Should all article marketing threads be relegated to a sub forum

42 replies
As someone who regards article marketing as graffiti and spam I for one would like to see this happen. (ducks for incoming)

Article marketing is a supremly inefeicient way of getting traffic and marketing persay as it rquires the very things that Paul is now working to rid the forum of. Without proxies, auto submitting and spinners and other black hat nonsense it would never be viable

Its my opinion that the current crop of internet garbage creators would not have congregated in this forum if there wasnt this build up of article marketing people in the forum.

It dominates the main forum just like the email spammers did in the old days, it took a whole lot of persistance and pain to clear them out. It may be thats what we will have to go through to clear the latest batch of electronic spammers out.

Relagating them to a sub forum would make this easier and less painful.

Now I'm sure this has already been discussed by the super mods, and for now that doesnt seem to be the way they want to go

But I for one would jump up and down with joy if this happened.

Robert
#article #forum #marketing #relegated #threads
  • Profile picture of the author JayXtreme
    Should all article marketing threads be relegated to a sub forum?

    No, imho. But if the boss decides it should be, who am I to argue?

    Originally Posted by Robert Puddy View Post

    As someone who regards article marketing as graffiti and spam I for one would like to see this happen. (ducks for incoming)
    In which case.. you're probably not the best person to be discussing this kind of thing.

    Article marketing is a supremly inefeicient way of getting traffic and marketing persay
    No it isn't.

    as it rquires the very things that Paul is now working to rid the forum of.
    No it doesn't.

    Without proxies, auto submitting and spinners and other black hat nonsense it would never be viable
    Ummmm... Yes it would, and it is viable. VERY viable. Just because you don't know how something works... doesn't make it useless.

    Change the tools for people.

    Its my opinion that the current crop of internet garbage creators would not have congregated in this forum if there wasnt this build up of article marketing people in the forum.
    On this we probably agree. But not so strongly, you're looking at it in a very negative light. That's not good for discussion, clouds your judgement.

    Relagating them to a sub forum would make this easier and less painful.
    You are painting with a very broad brush there, Robert.

    Not all article marketers are damaging to the interwebz

    Have a great evenin'...

    Peace

    Jay
    Signature

    Bare Murkage.........

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048668].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ron Douglas
    Hey Robert, I actually raised this question over a year ago in a poll and 65% responded YES: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ing-forum.html

    I agree that it's inefficient in some ways, but I disagree that it isn't viable. Many people do really well with article marketing without using black hat tactics.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048701].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JAIDEEP2959
      Sub forum on 'Article Marketing' would be great.

      It will be very easy to navigate for aspiring article writers.

      Article marketing is a very efficient way to get targeted traffic to your website.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048715].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Robert Puddy
      Originally Posted by Ron Douglas View Post

      Hey Robert, I actually raised this question over a year ago in a poll and 65% responded YES: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ing-forum.html

      I agree that it's inefficient in some ways, but I disagree that it isn't viable. Many people do really well with article marketing without using black hat tactics.

      My view of the article marketing sect is certainly coloured by those that seek to manipulate the strategy, And to Jay I say yes I am painting with a broad brush stroke because of that.

      Still the question is should a group be allowed to dominate a forum in such away that it leads to the excess's that now have to be dealt with.

      the thread was started to bring that debate to the fore.

      Robert
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049052].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        Bob,
        the thread was started to bring that debate to the fore.
        It's a question, possibly a discussion, but not a debate. So there! Nyah!

        [insert 'talk to the palm' graphic here]

        Okay. Back to reality...

        I'm not a big fan of most sub-forums, but that's a personal thing. I do believe that one on a topic like this would need someone to actively moderate it, and they'd have to be experienced at both parts. That gets down to a fairly small group, not many of whom would want the task, even among those who'd have the credibility to do it without creating a storm.

        That doesn't even get into whether it's a good idea or not...


        Paul
        Signature
        .
        Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049084].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Robert Puddy
          Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

          Bob,It's a question, possibly a discussion, but not a debate. So there! Nyah!

          [insert 'talk to the palm' graphic here]

          Okay. Back to reality...

          I'm not a big fan of most sub-forums, but that's a personal thing. I do believe that one on a topic like this would need someone to actively moderate it, and they'd have to be experienced at both parts. That gets down to a fairly small group, not many of whom would want the task, even among those who'd have the credibility to do it without creating a storm.

          That doesn't even get into whether it's a good idea or not...


          Paul
          Paul

          I am hoping the steps being taken will be enough, Like you I hate the way this stuff has gone down the spam route

          It is closely analogous to the distinction between email publishing and spam.
          These would be my words exactly, we just have to seperate the good guys from the bad guys. And relegating them to sub forum, would (I think anyway) make the bad guys go away, so when the dust settles we will only be left with those that dont seek to leave graffiti every where.

          Maybe though taking away there influence by forcing them out of the WSO section will be enough to drive them off... I wish you luck with it

          Robert
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049130].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Nick Brighton
            Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post


            JVs.

            That's a laugh when you're a nobody. Good luck trying to get one unless
            you offer to slave as a VA for the person for a good 30 to 60 days for
            no pay.

            No thanks.

            I spend less money monthly than probably any other Internet marketer
            in existence. If you knew my monthly expenses, you'd laugh.

            My ROI per month is like 5000%

            How many of you hot shots make a 5000% ROI with your ad buys and
            pay per click expenses?

            Steve, could I add something?

            You don't need to work for 30 to 60 days as a VA for someone, in order to do a JV. In fact, I'd run a mile from a potential business partner who thinks it's morally sound to make me work for nothing, and lick their boots, just to get them to promote for me.

            All you really need to do is develop a relationship and give them something valuable in return for partnering with you.

            And your ROI is 5000% NOW, but when you think about it, that's back pay for all the years you spent busting your butt for nothing, wouldn't you say?

            Sure, it begins to become profit sooner or later, but I guess advertisers skip the years of working in debt to themselves, at the risk of losing some money upfront whilst testing.

            The thing is, advertising, when done right, should not cost you a penny. Article marketing, when done right or wrongly, costs you time...

            I respect your business model and ethic, but I do feel you're somewhat biased at times. (can't really blame you, because we all defend what we know works I guess!).
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049331].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
              Originally Posted by Nick Brighton View Post

              Steve, could I add something?

              You don't need to work for 30 to 60 days as a VA for someone, in order to do a JV. In fact, I'd run a mile from a potential business partner who thinks it's morally sound to make me work for nothing, and lick their boots, just to get them to promote for me.

              All you really need to do is develop a relationship and give them something valuable in return for partnering with you.

              And your ROI is 5000% NOW, but when you think about it, that's back pay for all the years you spent busting your butt for nothing, wouldn't you say?

              Sure, it begins to become profit sooner or later, but I guess advertisers skip the years of working in debt to themselves, at the risk of losing some money upfront whilst testing.

              The thing is, advertising, when done right, should not cost you a penny. Article marketing, when done right or wrongly, costs you time...

              I respect your business model and ethic, but I do feel you're somewhat biased at times. (can't really blame you, because we all defend what we know works I guess!).

              Hell yeah I'm biased. And why shouldn't I be. I've probably spent less
              money in 7 years than most marketers spend in a month.

              Having said that, if I had a personal PPC expert who would write my
              ads for me and do all my keyword research for me and had 100K in the
              bank to piss away, I probably would have never wrote any article in my
              life.

              I would have just hired the guy to run my campaigns and just collect my
              checks each month.

              And think about how bored I'd be too.

              My model isn't for everybody and I never said it was. But to totally dis it
              like Robert did is wrong too.

              That's all I'm saying.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049370].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Jeremy Kelsall
                Mass submitting, and spinning are not Black-Hat tactics.

                Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make it black-hat. I sure as hell hope Paul reigns in these types of blanket statements...If not, this place could be ruined for ALL OF US.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049396].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
                  Mass submitting, and spinning are not Black-Hat tactics.
                  Assuming they're used to submit to sites that want the articles, they're not even light grey.

                  The problem with spinning is the aesthetics, not the ethics. Most "spun" articles are unintelligible garbage. If you can't tell it's been spun, it's not a problem, in my view.


                  Paul
                  Signature
                  .
                  Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049445].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Ernie Lo
              Nick I understand your point as Im sure Steve does too but you need to realise that Steven LOVES WRITING. Do you think he cares too much that he had to slave away writing the thousands of articles he has written?

              He had one dream and that was to make money online working for himself and he has accomplished that. He has basically won the lottery, because anyone who doesnt have to go to a 9 to 5 job slaving for a boss is one lucky SOB.

              It doesnt matter how you get to your dream as long as you get there in the end and are young enough to enjoy it as Steven has done.

              Article writing isnt the best, easiest nor fastest way to make a income online but it works...and if done right can work well.

              If more of the gurus got it into the heads of the newbies that it takes hard work and discipline to make it online (and they all worked as hard as Steven), we would have a LOT more successful newbies here dont you think?



              Originally Posted by Nick Brighton View Post

              Steve, could I add something?

              You don't need to work for 30 to 60 days as a VA for someone, in order to do a JV. In fact, I'd run a mile from a potential business partner who thinks it's morally sound to make me work for nothing, and lick their boots, just to get them to promote for me.

              All you really need to do is develop a relationship and give them something valuable in return for partnering with you.

              And your ROI is 5000% NOW, but when you think about it, that's back pay for all the years you spent busting your butt for nothing, wouldn't you say?

              Sure, it begins to become profit sooner or later, but I guess advertisers skip the years of working in debt to themselves, at the risk of losing some money upfront whilst testing.

              The thing is, advertising, when done right, should not cost you a penny. Article marketing, when done right or wrongly, costs you time...

              I respect your business model and ethic, but I do feel you're somewhat biased at times. (can't really blame you, because we all defend what we know works I guess!).
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049496].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author grayambition
        Originally Posted by Robert Puddy View Post

        Still the question is should a group be allowed to dominate a forum in such away that it leads to the excess's that now have to be dealt with.

        the thread was started to bring that debate to the fore.
        Robert
        You are conflating two entirely separate issues.

        1. Do we want/need sub-forums for certain topics? Maybe yes, maybe no. That's for the forum owner/mods to decide.

        2. Is article marketing a valuable, productive form of marketing, or is it pure spam? I believe that question has been more than adequately, and in some cases brilliantly, answered by Jay, Steven, Allen, and others, so I won't enter that fray for now.

        Suffice it to say that if article marketing is the evil you proclaim it to be, posts about it should be banned along with all the other BlueFart stuff, rather than given their own forum. (That's NOT what I think should happen - just following this to its logical conclusion.)
        Signature

        Jan Weingarten
        Substitute "damn" every time you're inclined to write "very"; your editor will delete it and the writing will be just as it should be. ~Mark Twain

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049513].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Nick Brighton
    Robert, sorry mate but I'm with Jay on this one.

    Article marketing embraces the essence of the web. Content, which leads to links. If there were no articles, there would be nothing to link to, and no reason to visit any sites.

    I think you're simply getting one type of article marketer/marketing lumped in with the genuine methods.

    I agree, the spinners and manipulators give article marketing a bad wrap, but would it be right to tarnish good writers and content marketers with the same brush?

    I'm not really sure moving it to a sub forum would help, or whether it would simply allow the bad eggs to get a tighter grip over the subject, as fewer watchful eyes would frequent such a sub forum?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048709].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lgibbon
    Banned
    Originally Posted by Robert Puddy View Post

    Should all article marketing threads be relegated to a sub forum
    Maybe, but not before the "offline" threads get relegated.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048725].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author timpears
    Originally Posted by Robert Puddy View Post

    Article marketing is a supremly inefeicient way of getting traffic and marketing persay as it rquires the very things that Paul is now working to rid the forum of. Without proxies, auto submitting and spinners and other black hat nonsense it would never be viable
    Robert
    So I am curious Robert, what method(s) do you use that you feel are better than article marketing.

    My results so far with article marketing SUCK. So I tend to agree with you on this. But I hear so many people say that they make good money and get good traffic from article marketing, so, who am I to say it isn't so?

    So tell us Robert, what is the better way(s) you think that drive traffic to your money pages?

    Inquiring minds want to know.
    Signature

    Tim Pears

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048737].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ernie Lo
    Robert you're so off the mark on this one it aint funny. Jay summed up my thoughts pretty much so I wont bother repeating.

    Having said that if Article marketing is "infesting the web" then the same must be said for pretty much every marketing method out there.

    Open your eyes a little, no offense.

    Have a great day,
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048746].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ken Leatherman
    INCOMING !!
    DUCK PUDDY!

    Robert the first question that came to my mind after reading your post was: "Who peed in your porridge this morning?

    As one who uses article marketing; I resemble that remark. However, andthat is a big however, I in no way consider it as graffiti or spamming. It is a legitimate way to market ones services and products.

    IMHO, if one can contribute good and helpful information and gets it into the hands of the people seeking this information; why the heck not?

    As far as having a separate sub forum, perhaps yes and perhaps no. As it would make it easier to find the "article marketing" information, I agree. But moving the article marketing threads from the "Main Discussion Forum", there would be many who may well miss valuable information.

    Your broad paint brush sloshes paint on everybody, who uses this tactic, for driving targeted traffic to their sites. And for many of these folks, it may well be the only stepping stone, they can afford, to try and better their life.

    Ken Leatherman


    The Old Geezer
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048807].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
      (waiting until steam has finished coming out of ears)

      As an article marketer who has NEVER mass submitted one article in his
      life and makes a very good living off of article marketing, I am beyond livid
      at your remarks.

      I'll leave it at that because if I say anything else I am likely to regret it.

      :rolleyes:
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048882].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Ernie Lo
        LOL I was waiting for you to see this ridiculous thread.

        Go on Steve let it out all out, we want to hear how you made $28 in 5 months and how article marketing got you where you are today




        Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post

        (waiting until steam has finished coming out of ears)

        As an article marketer who has NEVER mass submitted one article in his
        life and makes a very good living off of article marketing, I am beyond livid
        at your remarks.

        I'll leave it at that because if I say anything else I am likely to regret it.

        :rolleyes:
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048950].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Marhelper
        Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post

        (waiting until steam has finished coming out of ears)

        As an article marketer who has NEVER mass submitted one article in his
        life and makes a very good living off of article marketing, I am beyond livid
        at your remarks.

        I'll leave it at that because if I say anything else I am likely to regret it.

        :rolleyes:

        I am with you on this one Steven.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049596].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sylvia Meier
    I don't even know how to respond to that post honestly.

    Yes, as with an marketing method, there are those that abuse and spam the **** out of sites with crap, rehashed, uneducated articles, but there are also those who do it completely white hat.

    There are too many who make sole incomes off of article marketing to say that it doesn't work.

    As someone who regards article marketing as graffiti and spam I for one would like to see this happen. (ducks for incoming)
    I cannot even believe a marketer such as yourself would hold such a belief, but to each their own I suppose.

    Article marketing is a supremly inefeicient way of getting traffic and marketing persay as it rquires the very things that Paul is now working to rid the forum of. Without proxies, auto submitting and spinners and other black hat nonsense it would never be viable
    Yes, I auto submit, but I only autosubmit to the select few directories I believe in. I don't spin, use proxies or any other things of the like. I don't encourage anyone to mass submit or use any black hat methods nor would I ever.


    It dominates the main forum just like the email spammers did in the old days, it took a whole lot of persistance and pain to clear them out. It may be thats what we will have to go through to clear the latest batch of electronic spammers out.
    As I've only been here two years I cannot comment to what that resembled, but right now there are very few posts on the front page of the main forum that discuss article marketing at all.

    I am just very shocked to see such a post.


    I don't know if you've ever tried it, so I won't comment to that effect, but the broad sweeping damnations you make on article marketers I believe is very incorrect and extremely unprofessional, as someone said higher up, who peed in your porridge? I mean just look at some of the names associated with article marketing, and ask youself if you truly believe these marketers to be of the class you just painted them to be.

    Just my 2 cents.

    Sylvia
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048939].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Zeus66
    Perhaps Puddy was referring to the more traditional meaning of article marketing... where you use it just to blast away with crappy articles in order to get a ton of backlinks. I can see his point there. But it has evolved in recent years. Wags is a good example of a completely non-spammy way to use it very successfully. And people like Tim Gorman, Dean Shainin, etc.

    As with most forms of online marketing, there's good and bad. Spam doesn't indict all forms of email marketing, as one example.

    john
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2048955].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Bob,

      Like with many situations, it's easy to mistake the masses for the target. That leads to problems.

      It is very possible, as some have mentioned here, to do article marketing effectively and profitably. That benefits primarily two groups: Those that have no money and those that have a lot of talent or skill.

      I will agree with your main point, though: A lot of the problems here stem from people who think an article is any group of 200-350 words, broken into smaller blocks of text that look like paragraphs, each containing strings of letters arranged into patterns that look, from a distance, like sentences.

      Basically, unintelligible gibberish, posted for the purpose of getting a link. That is what fuels the virtual littering, abuse and nonsense that comes with a lot of what people call article marketing.

      I've looked at the articles some people here call "quality content," and an awful lot of it is pure trash. An embarrassment to any literate person. Keyword porridge, and thin at that.

      Why? You have people who couldn't write a shopping list in their native English paying people who can barely read a shopping list in English as a second language to compose content with specific keyword densities, for little money and in less time. Then they put these poorly composed blobs of alphabet stew through a spinner, which further muddles them, and post them automagically and uninspected to all sorts of places. Many accept them to boost their own meaningless numbers, and it's a race to the bottom.

      That's not "article marketing." That's spewing trash.

      It is closely analogous to the distinction between email publishing and spam. The people who can fix this problem are the places that accept the trash, not us. All we can do is try to avoid adding to the problem by allowing or teaching the destructive methods.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049009].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
      Not discounting the possibility that somebody has hijacked Robert's account
      in order to post such dribble, let me say this.

      Are there quicker ways to earn a living online?

      You betcha.

      I can name pay per click and ad buys as two off the top of my head.

      JVs are super fast in getting quick results.

      Here are the problems with those 3.

      1 and 2 take money...lots of it.

      But number 1 takes even more than just money.

      Ever try to run a PPC ad when you didn't know your ass from your elbow?

      Do you have any idea how much is involved with PPC advertising? Again,
      just off the top of my head.

      • Keyword Selection
      • Geographic Targeting
      • Ad Writing
      • Proper Landing Page
      And there's more...

      As to the money part, tell somebody who is living in a shoebox and just
      trying to get up enough money to pay the electric bill so he can keep his
      PC on that he has to shell out $100 a day on PPC costs to make any kind
      of a decent return.

      Good luck with that.

      As for ad buys, the costs are even more.

      JVs.

      That's a laugh when you're a nobody. Good luck trying to get one unless
      you offer to slave as a VA for the person for a good 30 to 60 days for
      no pay.

      No thanks.

      Article marketing, if you're going to write legitimate, helpful articles, and
      not spam the sh*t out of every directory in existence takes time.

      But it also takes more than just submitting to article directories.

      You should also be doing the following:

      • Posting To Your Own Blog
      • Guest Authoring At Other Blogs
      • Packaging Articles As Free Reports
      • Using Articles As Autoresponder Followups
      • Social Bookmarking Your Articles
      • Spreading Word Of Your Articles Through Twitter, Facebook, etc.
      There's more, but I'll stop there.

      It took me years to write thousands of articles and get to where I am
      today.

      But guess what?

      I spend less money monthly than probably any other Internet marketer
      in existence. If you knew my monthly expenses, you'd laugh.

      My ROI per month is like 5000%

      How many of you hot shots make a 5000% ROI with your ad buys and
      pay per click expenses?

      Let's see, if you spend $100 a day on PPC, that's $3,000 a month.

      To get a 5000% ROI, you'd need to make $15 million a month.

      How many you guys doing that?

      Article marketing inefficient?
      Article marketing crap?

      More like the mindsets of some people need to little adjusting.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049054].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Ron Douglas
        Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post

        I spend less money monthly than probably any other Internet marketer
        in existence. If you knew my monthly expenses, you'd laugh.

        My ROI per month is like 5000%

        How many of you hot shots make a 5000% ROI with your ad buys and
        pay per click expenses?

        Let's see, if you spend $100 a day on PPC, that's $3,000 a month.

        To get a 5000% ROI, you'd need to make $15 million a month.

        How many you guys doing that?

        Article marketing inefficient?
        Article marketing crap?

        More like the mindsets of some people need to little adjusting.
        I understand the point you're trying to make but I can't resist disagreeing with the math. ROI is overrated when you look at it in percentages instead of gross profit.

        Example A: $100 X 5000% = $5,000

        Example B: $3,000 x 500% = $15,000

        I'd much rather be example B.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049601].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
          Originally Posted by Ron Douglas View Post

          I understand the point you're trying to make but I can't resist disagreeing with the math. ROI is overrated when you look at it in percentages instead of gross profit.

          Example A: $100 X 5000% = $5,000

          Example B: $3,000 x 500% = $15,000

          I'd much rather be example B.
          Actually Ron, there is nothing wrong with my math. I used to calculator
          to do it.

          ROI = (Income/Expenses) x 100%

          It's that simple.

          My ROI is 5000%

          If anybody has a 5000% ROI on expenses of $3,000 a month, I'd love to
          see it.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049796].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Ron Douglas
            Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post

            Actually Ron, there is nothing wrong with my math. I used to calculator
            to do it.

            ROI = (Income/Expenses) x 100%

            It's that simple.

            My ROI is 5000%

            If anybody has a 5000% ROI on expenses of $3,000 a month, I'd love to
            see it.
            I didn't say your math was wrong. You misunderstood my reply.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049813].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
              Originally Posted by Ron Douglas View Post

              I didn't say your math was wrong. You misunderstood my reply.
              You're right, I did. Sorry about that.

              But for somebody who doesn't have $3,000 a month to spend, it's a moot
              point.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049819].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Ron Douglas
                Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim View Post

                You're right, I did. Sorry about that.

                But for somebody who doesn't have $3,000 a month to spend, it's a moot
                point.
                Go one month with your ROI and you should have the money to spend to make even more the next month.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049822].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
                  Originally Posted by Ron Douglas View Post

                  Go one month with your ROI and you should have the money to spend to make even more the next month.
                  Minus what it will cost to hire an expert at PPC to make sure I don't toss
                  my money down the toilet because of bad keywords, bad targeting or
                  bad ads.

                  Like I said...not everybody is an expert at putting together a PPC campaign.

                  If they were, we wouldn't need books on Adwords, which by the way, I
                  have and still haven't given me more than a marginally profitable campaign
                  to date. In fact. my profit % on average is about (let's do the math)

                  Average $ spent per month ($60)
                  Average Income per month ($200)

                  That comes out to about a 333% ROI.

                  It's nowhere near what I get on my articles.

                  Yeah, I know. I spend 10 x that amount and make an extra 2K a month.

                  For the headaches of having to watch over an ad campaign and add more
                  hours to my day, 2K isn't worth it...not at this stage of my life.

                  Please don't get me wrong. I am not discounting this method of promotion
                  for somebody who...

                  1. Has the money
                  2. Has the smarts
                  3. Has a viable niche with lots of potential where you're not spending $1
                  per click or more.

                  IMO, PPC is too much trouble. I can't be bothered with it...not now when
                  I have thousands of articles already out there bringing me an average of
                  10-20 new subscribers daily.

                  But like I said, for the right person, I can definitely see going this route
                  and never writing one article as long as they live.

                  Especially if they can't write their way out of a paper bag.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049853].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Robert Puddy
      Originally Posted by Zeus66 View Post

      Perhaps Puddy was referring to the more traditional meaning of article marketing... where you use it just to blast away with crappy articles in order to get a ton of backlinks. I can see his point there. But it has evolved in recent years. Wags is a good example of a completely non-spammy way to use it very successfully. And people like Tim Gorman, Dean Shainin, etc.

      As with most forms of online marketing, there's good and bad. Spam doesn't indict all forms of email marketing, as one example.

      john

      This was my point yes see post above

      Stephen i am not arguing with real articles, I am railing against the abuses that are used in its name, and the fact that we allowed this sub group of neanderthals to sneak in and over run the forum

      Taking years to get to where you are is not what they want, they want to use all the trash ways to cut the corner and get there by disfiguring the rest of the internet.

      That unfortunatly has allowed the forum to be hijacked

      And while I could get behind the whole of Pauls post, I find myself disagreeing with this statement

      It is very possible, as some have mentioned here, to do article marketing effectively and profitably. That benefits primarily two groups: Those that have no money and those that have a lot of talent or skill.
      The no money part is irelevant, only the part about skill is

      If your poor but talented then knock your self out..

      But poor and using black hat stuff to level out your lack of talent is not kosher

      Robert
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049057].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Allen Graves
      Originally Posted by Zeus66 View Post

      Perhaps Puddy was referring to the more traditional meaning of article marketing... where you use it just to blast away with crappy articles in order to get a ton of backlinks. I can see his point there. But it has evolved in recent years. Wags is a good example of a completely non-spammy way to use it very successfully. And people like Tim Gorman, Dean Shainin, etc.

      As with most forms of online marketing, there's good and bad. Spam doesn't indict all forms of email marketing, as one example.

      john
      Actually, traditional article marketing has nothing to do with mass submitting and/or spamming or anything like that. Back...WAYYYY back, we used to have to be interviewed and provide example literature that we wrote in order to be published online. And it worked very well!

      It wasn't until around 2004 that people started abusing it. Then around 2006 it really hit the fan.

      Anyway - I agree that this is probably what Robert was referring to - but Robert, be careful because you just painted me with those nasty words too - and I am all about ethics, white-hat and integrity. Yes, it still works that way.

      And there are a few more VERY ethical marketers I know of that use article marketing successfully.

      Don't worry, Robert, I believe that the people you are referring to will be weeded out very soon. Not by the Warrior Forum...but by Google, the other SE's, article repositories and website owners alike. In fact, it is already happening.

      Allen Graves
      Signature
      Every day I check the obituaries. If I don't see my name there, then I know it's going to be a good day!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049471].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jay Jennings
    I hate the idea of every topic being broken out into a sub-forum -- that just makes it hard to keep up with the "general" flow of the marketing world.

    I hate it, until I want to do some research on a given topic -- then it's wonderful.

    So here's my suggestion...

    Make WF work like iTunes -- you have the Library, where ALL your music is, that would be this forum...

    ...and then you have playlists, where you specify certain types of songs in each. Those songs in the playlists still live in the Library, but they're grouped by type, length, whatever.

    So you could have sub-forums that contain only those threads tagged with "article marketing," video marketing," "MLM," etc.

    In fact, give users a way to create their own "playlists" and you'd have people swooning with delight.

    Because then Robert could create his playlist to show everything MINUS anything tagged with "article marketing" and he'd never have to see it again.

    When can we see that feature, Allen? =

    Jay Jennings
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049330].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
    Robert - Article marketing is legitimate marketing. Just because you don't find it worthwhile doesn't mean your results apply to everyone.

    Furthermore, citing the worst of the lot to make your case seems slightly disingenuous. That's like saying email marketing is crap because some people spam.

    Lastly, dividing a forum into too many sub-forums is often counterproductive. Look how many sub-forums there are already. How many do you visit? I visit this main forum and the War Room. I ocassionally check out a sub-forum, but that's probably once a month or less.

    If the pie is divided into smaller and smaller pieces, pretty soon none of the pieces offer enough food to be satisfying. There's a lot to be learned by reading a diversity of topics.

    Besides, the moderators have to do enough thread moving as it is, adding another topic for them to monitor will only increase their workload.
    Signature

    Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049493].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Edie47
      I agree with Dennis and others, that article marketing is not all trash as Robert seems to believe. I know a number of good writers who make a viable income writing articles. Just because there are those who spin to their hearts content and turn out trash does not mean all article writers should be seen as black hat. Good quality content is still king and many article writers provide that content.

      Whether the article writer discussoins should be sent to a subforum, I haven't been on here long enough to have an opinion on that topic. Sometimes it helps to have subgroups so that people who want to focus on those areas can. On the other hand, it might spread to wide a net with members having to make even more decisions about where to post and what to read. I am sure the powers that be will make the right decision for this forum.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049886].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
    Banned
    We have a forum owner who makes those decisions that ... goodness. I'm all for less "Let's do this or that to change Warrior Forum" threads and more discussions on how to make money, including with article marketing.

    It is Allen's back yard .... he is capable enough to structure it as he sees fit... don't ya think?

    Just because some spammers spin out garbage does not mean that all article writers spin out garbage. I don't put garbage in my sites and many people don't.

    I wouldn't throw out article marketing as a viable marketing method just because some abuse it. A lot of marketers abuse just about any type of marketing they try ... doesn't mean the method is garbage ... it just means the marketers are spammers.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049547].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jennypitts
    Robert, you have "opened a Pandora Box"... For those who do not understand the concept let me explain... My husband's family is originally from Puerto Rico (in case noone knows, it is a little island in the Caribbean that is a US territory, it is gorgeus) anyway, my mother in law uses this IN ENGLISH but she translates it directly from Spanish and I am not entirely sure she realizes it is a weird translation. Well, it means that when someone suggests a something as drastic as what Robert has recommended, attributing his suggestion to an assortment of perhaps "self encountered" reasons it is going to rain OPINIONS both in favor and against. As well as all the hidden "secrets" no one knew about or you would not want known. NOW, I am not sure that I am being understood here, especially since I rarely understand when my mother in law uses the phrase, but I know for sure she relates it to controversial topics.

    This said, I think it is a matter of self opinion and self experiences. Article marketing as some have said here, HAVE BEEN a great way to make money for MANY warriors. In addition, those of use that use it for SEO purposes, if done RIGHT, they do serve a positive purpose.

    NOW, I think that if Article Marketing is "SPAM" and others agree with your Robert (which I doubt that many will) then moderators should simply eliminate those threads completely. BUT, since I know for a fact that the majority of the people who implement this tactic as part of their SEO techniques as well as to make money, do SO in an ethical, informative and well written manner. OF course there are many people that simply stuff the articles with keywords, use junk articles spit out through terrible spinners, and even plagiarize someone else's work. BUT the truth is, it happens with everything. You will ALWAYS have people do things by the book, work hard and honestly earn a buck, while there are others who will stop at nothing to be unscrupulous.

    Hey... that is simply my two cents in this "opened box of pandora"...
    Signature
    Traffic Exchange - Solo Ads - Contact Solo Ads
    Social Networking For Internet Marketers to Increase Traffic to Referral Program or Site.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049586].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CDawson
    Banned
    Article marketing is and always will be the best source of free traffic.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2049797].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Midas3 Consulting
    Relegated isn't the appropriate verbiage, it suggest something negative
    about what is, under many circumstances, no more than providing
    readers with quality solutions to their problems.

    Article marketing is, under the right conditions basically what every newspaper
    you read online is doing.

    See all those ads on the pages of your online newspaper, different model than
    a direct affiliate link to a product , but essentially it's about providing content
    which gets eyeballs which gets revenue. The entire Internet, is really one
    huge article marketing project.

    Those who submit solution based content to ezine articles etcare about one
    step away from a cookie stuffing office managed by Satan and those with
    a more corporate approach are saved from the criticism.

    That said...

    I don't think it would harm to generate a sub forum for article marketing
    within the main Internet Marketing forum.

    It could be beneficial to create a few sub forums, with a basic FAQ
    that appeared as a sticky at the top of each of those sub-forums.

    The FAQ would contain the basic answers to the identical questions this
    forum gets on a daily basis.

    The FAQ's could be added to organically as repetitive questions are
    dealt with.

    This would then allow experienced members to simply link to the
    relevant section of the FAQ when people asked the same ol' stuff.

    Jay dealt with the rest to well in his initial post to bother adding
    further comment.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2051141].message }}

Trending Topics