Very curious - which site monetization is more effective?

9 replies
  • SEO
  • |
Alright I am slowly updating my site but am very curious about two varieties of monetizing a site that I have seen.

One is where a site has links embedded within the article as anchor texts and the other is where there are animated images and large and bold "click here" pieces of texts that hold as links to a directed site.

Here is my site with one way: Audio Mastering Software | sonic-producer.us

Here is the other: Groom Wedding Speech

Which is generally more effective? Anchor texts look far more natural but what about a page, like my site example, that is monetized around the articles rather than inside the article?

*I am not sure whether review pages are allowed here or not and I will delete the links if they are not, but hopefully my question is understood.
#curious #effective #monetization #site
  • Profile picture of the author AdsenseMastery
    IMHO, bold "click here" pieces of texts that hold as links to a directed site. - This will work!

    The Call for Action must very clear for your visitor to click. So go with the second model.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2861930].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Elion Makkink
    I think inside monetization is more effective. But don't use image ads, use text ads that are relevant to your own content, blend it in like it's part of your site. You can either do this with Adsense, Adbrite, or Bidvertiser.

    What results did you get so far? You can do AB testing to see what works the best for you.
    Signature

    Cheers,
    Elion Makkink

    Become an SEO Hustler too at seohustlers.com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2861957].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author socialbookmark
    I think the sonic-producer.us/audio-mastering-sofware/ is better than the other one. In my opinion, its more probable that visitors click on your affiliate links than the second type.
    Signature

    I love warriorforum. zendegiyesabz

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2862356].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author heavysm
      I have seen sites with and without www. for their url's. Does this make a difference if it is included or not within the url?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2864220].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author momentumrider
        From what Ive heard it makes a difference in your SEO efforts. If you dont specify which one you want the search engines to prioritize then you might be losing half of the effectiveness of your SEO efforts because your backlinks might be using both types of url. There is a good discussion about url canonicalization on Matt Cutts blog if you want to check it out.


        Regards,
        Jon
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3364164].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HostStage
    Search about a plugin called popup domaintion, offer some free weeding speeches idea for people signing up and then monetize the subscribers with Clickbank.
    Do that and you`ll bank extremely well ^^

    Don`t forget to buy me a beer !

    Cheers !
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3364187].message }}

Trending Topics