision or perhaps they’ve been denied a loan and are now confused about why their scores are low. In this state they arrive on a site to get an onslaught of upsells and rebill offers only to feel mislead by the site afterwards which leads to complaints.

With the FTC stepping in to address these complaints, existing credit report affiliates might feel that the FTC’s proposed disclosures are draconian in nature. An example:

“for any Internet site offering free credit reports, the Commission proposes a requirement that, before the consumer may obtain a credit report from that Web site, such site must first display a separate landing page with the required disclosure: “This is not the free credit report provided for by Federal law.”

Giving consumers the message “you don’t have to enroll for any upsells and by the way, here’s a link to your free credit report” will obviously hurt conversions in a significant way. If these measures come into effect, advertisers who provide these credit-related services will have to step up their game and offer compelling information/content that will add to the free credit report, or risk their offer going up in flames.

Think the FTC’s proposed measures lack bite?

A day later (8th October 2009), the FTC issued a media release stating that two credit repair companies and their principals settled FTC charges that they falsely claimed they could repair consumer’s credits and collected upfront fees, in violation of federal law.

Although offering a free credit report is a far step from claiming to being able to repair a consumer’s credit score, the FTC is showing its online mettle when it turns a keen eye on what’s happening in the online space.

The FTC isn’t choosing to deal with internet marketers by slapping them gently on the wrist either. Imposing fines of $8.3 million and $2.5 million against the defendants, the credit repair businesses were suspended due to an inability to pay the fines.

Impact for affiliates and marketers?

Although an affiliate or merchant with a vested interest might think the government is actively seeking and destroying the lucrative livelihoods of online marketers, it’s a stretch to come to that conclusion.

In the scenarios highlighted above, consumer complaints were the catalyst that got the ball rolling, with the resulting legal consequences. This past July, the FTC solicited public feedback on proposed amendments to the Free Annual File Disclosures Rule, also known as the “Free Credit Report Rule.”

Furthermore, the Credit Card Act of 2009 requires the commission to issue a rule by Feb 22, 2010 to prevent deceptive marketing of “free” credit reports. If advertisers are under the impression that the legislative “perfect storm” has passed, there’s going to be more bad news for them, but good news for consumers down the road.

Some advertisers within the credit report/report space have chosen to build their business model around rebills and/or offering premium upsells to uninformed consumers. It might even sound like a great business proposition. The reality as has been shown in the FTC’s recent actions, will likely result in more shady operator’s “businesses” collapsing like a house of cards.

FTC Resources:
Credit and debt related issues

Read more:
The Credit Report/Repair Niche Feels The Long Arm of the FTC

Search Engine Keywords:

• marketing credit repair affilliactes

Tweet This Post

When it comes to effectively using social media to market yourself and/or your brand, are you falling prey to a “Hare Syndrome” and losing site of the end goal?

Does this sound familiar?

You discover a new social media outlet, (insert your favorite choice of Facebook, Twitter, FriendFeed, StumbleUpon, or a high authority forum in your industry), and enthusiastically create a profile on the site.

Within the first day, you’ve made 10 postings/updates and check the site every couple of hours for updates. You might even have one or two highly energetic “chat conversions” with other enthusiastic members or the community. You might even find yourself in a “meeting of the minds” type conversation over instant messenger with community members.

If there was a definition of the social media “honeymoon” effect, this is probably it.

Unfortunately, things are not meant to last, and within a period of 10-14 days, you’re going through stages of social media burnout, exhibiting symptoms like restlessness, fatigue, and maybe even an inability to fully focus on your regular work. That is, until you plug yourself cold turkey from the site.

What happened?

Plugging in and going “deep” into a social network can be addictive and all-encompassing.

Given the volume of data and conversations that a well-tuned community can pump out, it might be tempting to spend way too much time:
* Trawling your friends networks to see who else you know (and can invite to be your friend)
* Following links, recommendations, viewing recommended videos and spending a big chunk of time on news sites, YouTube and content aggregators
* Sending out friend invites, getting invited/pulled into group chats

…to the detriment of hours of otherwise productive time.

While we all could potentially fall prey to the Hare syndrome and probably more than a few of us will admit to having been there and done that, you might also consider the “Tortoise” approach.

Here are some tips to ensure a longer term approach to using social media effectively:

Look before you leap.
Just like in Aesop’s fable, the tortoise isn’t always the first to rush into a new social media outlet.
There’s no hurry to rush into the “new thing”. Instead, calmer heads prevail and one might even hold back for a couple of months until there are signs that the community might be around for a while, rather than being another flash in the pan.

Can you find what you’re looking for?
Can the community help you achieve your long term goals? Given that internet marketing is frequently a solo endeavor, the prospect of connecting, communicating and exchanging ideas with someone in a different town, state or continent has a degree of newness that breaks the routine of running a business.

Taking part in community conversations can do more than just provide a “connection to the outer world” fix. Going into it with goal-oriented clarity with objectives you want to achieve will give you a concrete return on your socialising efforts.

Confidant to a few or social butterfly to all?
While there are some benefits to being a friend to many and being known to most users in a community, the greatest dividends come from a few intimate relationships within the community. By “intimate” I am refering to peeling away the social shields to share information and establishing joint ventures with potential partners. You’re more likely to do business with people you know and trust.

Plan and stagger the time you spend in a community.
Managing your time effectively and limiting yourself to a daily allocated block of 15 or 30 minutes can help increase your effectiveness. Some will see a time limit as restricting what you’re able to do. I see it as motivating yourself to prioritize the most important activities and getting those done.

While following the tips listed here will not make you a social media superstar, it can however gain you traction in the community and ultimately, like the tortoise, help you win the race.

View original post here:
Social Media: Are You A Tortoise Or A Hare?

Tweet This Post

Recent launches of Amazon’s Kindle 2 eBook reader and its Sony counterpart, the Reader Digital Book, have satisfied the wants and needs of bleeding edge consumers with longer battery life and enhanced text readability. But how much are they expected to disrupt traditional print-based media like books and newspaper? More importantly, will they significantly influence the way the majority of consumers consume printed media?

I’ve read a couple of analytical pieces, including a recent post Kindling an Interest in eBooks by Revenews writer Barry Silverstein  comparing the potential  revenue generated by an eBook  to a paperback and a hardcover.

The Great Paper Waste

While on a per unit basis it appears that hardcover books and their limited editions/first edition counterparts give better returns than eBooks, the writing’s on the wall that digital printing will outperform and likely supplant traditional media. The factors  are pretty overwhelming and the question is when this will happen.

According to a post by Dave Taylor in response to how much of a book’s print run remains unsold  or destroyed, the industry estimates are between “as little as possible” to about 55%. Having worked in the publishing industry before, I’ve seen as much as 90% of the print run of a book remain unsold.

Similar to how CDs,  DVDs, and other physical goods are produced, you might expect 5% of product produced to be bestsellers, going into a 5th or 10th printing, another 30-50% to break even and possibly generate marginal profit, while the balance is relegated to the bargain bin section of your bookstore or online and direct mail specialty book clearinghouses. If said stock, whether CD, DVD, book, magazine, newspaper, remains unsold, it’s either recycled or ends up in a local landfill.

What this means is  with half of all books printed not sell the  viability and bottom line  for traditional publishers is brought down. Printing a string of dud books could be financially fatal for niche and specialty publishers.

The Digital Publishing Paradigm Shift

How digital publishing disrupts the established business model is by allowing authors the option to choose to self-publish.  This is feasible if they’re confident in promoting their books themselves outside of the book catalog  and book tour avenue of publishing publicity.

Publishers  can also benefit since by being  able to avoid printing an excessive amount of inventory, reduce production and storage costs and channel their efforts more towards promotion and less on the production element of the business.

But the biggest payout for digital book readers could potentially be the environmental impact.

Step into your bookstore and imagine that half of the books you sell will be unsold and relegated to a paper mill for shredding or burning.

When you take that example and multiply it by all the bookstores in the country, the potential is there for digital publishing to supplant not just the business model for brick-and-mortar bookstores, but also positively impact the environment.

Overcoming The Final Barrier

Cost, however, remains a barrier at this point. At the current $350 to $400 price bracket, eBook readers will appeal to the tech set  and remain out of the hands of the masses for some time.

If the industry trend in MP3 players is similarly replicated in the eBook reader industry, we might eventually see these devices drop to the $100 price point or better. When that happens, we might see printing presses become a thing of the past.

Andrew Wee blogs about blogging, affiliate marketing and social traffic at Who is Andrew Wee.

View original here:
How eBooks and Digital Publishing will Disrupt Traditional Book Publishing

Tweet This Post

Does it feel like a slap in the face when you request to be someone’s friend on a social network and they ignore, reject or ‘diss you? Should your feelings get hurt?

Gone are the 2006’s “happy days” of MySpace when everyone and his cousin was refreshing their screens every 30 minutes, happily adding some smiling bikini-clad female to their network of “friends”. It didn’t seem to matter that you didn’t know who 90% of these people were, or if they were even real.

The Hottie and the Nottie

Enter 2009 and the era of social relevance. It’s no longer how many you know, or even who knows you, but who you know.

Social networks are not in bestselling author Michael Lewis’ words, who penned the book The New New Thing, just another “new new thing”. In his book, Michael wrote about the then-booming Silicon Valley technological scene, and discussed its obsession with innovation (also known as the “bright shiny object syndrome”).

Still the shininess of social networks is not so enamoring that having 200 people waiting in the “pending requests” queue of Facebook is an appealing thought. Especially when the logic for their request is: “We have a few friends in common, so we should be friends”.

Huh? I have been thinking over that one for some time, and I still don’t get it.

Sure, there are a couple of Twitterati floating about fast replacing the Bloggeratti in collecting legions of fans, many of whom they don’t know. But isn’t the mere act of collecting followers missing the point of social networking?

Granted, all of us have differing goals when we join Facebook, MySpace, Orkut, Friendster, or any social network.  Some social network members might be looking to make new friends. Others could be in the business of collecting cheap or free leads they hope to convert via a CPA offer. And of course there might be a lonely guy or lonely girl who, tired of the slim pickings at dating sites like PlentyOfFish, is trolling the social scene.

Like the saying goes, different strokes for different folks.

It takes guts and integrity to follow the path that some marketers have taken. Revenews blogger Peter Figueredo recently explained why he has no qualms saying “No” to uninvited guests. Not because he gets a kick out of the rejection process, but because he wants to keep his network socially relevant.

That’s one of the reasons why I’ve largely given up on MySpace – way too many strangers I haven’t a clue about. It was fun to “collect” and play with the “Top 16” friends, rotating them around like an all-star lineup in a baseball card collection. Unfortunately, the thrill wore off about three days later.

Taking Control of Your Social Network

How can you continue to keep a relevant community on your preferred social network?

1. Realize you’re in charge. It’s your community and your account.  More importantly it’s your personal brand. While it may be a public network, it’s still your personal turf, your personal space on that network.
2. You are known by the company you keep. Go beyond pure numbers to look at the quality of company you keep. Are these people you’d hang around with in real life? If not, why are you keeping them as virtual companions?
3. Invest the time. The talk about social networks providing “free traffic”, “free leads” and “free networking” only makes sense if your time doesn’t have any value. On one hand, you can’t spend all day reading twitter updates or responding to direct messages on the social networks. But on the other hand, you can’t go off the radar for weeks at a time and think you can pop back in with a “Hi! I’m back. Miss me?” That gets old, pretty fast.

Instead, working the social networking route means identifying one or two key networks and specializing in them. Build social goodwill, have genuine conversations and good things, business or personal, will come.-

Trimming the Fat

The fact is that relationships are dynamic – they form, sometimes people fight, grow distant, move to a different continent, and maybe are even recruited into top secret, covert organizations never to be heard from again.

Likewise, relationships in the digital world are similarly dynamic – you talk to someone every day over IM and then suddenly all communication stops. It’s the end of the honeymoon period.

You could insert a suitable bonsai analogy here, but the point is the same: if you cull your network, you can refocus your attention on strengthening relationships within your existing contacts.  Trying to maintain and cultivate an ever expanding social network as it bloats beyond any manageable proportion can be a hopeless endeavor.

If you consciously clean up your email inbox and your blogroll, why not your social networks too?  A good practice might be to “un-friend” 5-10% of your community that is no longer relevant to your goals.

At the end of the day, social network quality trumps social network quantity any day of the week.

Andrew Wee blogs about blogging, affiliate marketing and social traffic at Who is Andrew Wee.

Read more:
Filtering the Social Networks: Social Acceptance, Relevance and Trimming the Fat

Tweet This Post

As a former business newspaper reporter, my work used to consist of bashing out news articles on a regularly scheduled basis. If an article did not pass the “content filter”, AKA news editor, it ended up in the trash. Outcome: only “newsworthy” content saw the light of day.

I confess as a result of this training I am somewhat protectionist towards my content and likely more than a little closed-minded when it comes to definition of “editorial content”.

Let me make an analogy. In the upcoming move The Watchmen, based on the DC graphic novel of the same name, a Latin phrase features prominently. The phrase is “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” or loosely translated “Who watches the Watchmen?”

Within the online world, where websites are just a mouse click away, are there “content watchmen” to ensure that web content passes muster and provides added value to consumers?

Shopping ain’t as Fun as it used to be… Enter the Sterile Shopping Experience

There is an emerging armada of online shopping sites where a datafeed-driven price comparison engine occupies the centerpiece. Shopping at one of these portals is a cold, unexciting experience – scan for the best price, click a check box, enter credit card info, await a brown cardboard box. These shopping sites are adequate for shoppers who have made up their minds and are at the tail end of the buying cycle. This is where a $1 price difference can “make or break” the sale going to one merchant or another.

It’s pure business and a “just the facts, ma’am” approach prevails. Check prices, whip out credit card, check out. Done.

Sure, the lowest price will do fine if you’re already have a specific brand, model number and price point in mind, but what about the rest of us? I’d like to think that there is scope for content-rich websites to occupy their rightful place in cyberspace.

“I still haven’t found what I’m looking for”: A Case for Useful Content

Not all shoppers have a clear idea of what they want to buy, or even know that a specific product model exists. These typically are known as “uninformed buyers” – they know they want a new plasma TV or SUV – they have no idea what model they want yet.

The pool for these prospects early in the buying cycle is vast compared to the buyers that emerge at the end. If your customer has a vague idea that he’d like to buy a laptop of some sort, but has no idea about the type of products available, how is he able to make the buying decision? A battery of price comparisons will not help him or her decide on the SW-R2D2 versus the T-1000.

Result? Indecision. Possibility: Lost sale.

What if out of every ten shoppers, only one made the buying decision? There’s scope for another nine undecided prospects to be converted into customers, which is where “useful content” can help.

“Useful content” should help the consumer understand more about the products or services being offered, not just the “thin content” (tech specs or manufacturer’s information) being served up as a “content site”.  Labeling marketing material provided by the manufacturer as editorial content is a disservice to the consumer. (Unless your consumers are incapable of visiting the manufacturer’s web site for product information).

Digging For Affiliate Gold: Keyword Watering Holes

In a recent Revenews post, “New Super Affiliate?” Peter Figueredo mentioned that new affiliate shopping site Offers.com’s key differentiator would be added editorial content that they publish on the site. After some clarification from Peter, it appears Offers.com’s editorial content refers to topic write-ups like their article on Genealogy.

Most smart marketers within a niche have discovered their key content watering holes. Spending your cash at these sites is not just an exchange of currency, but serves as a covert product education process too.

Back to the original point about “uninformed buyers”. Consumers want to be given guidance on what to buy. That’s why publications like the Consumer Reports magazine and the Better Business Bureau continue to exist and be accessed by consumers as a trusted authority.

Keywords alone don’t drive transactions, they merely bring traffic over. An eyeball isn’t worth as much, unless it’s a “buying eyeball”.

Here’s where useful content – not just for the sake of keyword ranking or even “search engine domination” – can help.

Firsthand information especially from other customers can close the deal, especially if their feedback is seen as neutral and unbiased. It’s not merely the keywords that feature on the page, but the fact that there is a living, breathing human being that’s put the credibility behind their name or username that brings the trust element into the relationship.

But webmasters are not just dependent on the whims and opinions of their past and present customers either. Being proactive helps. A lot.

What Webmasters can do: Beyond Keyword Driven Content

Take the additional step and go beyond search engine keyword-optimized content, Address the consumer’s questions about the technology, product’s process and effectiveness.  When you publish useful content as an effective marketing tactic it builds trust and if done well, eventually brings in the sales.

Trust as a concept cannot be easily defined. We all know what it means, but how is it put into practice?

Here are some examples ways to provide your customers useful editorial content:

• The information you are providing should go beyond what the manufacturer has already printed on their product packaging or website. Providing this is just scraping or recycling what is already known.
• Provide some idea of how other consumers or reviewers have experienced how the product functions in comparison to what the manufacturer says it does
• Suggest some ways applications for the product. Recipes which are provided with a microwave are “software” to go with the product “hardware”

While editorial content might not be as easy as copying and pasting blocks of text, it can pay big dividends. When done correctly it can move prospective customers further along the buying cycle, enhance trust and credibility with your customers and help close the sale.

Andrew Wee blogs about blogging, affiliate marketing and social traffic at Who is Andrew Wee.

Excerpt from:
Can Content on Affiliate Websites Be More than Just Keyword-rich Text?

Tweet This Post

Every year seems to bring with it a hot new social network. First MySpace, then Facebook and, now Twitter, initially thought of as strictly more a micro-blogging platform than a “traditional” social networking site populated with user data. Exactly what impact these large networks will have on the online industry is still to be determined.

Some marketers have used the advertising platforms on these networks with varying degrees of success.  Profiting from super food Acai berry, dating and grant information type CPA offers has never been easier, but what can more traditional retail focused marketers and merchants get out of them?

Let’s look at the makeup of useful social networks:

• Mass: The bigger, generally the better. With a larger market you’re able to poll a large, statistically significant audience, particularly when it comes to gathering user preference and feedback especially for product development or marketing campaigns.
• Relevance: A network that is actively moderated with the culling of fake and machine-created user profiles and accounts will provide a higher quality user experience and likewise attract better quality users.
• Conversation: Is the network mere collections of user profiles or are users actively communicating and having active discussions? While the ability to post bulletins, broadcast messages and classifieds is a step above more traditional websites, the signs of an active community are discussion threads with responses being traded back and forth and more than two people involved in a conversation.

Looking at a social network as merely an aggregation of consumers, versus a community that you can build a relationship with, will make a difference in the way you engage the social networks.

Seeing a social network’s users as a collection of potential customers tends to predispose the affiliate to looking at user demographics and seeing the users as a one-time affiliate lead or product purchaser. The relationship tends to be short-lived, and once a “razed earth” situation has resulted, the marketer moves on to another social network in search of fresh pastures and leads.

On a long term basis, seeing social network users as a community one can build a relationship with can lead to a positive long term outcome. I see it this way: if you’re providing services to a specific demographic such as recent college graduates, you’re able to carve out a community of users with whom you’ve build a relationship and established trust and credibility.  This is vital for doing business in the long term.

Relationships across a social network function along the same rules as their real world counterparts – they need to be nurtured and trying to game them might kill the proverbial golden goose.

The soft approach of providing advertorial content or useful information with strategic product recommendations  goes down better with the community than an “in your face” direct marketing approach (think of the user backlash resulting from very direct “Are you feeling sad and lonely” style dating ads).

Social networks have their own set of rules. Successful social marketers need to understand those rules a number of which are network specific, rather than universal. Understanding these differences can pay off big dividends for smart social marketers.

Andrew Wee blogs about blogging, affiliate marketing and social traffic at Who is Andrew Wee.

More:
Making Sense of Social Media

Tweet This Post