Does Size Matter?

[James Legacy]

When submitting to Ezine Articles, do you find that articles of different lengths achieve different results? Do you really get more traffic and clickthru's from a 500-word article as opposed to a 250-word article?

(A part of me thinks, "A shorter article means that the reader will reach my bio box faster!")

In your experience, how has article length affected your results?

[dvduval]

Ok, so we are talking about articles.

I think it mostly has to do with presentation. SEO-wise, 250 vs. 500 shouldn't make a beg difference. Considerations are going to be more about the rules of the site where you are submitting, and the effectiveness of the copy.

[traces2757]

I think if you make it much longer than 400 words, unless it is a very compelling article, then you risk losing your reader. That's not a hard and fast rule by any means, but it seems to be a good one to follow most of the time. 250 words, however, might be a little too short. Around 350 to 500 words is good.

[BlueStar]

Originally Posted by James Legacy

When submitting to Ezine Articles, do you find that articles of different lengths achieve different results? Do you really get more traffic and clickthru's from a 500-word article as opposed to a 250-word article?

(A part of me thinks, "A shorter article means that the reader will reach my bio box faster!")

In your experience, how has article length affected your results?

The top experts will tell you Minimum is 800 words. I know a top IM'er who does between 800-1500 words and he dominates.

Do what others refuse to do.

[BlueStar]

Originally Posted by traces2757

I think if you make it much longer than 400 words, unless it is a very compelling article, then you risk losing your reader. That's not a hard and fast rule by any means, but it seems to be a good one to follow most of the time. 250 words, however, might be a little too short. Around 350 to 500 words is good.

You can NEVER lose a reader with GREAT content. Ask John Caples, David Ogily, Dan Kennedy, Gary Halbert, etc...

[angela99]

Can you deliver great information in an article of 300 words? You probably can.

If so, write 300 words.

If you need more words, write them.

Your aim is to get the reader from the headline, to the resource box, and to your site. It's possibly also to build your presence online.

Rather than worrying about the length of your article, try creating an article marketing plan, with goals, and with tracking. Any article marketing plan will involve writing more than one article.

Worrying about the length of any one article is pointless. Just ensure that you deliver, and take your article marketing one article at a time.

I'm on the way to hitting 1000 articles published at Ezine Articles (I know people who've published many, many more), and have never noticed that short articles performed any better or worse than longer articles.

Good luck with your articles. :-)

[Paul Myers]

You can NEVER lose a reader with GREAT content. Ask John Caples, David Ogily, Dan Kennedy, Gary Halbert, etc...

As a rule, I tend to agree with this. That's not the question that was asked, though.

Without looking at the skills of the writer, is there a difference in click-throughs based on content length?

Remember, most of what people call "articles" when talking about article marketing are actually teaser pieces. They're designed to get the click, not to educate the reader. Yes, I know. Real writers don't think that way. But a lot of real marketers do, and that makes it a valid and useful question.


Paul

[James Legacy]

Originally Posted by angela99

Worrying about the length of any one article is pointless.

I'm not worried about length; I'm worried about results. If a 250-word article will bring the same results as a 750-word article, then I am throwing away 66.6% of my time and money every single time I write a 750-word article.

[BlueStar]

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

As a rule, I tend to agree with this. That's not the question that was asked, though.

Without looking at the skills of the writer, is there a difference in click-throughs based on content length?

Remember, most of what people call "articles" when talking about article marketing are actually teaser pieces. They're designed to get the click, not to educate the reader. Yes, I know. Real writers don't think that way. But a lot of real marketers do, and that makes it a valid and useful question.


Paul

I respectfully disagree.

People do read content if they are truly interested.

Buyers read content, lookers don't.

What good is more clicks if you don't CONVERT?

Traffic + Conversion = Profits

It seems like so many IM'ers only care about Traffic, yet they can't CONVERT for squat.

I'd rather have 1k visitors and get a 5% conversion than 10k untargeted traffic that gets zero (like so many do).

[Shannon Herod]

my goal is to stay around 300 words when it comes to writing articles. There is actually a reason for it...

You do not want to bore the reader and them leave before they get to your resource box.

Unfortunately, most people do not read entire articles. So, you want to make them as action-packed and short as possible. You want the reader to get to your resource box as soon as they can.

The better you can get them to your resource box, the more traffic you will get.

Unless you are a very prolific writer anything over 350 words is too much in my opinion.

Once you get up in the 500 to 700 range you are really going to lose potential visitors.

You need to be really good in order to hold the reader's attention that long.

This is what I have experienced myself. Not really guessing, is more a scientific guess. I have noticed a sharp increase in click through's if I keep my articles shorter.


Shannon Herod

[angela99]

Originally Posted by James Legacy

I'm not worried about length; I'm worried about results. If a 250-word article will bring the same results as a 750-word article, then I am throwing away 66.6% of my time and money every single time I write a 750-word article.

If you're worrying about length, rather than results, you stand a great chance of wasting your time anyway.

I write articles in batches, as part of an overall marketing plan for a site, or a product. Here's what I have noticed, and it has nothing to do with length -- particular articles will touch a chord, and will take off... some of my most-viewed articles are just over 300 words. Others are 500 to 600 words.

I don't care about length: I care about results, and I've never met anyone who can say that a short article is better/ worse.

As for "then I am throwing away 66.6% of my time and money every single time I write a 750-word article", with all due respect, I find it easier to write longer articles than shorter ones. It's much easier to waffle on and say nothing, than to product an effective, results-generating short article.

[BlueStar]

Originally Posted by Shannon Herod

my goal is to stay around 300 words when it comes to writing articles. There is actually a reason for it...

You do not want to bore the reader and them leave before they get to your resource box.

Unfortunately, most people do not read entire articles. So, you want to make them as action-packed and short as possible. You want the reader to get to your resource box as soon as they can.

The better you can get them to your resource box, the more traffic you will get.

Unless you are a very prolific writer anything over 350 words is too much in my opinion.

Once you get up in the 500 to 700 range you are really going to lose potential visitors.

You need to be really good in order to hold the reader's attention that long.

This is what I have experienced myself. Not really guessing, is more a scientific guess. I have noticed a sharp increase in click through's if I keep my articles shorter.


Shannon Herod

Really? So you have stats?

[Paul Myers]

I respectfully disagree.

People do read content if they are truly interested.

Buyers read content, lookers don't.

Shouting isn't going to make your point any clearer or more persuasive. Nor is ignoring the point to which you're replying.

You're preaching to the choir, sir/ma'am/whatever, but you're in the wrong church. James is talking specifically about content submitted to EzineArticles.com, not general content that's intended, most often, for a very different purpose.

Different discussions, in other words.


Paul

[melanied]

I find the best results with articles between 300 and 400 words.

[Frank Donovan]

Hi BlueStar

Originally Posted by BlueStar

The top experts will tell you Minimum is 800 words. I know a top IM'er who does between 800-1500 words and he dominates.

Well, many would call Travis Sago one of the top article-marketing experts and he's just sent out an email advocating 250-word articles (in conjunction with a longer bio). It would seem there's more than one way to dominate.

Originally Posted by BlueStar

You can NEVER lose a reader with GREAT content. Ask John Caples, David Ogily, Dan Kennedy, Gary Halbert, etc...

I don't recognize any article marketers on that list.

The OP asked about results from submitting to EZA; in which case, it's not so much about "losing a reader" as enticing a clickthrough or promoting keywords.



Frank

[Paul Myers]

It seems like so many IM'ers only care about Traffic, yet they can't CONVERT for squat.

"Really? So you have stats?"

[Christa_Regalado]

I think it's better to focus on the content rather than the number of words. A short article may deliver the information the reader is looking for as opposed to the superfluous, wordy lengthy article which may be boring in the long run.

400-500 words is minimum for me.

[BlueStar]

Originally Posted by Frank Donovan

Hi BlueStar



Well, many would call Travis Sago one of the top article-marketing experts and he's just sent out an email advocating 250-word articles (in conjunction with a longer bio). It would seem there's more than one way to dominate.




I don't recognize any article marketers on that list.

The OP asked about results from submitting to EZA; in which case, it's not so much about "losing a reader" as enticing a clickthrough or promoting keywords.


Frank

I understand your point. But Ultimately it's ALWAYS about conversion.

Everything counts. It's the small things that seperate the top IM'ers from everyone else.

[powerspike]

I usually write articles based on keywords, 250-500-750 it doesn't really matter for me, what i find an effective way of getting people to click on your links, is to make your bio the last paragraph of the article, so it reads on, and gives them suggestions, haven't had a ezine article rejection for it yet. and it works wonders.

[Paul Myers]

I understand your point. But Ultimately it's ALWAYS about conversion.

Everything counts. It's the small things that seperate the top IM'ers from everyone else.

Yep. And understanding your sales process involves a lot of small things, many of which change wildly depending on the source and approach of the prospect.

Before you go ballistic, consider that my average article is 5 PAGES or more in length, not a page and a half. I don't need convincing that it's about the reader getting the message, and not the word count. But I don't market in the same playground James referred to in his question. That's a different process entirely.

Many of these folks treat the "articles" that go up on EZA as though they were longish classified ads, designed to get the click, not to educate or entertain. Done properly, it works.


Paul

[BlueStar]

Originally Posted by Paul Myers

Yep. And understanding your sales process involves a lot of small things, many of which change wildly depending on the source and approach of the prospect.

Before you go ballistic, consider that my average article is 5 PAGES or more in length, not a page and a half. I don't need convincing that it's about the reader getting the message, and not the word count. But I don't market in the same playground James referred to in his question. That's a different process entirely.

Many of these folks treat the "articles" that go up on EZA as though they were longish classified ads, designed to get the click, not to educate or entertain. Done properly, it works.

Paul

So true. It's about perfecting all those small things, about a million of them

But, once you do, the money is easy!

[Andrew Maule]

Thread title = brilliant. I'm taking notes.

[Norma Holt]

James, don't worry about the length as much as the content. My goal in writing my articles is say something important that will appeal to others. If they like it they will like you and will read more of your articles and will click through to your site. If you write just to get articles published you will probably fail.

That's my take on it.

God bless

Norma

[Frank Donovan]

Hi Andrew

Originally Posted by Andrew Maule

Thread title = brilliant. I'm taking notes.

Really? I nearly didn't open the thread. As a phrase, I think it's been done to death.



Frank

[Sheryl Polomka]

I don't have any stats on what converts better, just going by my personal preference as a reader I do prefer shorter articles. Everyone is different though but I'm the sort that am not likely to read through a whole article if its really long - maybe I'm just lazy but that's just me. I prefer them shorter.

[yesacpow]

When it comes to length of an article I would say 250- 350 works best for me.

I tend to write most of my articles in point form and the bio box normally comes in as a point as well. So in that way my reader will naturally click on the link to go over to my website to find out what else I have to offer.

I find that writing large chunks of paragraph is not effective for me i.e the longer articles.

I myself do not like to read a lot whether the article is interesting or not so I tend to think that my readers are like that as well.

Just my 2 cents!

[Anomaly1974]

Man, I always harp about word counts as opposed to numbers of pages and now somebody has to bring this up.

In specific regards to article marketing, I actually do not think that the word count is so important as pre-qualifying your customers so to speak. You need to be able to ask a general question, narrow it down to a specific problem and then offer the readers who have that problem the OPPORTUNITY to go to your site to get (buy?) the solution.

I think your results will be directly in proportion to how well you target and qualify the people reading the articles.

My own pathetic little marketing plan as an example - I sent an email out to 40,000 safelist members since I do not have a list ... results ... a couple of hours wasted with nothing to show for it.

Getting a friend to promote it to their EXTREMELY small list ... a bit more targeted ... though not directly targeted to be sure ... and the results were about an 8% conversion.

Given the size of his list ... well, it did not put me in the black for the month even but sure beat wasting my time for nothing.

Having written numerous articles for the directories ... the key is in qualifying the people you want to come to your site. You are always going to be better off with ten targeted and motivated buyers coming to your site than you will be with a thousand people coming to your site for more general (and often only the free) information.

Just my two cents

[James Legacy]

Originally Posted by angela99

As for "then I am throwing away 66.6% of my time and money every single time I write a 750-word article", with all due respect, I find it easier to write longer articles than shorter ones. It's much easier to waffle on and say nothing, than to product an effective, results-generating short article.

This made me LOL.

Originally Posted by Andrew Maule

Thread title = brilliant. I'm taking notes.

Feel free to add it to your headline swipe file. (I did as soon as I saw this thread blow-up in about 7 minutes).

[GameOver]

I usually stick with 250 word articles because you get the highest click through rate. Much much less with articles of 500 words. People have a short attention span- capitalize on this fact.

[Jammy]

I think it depends on your niche, how skilled a writer you are, and ultimately what the purpose of the link is!!

By that I mean, I personally find that the traffic to conversion rate I get from EZ is terrible, I suspect for two reasons... one, there are a lot of internet marketers there checking out what everyone else is doing and two, I'm a crap writer (hey, at least I can admit it!).

I use EZ solely for the SEO'd backlink to make my site rank, the (crap!)traffic I get is classed as a bonus, so I just whip out short articles. I do get a few conversions obviously but nothing like the conversions I get from direct traffic to my sites.

Good luck!