Facebook vs. Blog or Static Site

12 replies
If I wanted to promote myself as, say, the best carpet cleaner in town, which would get better, faster results:

1) Making an Acme Carpet Cleaning website/blog and doing proper SEO, building links, etc.

2) Making an Acme Carpet Cleaning page on Facebook, making it open (as opposed to private), and building links to it?

Anyone with some experience want to weigh in? Can Facebook's favorable position in Google's eyes be used as leverage for quick ranking?
#blog #facebook #site #static
  • Profile picture of the author Kelvin Nikkel
    To answer your query, I think that in your long range plans, the website would be more permanent.

    Facebook would give you instant Google love, where are after your website is indexed and ranked it would be more relevant I think.

    I don't know about FaceBook but I DO know that if you used Twitter, you are able to localize your searches so that you can target your exposure. Which is what I think you might be interested in right?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231274].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TinkBD
    Hi Free - Why think in terms of either / or?

    I would suggest having a Facebook page but also have a web site (possibly built with WordPress)

    (Edited to add)

    I see that Twitter was also suggested. ;-) I have just spent the day working on a Twitter related project...

    At this point, I am also tying most of my offline clients into Twitter, as well... just as a standard practice.

    Again, I don't see any percentage in taking an either / or position for any of the options.

    Tink
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231280].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kelvin Nikkel
    You're absolutely right Tink

    Why choose one or the other, when they complement each other.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231301].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Freeman77
      Thanks for your answers. Yes, I will do both a traditional website and a Facebook page for this project. I was just wondering if FB would provide more immediate results, and whether it would likely rank above the webpage if both sites had the same amount of backlinks.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231359].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BradCarroll
    Try sending the same amount of links to each (this shouldn't take much extra time, with most methods I can think of. If you're buying links, see if you can get a discount).

    The things you learn when you drive the same number of links, from the same places, towards two different sites, will be lessons you can apply elsewhere (at least in that niche).

    I'm also willing to be that you get better conversions from your website--though I could be wrong!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231400].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AffiliateTraining
    You need to do your own website first, then tie the rest in, without doubt.

    Fast results will mean nothing if there isn't a "ground control" dept at the end of it.

    Do that first, then work on FB, T, etc.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231403].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TinkBD
      Originally Posted by AffiliateTraining View Post

      You need to do your own website first, then tie the rest in, without doubt.

      Fast results will mean nothing if there isn't a "ground control" dept at the end of it.

      Do that first, then work on FB, T, etc.
      Paul makes a very good point...

      It is of the utmost importance that a business have control over its assets -- in this case, the web site. Remember, an offline business in particular, is in it for the long haul. ;-)

      While both Facebook and Twitter are extremely effective right now it is important to remember that in each case,

      1) someone else is controlling the situation ... remember Squidoo

      2) and things change quickly... remember Squidoo

      Tink
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231549].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author blur
    I see it as your webpage as being your 'home' on the web and you want to get everyone to visit you at your house. Facebook, myspace, twitter are all just roads to get people to come over to your place.

    As said before, why not point all the roads to your house?
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231414].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Freeman77
    "Conversions" in this case is just picking up the phone, so I think Facebook may be almost as effective as a traditional site. I guess time will tell.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231471].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AffiliateTraining
    You actually need a website funnel to be honest. It needs to lead people from free, to low cost, to reasonable paying, to money shot, to (ultimately, if you're up for it) upfront seminar or some other kind of high-ticket item.

    That's if you're operating in the "info" biz, which I gather is what most are involved in here.

    You definitely need a website though. You're only just playing at it if you're thinking about sending your visitors anywhere else.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231595].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author RebeccaL
    Do both.

    Use the Facebook page to attract people, drive traffic to your site and provide a communication medium.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231955].message }}
  • Your website is the crown jewel. Your Facebook site is just a little stone to make the crown jewel look all the more majestic. Do both, but remember that you rule your domain.

    Personally, I would not put any of my business on Facebook. That is one creepy app. People talk about Google having too much information, but Facebook has your friends, family, hobbies, political leanings, pictures...
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1231967].message }}

Trending Topics