Why do you care about EZA approval times?

by Alexa Smith Banned
238 replies
I know EZA approval times are slower than usual at the moment.

I know they've had a particularly bad couple of weeks (for reasons we all understand), have a lot of other things to do, and are not firing on all cylinders just at the moment.

I know they've just recently doubled the amount of time allocated to editors to review all submissions, and this may have slowed them down to some extent.

I know that different people wait different amounts of time for approval (Premium, Diamond and Platinum authors in good standing - in that order - get the fastest service, and people on "Basic Plus", i.e. those whose submissions have previously caused problems/rejections, get the short straw, which is perhaps understandable and inevitable, to some extent).

I know that I'm using EZA a little differently from many other Warriors.

But none of these observations answers the question that puzzles me: why do you care?

Every thread we have about EZA at the moment (and for understandable reasons, that's quite a few) seems to be full of posts saying "I won't submit there any more because they take so long to approve). And I just can't understand why. What difference does it really make?

It seems to me that if you submit two acceptable articles per day there, then they'll steadily be publishing 60 of your articles per month; if you submit 3 per day, they'll be publishing 90 per month; if (like me) you submit one per day, they'll be publishing 30 per month.

Here's the point: after the initial lead-in, however fast/slow that is, they'll be publishing however many per month they'll be publishing, won't they? I mean, either EZA submission is part of your business model or it isn't surely?

Until the very recent delays, for the reasons we all understand, I was waiting about 7 hours for publication. Now I'm waiting up to 24 hours. But honestly, if it had been 7 days instead, it wouldn't have made the slightest difference to me.

I know people have other problems and dissatisfactions with EZA: they don't like the guideline changes (I do), they don't like the new excluded categories (I do), they don't like the inconsistency of editorial appraisal (it's never affected me) and I completely understand that these are all readily understandable reasons for people not liking EZA too much at the moment. All these things I understand. These are not what I'm puzzled by; nor what I'm asking about.

But what everyone's so consistently saying is that slow approval times are the reason they're not planning to submit to EZA any more.

I genuinely can't understand this at all. What am I missing, here?

Why do so many people care about approval time so much that they're apparently altering their business model over it?

Who can enlighten me, please?
#approval #care #eza #times
  • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
    In the occasion of a product launch, I could see someone wanting to be first to rank for what ever names/keywords they are using.

    Personally to me, it has never been an issue. I can get immediate approval with a youtube video.
    Signature

    "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563638].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Themeplated
    I think it's the issue of time and waiting. People want their content indexed as fast as possible, so that they can see results as fast as possible.

    Also, their guidelines are pretty sticky, and it's at times unclear what will and won't fly with them, hence why it's even more annoying to wait and then have your content turned down.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563669].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Fireworksable View Post

      People want their content indexed as fast as possible, so that they can see results as fast as possible.
      They'll already have it published indexed on their own sites, won't they, prior to EZA submission, surely? Sorry if I'm being dense, but why would that be relevant?

      We're surely not assuming that all the people no longer using EZA over this reason had been submitting original copies to EZA?! :confused:
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563689].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ymest
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        They'll already have it published indexed on their own sites, won't they, prior to EZA submission, surely? Sorry if I'm being dense, but why would that be relevant?

        We're surely not assuming that all the people no longer using EZA over this reason had been submitting original copies to EZA?! :confused:
        Well, Alexa I bet they are! As you explained in so many of your threads many can't seem to understand the difference between article marketing and article directory marketing....I for one was part of this after signing up for a course that taught me that "NO MATTER WHAT" you had to submit to Eza and then once published you could submit elsewhere! This truly was my understanding of things but is no longer!

        It was clearly a very short-term business(plan) as if..it had been one in the first place but there again when you get into IM there is so much stuff out there that you pick what seems right, easy and so on!

        You do seem to have a really good grasp of IM, SEO , probably much more knowledge than some of us! Don't get mad at us! Lol!

        Anyway, I believe that your threads have shed some lights (the missing ones) on a HUGE PART of what article marketing is/ can be/ should be, unless you want to BURN OUT churning out hundreds of articles a weeks and submitting to article directories in the hope of making sales! I have done it in the past and it did work but as you previously mentioned, this isn't a sustainable business model!

        That's my take on it! Thanks to Eza...I am sure many of us have learnt a lot and thanks to your contribution as well as other very knowledgeable people here!

        Yoan
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564211].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
        Banned
        Wait, do people put original content on their site and then submit the same content to EZA?

        Hopefully not, for their sake.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564829].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author oneplusone
          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Wait, do people put original content on their site and then submit the same content to EZA?

          Hopefully not, for their sake.
          What's this got to do with the approval times :confused:
          Signature
          'If you hear a voice within you say "you cannot paint," then by all means paint and that voice will be silenced.' Vincent Van Gogh.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564881].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
            Banned
            Originally Posted by oneplusone View Post

            What's this got to do with the approval times :confused:
            Someone mentioned caring about approval times because that means slowing indexing. Then Alexa mentioned that you can put it on your site first.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564990].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Doug Wakefield
          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Wait, do people put original content on their site and then submit the same content to EZA?

          Hopefully not, for their sake.
          They do it so they are building up property they own as opposed to an article directory someone else owns. It is actually the smarter way to handle article marketing, though two highly successful article marketers will tell you that they don't rely mainly on their sites... though they are highly proactive at getting their content on other sites (that aren't EZA.)

          For most people they will be better served by putting the content on their site and then submitting it once it gets indexed.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564911].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Doug Wakefield View Post

            They do it so they are building up property they own as opposed to an article directory someone else owns. It is actually the smarter way to handle article marketing, though two highly successful article marketers will tell you that they don't rely mainly on their sites... though they are highly proactive at getting their content on other sites (that aren't EZA.)

            For most people they will be better served by putting the content on their site and then submitting it once it gets indexed.
            I understand putting content on your site, I DON'T understand why you'd take that same content and put it on EZA right after that. Google tends to pick one version of an article, why you'd take the chance that they'd pick the EZA one is beyond me.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564995].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Doug Wakefield
              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              I understand putting content on your site, I DON'T understand why you'd take that same content and put it on EZA right after that. Google tends to pick one version of an article, why you'd take the chance that they'd pick the EZA one is beyond me.
              You get it indexed on your site first so the odds of that happening is slimmer. It will still happen with a new site, but as you keep doing this your site will win out more often. With the current slap, this is even less of an issue.

              I'm sure she will pop in here and explain it better than I ever could. I'm just a student, she is the teacher.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3565027].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kierkegaard
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        We're surely not assuming that all the people no longer using EZA over this reason had been submitting original copies to EZA?! :confused:
        This is something I can not understand.

        The idea that sending original writing to EZA is a mistake... is a mistake.

        I used to write articles for my own sites then later submitted these articles to EZA. After I woke up and started writing articles, specifically designed to attract people onto my sites (rather than for people already on my sites) my traffic from EZA doubled.

        My sales increased, not just because of the increase in visitors, but because the people I attacted were people interested in making purchases rather than 'interested in finding out more about the product/service'.

        Your readers on EZA make up a different audience than the readers browsing your site. If you create ebooks, the people reading will be a different audience than the ones you had on EZA or your blog.

        Just as you wouldn't (or shouldn't) reuse website content to create an ebook, you shouldn't reuse website content on EZA. I'm not saying it's impossible, just that you wouldn't be creating very good ebooks or submitting very good content to EZA.

        (There is an exception but this may not be relevant for most Warriors. If you have a informational site not intended to sell anything, then you can submit your articles to EZA).
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564952].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Doug Wakefield
          The part you are missing is that she is indifferent about the traffic that she receives from EZA. The people she wants finding her articles there are not random surfers (she puts the content on her site FIRST so those surfers end up on her site to begin with)... she does it for the syndication benefits (or the true purpose of the article directories to begin with.)

          It is her hope that the traffic for her articles ends up either on her site... or on the site of another webmaster who picked up the article, which is more likely to be better converting traffic than EZA ever could be.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564970].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Raindance
          Originally Posted by Kierkegaard View Post

          This is something I can not understand.

          The idea that sending original writing to EZA is a mistake... is a mistake.

          I used to write articles for my own sites then later submitted these articles to EZA. After I woke up and started writing articles, specifically designed to attract people onto my sites (rather than for people already on my sites) my traffic from EZA doubled.


          Just as you wouldn't (or shouldn't) reuse website content to create an ebook, you shouldn't reuse website content on EZA. I'm not saying it's impossible, just that you wouldn't be creating very good ebooks or submitting very good content to EZA.
          Aren't these statements in bold conflicting?
          Signature
          Making Money without Websites
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567529].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kierkegaard
            Originally Posted by Raindance View Post

            Aren't these statements in bold conflicting?
            Yes they do conflict.

            That is because the first statement refers to something I used to do in the past. And the second statement refers to something I do now in the present.

            If you could travel back in time and speak to me then, I would advise you to post your articles to your site and then post the same articles on EZA (ezinearticles).

            If you returned to the present day and asked my advice, I'd tell you to write articles specifically for ezine.

            The two pieces of advice would both be from me and be conflicting.

            Whether you agree with old me or new me (or holding on to see what me:2029 has to say) in all cases I'd say that EZA approval times don't really matter.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567620].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Raindance
              Originally Posted by Kierkegaard View Post

              Yes they do conflict.

              That is because the first statement refers to something I used to do in the past. And the second statement refers to something I do now in the present.

              If you could travel back in time and speak to me then, I would advise you to post your articles to your site and then post the same articles on EZA (ezinearticles).

              If you returned to the present day and asked my advice, I'd tell you to write articles specifically for ezine.

              The two pieces of advice would both be from me and be conflicting.

              Whether you agree with old me or new me (or holding on to see what me:2029 has to say) in all cases I'd say that EZA approval times don't really matter.
              Well, you said it out loud and clear for me and I really wanted a straight answer like that but still I hear so much of article syndication and the great traffic people reap from it. I still don't have a clear image of the battle between syndicated content and duplicated content. Even in this thread, on multiple occasions, submitting original content to EZA has been looked upon like an abomination. On the other hand, ezine is strictly accepting only original work. What are we supposed to do? :confused:

              Ali
              Signature
              Making Money without Websites
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568264].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author myob
                In the offline world, syndication in newspapers has been going on for well over a century. The most widely known syndication services are the Associated Press (AP) and Reuters for example. But it appears syndication is a revolutionary concept here in the WF. Why is there such a disconnect and so hard to grasp that the main function of article directories is for syndication? :confused:
                Signature
                “If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” – Isaac Newton
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568402].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author tpw
                Originally Posted by Raindance View Post

                On the other hand, ezine is strictly accepting only original work. What are we supposed to do? :confused:

                Unless something has changed in the last week, EZA is strictly accepting only "original content written by you".

                They have not said that they want "unique content submitted only to them".
                Signature
                Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568446].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Kierkegaard
                  Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                  Unless something has changed in the last week, EZA is strictly accepting only "original content written by you".

                  They have not said that they want "unique content submitted only to them".
                  TPW is correct.


                  Ali,

                  The discussion over whether to post the same article on your blog and to EZA is one of strategy. Some people think it is better to post to EZA first, then to their blog. Others think that you should post to your blog first then EZA. A minority it seems (of which I am a member) think you should write articles for EZA and different articles for your blog. This has NOTHING to do with EZA rules.

                  Some people WRONGLY argue that EZA will not allow writers to submit articles that have be published anywhere else. This is not true. If your appear appears with your name on it, it's fine.

                  Some people believe WRONGLY that if the same article appear on EZA and their blog then Google will punish them for duplicate content.

                  Hope that clears it up.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568985].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                    Banned
                    Fair point Mr. Platt. I will concede that I do my fair share of mocking. All in good fun of course.

                    I referred to the "Article Syndication Syndicate" because it reminds me of the way "The Syndicate" works.

                    1) Thread on article marketing
                    2) Exchange of ideas. Leader is challenged by someone.
                    3) Article Syndication Syndicate circles the wagons to defend their leader.
                    4) Group of 3 or 4 exchange "Thank You's" back and forth with each other.
                    5) If all else fails, they mock and say "Well, you're a hater and you just don't get it".
                    6) Repeat tomorrow..unless it's a weekend and Dave Rodman is busy skiing in Vermont.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569596].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Rumpleteazer
            Not had any problems having my articles approved at EZA - same timescale as usual.

            Your articles are approved instantly at Go Articles - but my articles there don't rank as well and get only a fraction of click throughs than I do at EZA.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567690].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author walesfootball
    I would totally agree with you on the time frame, and it doesn’t matter how much people rant it is unlikely to change things. Not using Ezine because of this would be a case of cutting your nose off to spite your face.

    What does surprise me however is to see Diamond authors with 8-10 articles submitted, if Diamond is to be considered a prestigious goal it seems strange to award this after so few articles, however good the quality.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563697].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by walesfootball View Post

      What does surprise me however is to see Diamond authors with 8-10 articles submitted, if Diamond is to be considered a prestigious goal it seems strange to award this after so few articles, however good the quality.
      That isn't what's happened, Wales: that's like seeing "Platinum Author, 5 articles" - it's telling you that that's just a pen-name, and that the author actually has many more under other names, that you can't see.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563795].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
        Alexa,

        You know you're doing it the right way.

        Lets not spend too much time worrying about the "others".

        If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

        I think it's the difference between wanting cash now and building a long standing and surviving business, both of which, as we know, are worlds apart.

        If 2 weeks is too long, well, my old man must be a mushroom.
        Signature

        Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563823].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Michael Shook
          I suspect that many folks do not view article (directory) marketing as a long term idea. Lots of people have lots of issues with writing. And the thought that they will need to write a many articles (well ,more than a 10 article blast submission) is daunting to them.

          Soe folks try things almost hoping they will not work becasue they did not want to do them in the first place, but they heard somewhere that such and such a tactic was going to get them instant traffic or rankings or instant something, so they try it even if they don't want to.

          When you are doing things you don't like, for reasons that are not your own but that somebody told you, it is easy to find ways to fail.

          Writing is one of those things. Some folks I have spoken with, still think that writing for the internet is like writing was back in school They hated it then, and they hate it now. So it is way easy to find fault.
          Signature


          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563914].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author alcymart
          Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

          If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
          Richard is right, and his statement above strikes a cord here. We are at a time where we will try everything and anything. We must remain smart. Money grows on "trees of patience" folks.

          Bernard
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564801].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Tina Golden
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        That isn't what's happened, Wales: that's like seeing "Platinum Author, 5 articles" - it's telling you that that's just a pen-name, and that the author actually has many more under other names, that you can't see.
        Did I read the TOS incorrectly then? I was under the impression that each pen name had to earn Platinum separately.
        Signature
        Discover how to have fabulous, engaging content with
        Fast & Easy Content Creation
        ***Especially if you don't have enough time, money, or just plain HATE writing***
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564414].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Doug Wakefield
          Originally Posted by Tina Golden View Post

          Did I read the TOS incorrectly then? I was under the impression that each pen name had to earn Platinum separately.
          Platinum just applies to the account in general. You only have to hit that mark once.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564420].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Tina Golden View Post

          I was under the impression that each pen name had to earn Platinum separately.
          Noooooo, only once, collectively - and all the pen-names get it simultaneously. (Which is fair enough, surely? It's an indication to their editorial staff of the "standing" of the author, after all? Which "shouldn't" vary according to the name under which they're writing?). Which explains why you see authors whose profiles describe them as "Platinum member, 3 articles" and so on - a clear giveaway that it's a pen-name.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564504].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    People are upset that they are not the center of EZA's universe.

    And to get even, they are going to aim the bazooka at the ground and blow their foot off to drive home the point.
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563713].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author christopher jon
    Because they are short sighted and impatient.

    I don't think people realize that a couple of hours or a couple of days doesn't mean a thing if you are in this business for the long run.
    Signature
    It buys my product or it gets the hose
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563720].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author SEOaaron
      Originally Posted by christopher jon View Post

      Because they are short sighted and impatient.

      I don't think people realize that a couple of hours or a couple of days doesn't mean a thing if you are in this business for the long run.
      All about the long run!
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570512].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alex Barboza
    I like that EzineArticles does this, that way, when they accept my articles they are already indexed by Google in my site first so that I can have credits as the author, not EZA.

    On a side note, I can't understand why people get so many articles rejected. I have never had one, even after the Google thing everyone is talking about, and I am not a native English speaker (yes, I write most of my content myself)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563722].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author spectrecom
      Originally Posted by Alex Barboza View Post

      I like that EzineArticles does this, that way, when they accept my articles they are already indexed by Google in my site first so that I can have credits as the author, not EZA.

      On a side note, I can't understand why people get so many articles rejected. I have never had one, even after the Google thing everyone is talking about, and I am not a native English speaker (yes, I write most of my content myself)
      Exactly. If you follow their rules and don't use spinners, it doesn't take you very long at all to get accepted. Speeds up after a while too.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564033].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ofthemix
    I think it depends on your business model, your patience level, and your organization skills.

    You submit your article to your site first, you submit your article to EZA, you wait for them to approve it, which varies in time. The problem is, for a lot of people who do 'article directory marketing' as you like to call it, they have to wait for their article to be accepted on EZA before they can post it anywhere else . . . which can be a real pain in the butt depending on what type of account you have with EZA.

    As you've also mentioned, submitting your article to EZA does not help boost the PR of your site directly from that submission alone, given that your article will have a PR0. For those that do 'article directory marketing', all that they're concerned with is getting as many low PR backlinks as possible. Given that the backlink they will get from EZA is just another PR0, perhaps they don't feel that it's worth the time waiting for approval when they could get tons of links in the time that it would take EZA to approve one of their articles.

    I'd personally rather wait for EZA to approve an article, as it has has syndication benefits beyond any other article directory that I've seen. A lot of people, however, don't care so much about that.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3563744].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Hlatky
    Wait....... you mean I can do something else while my articles are being approved?

    I only submit 1 every so often because I hear article marketing died.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564005].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
    Alexa, you well know that most people on Warrior Forum aren't article marketers, they are article directory marketers(You coined this term I believe) whom rely on quick approval for quick short term traffic, with the possibility of quick cash. Because that is what they have been taught to believe and how to operate from reading through all those IM products they have bought.

    Notice, I haven't mentioned a thing about building a stable long term business.

    Chris
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564017].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author RichardDean
    My site is live in 2 hours... where is my EZA approval at????

    I don't understand I gave them the article 10 minutes ago :-(


    Why is no one prepared?

    As a graphic designer I get this all the time
    " I need graphics can you do them by noon as my site goes live then "

    Be prepared

    Richard
    Signature

    5 Minute Mobile Sites... My Next WSO Comming Soon.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564046].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Sorry, I have run out of "thanks" for the day (just on my way to Oklahoma now to join Bill's harmonica band in time for Monday's rehearsal) but thank you all very much for your comments ...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564074].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KenJ
        Hi Alexa

        Your point is completely right and valid.

        However I had an occasion to try and "Show Off" the power of articles to a customer. My normal 48 hour approval time went to 5 days for this particular article.

        This really put the mockers on my "Impressive" Demonstration to this customer.

        So this would be one reason to want fast approval - but I admit, not a very good one.

        For my own business I submit, safe in the knowledge that approval will come through eventually.

        Kenj
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564141].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Bozigian
        I agree with Alexa, but some people are quitting using Ezine because they get rejected as in: NOT ENOUGH ORIGINAL CONTENT, or GRAMMER ERRORS and ETC.

        The only part I am having trouble in is with the NOT ENOUGH ORIGINAL CONTENT.


        Me, I dont care about how long they take to review, but when I write my articles, which is 1 per day also, I take my sweet time (1-2hours) and after the wait, if I get rejected because ezine says their is NOT ENOUGH ORIGINAL CONTENT, then I am a little frustrated that I spent my 1-2 hours only too get my article rejected?

        Sorry, but it dont really affect me cuz I submit that same article to other directories which means more doors of traffic.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564155].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Ben Armstrong
          It's these damn gen y kids. They want everything yesterday and they don't want to work for it :p
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564179].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
            The only times I've ever had a problem getting an article accepted, the problem was both self-inflicted and easily cured. Things like typos in URLs so they don't show up, tagging an article with the wrong pen name, etc.

            Other than that, it's been a smooth sail. So if the ride takes a little longer, I'm down with that...
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564243].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Hamida Harland
              But none of these observations answers the question that puzzles me: why do you care? :confused:
              To be honest I'm not really bothered why other people care. I prefer to get on with building MY business, and keep out of most of these virtually pointless discussions about article marketing and EZA (this isn't one of them by the way, but I'm sure most of us have seen Alexa ask the same question before).

              I've seen so much misinformation about article marketing and EZA bandied about here (especially in the last few weeks), that I don't even get involved in article marketing threads much any more. Mainly because I find it frustrating that those who actually know what they're talking about end up repeating themselves, and those who actually need to listen, don't.

              People could learn alot if they actually listened to the experienced article marketers here, many of whom freely share their strategies. Unfortunately it's like banging your head against a brick wall trying to explain things like 'why EZA approval times don't matter'.
              Signature
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564326].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
              There could be many reasons why approval times are important.

              For example, let's say you have a news oriented site. If you're writing
              about current events, which I sometimes do, you don't want your article
              published 7 days after the event. It's pointless.

              Naturally, there are exceptions, such as news events that last for days or
              even weeks, such as the unfortunate disaster in Japan.

              Still, you want to be the first one with the story and your viewpoint.

              That's the key...not so much the story itself but your slant on it and,
              ultimately, the reason why people will read your commentary over somebody
              else's.

              That's just one example.

              Product launches is another.

              Product reviews are always a big part of my marketing. Sure, I'll put the
              review on my own blog first, but for people who aren't aware of my blog
              and do go to EZA, I want them to see my review before somebody else's.

              EZA's approval times, while not affecting me now (I hardly write anymore
              anyway) could affect me if I were to do something that was time
              sensitive.

              Having said all that, the typical marketer shouldn't really require fast
              approval, especially if you're writing "how to" articles that, quite honestly,
              could be published at any time without any real consequence as to the
              time factor.

              Of course this is just my opinion and anybody is welcome to disagree.

              But the bottom line is this. What EZA is doing right now means about as
              much to me as the road construction going on in Wayne, NJ.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564343].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author frankfihn
    Signature

    The world's most controversial small business marketing plan - http://www.modernworkers.com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564348].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author marciayudkin
      Alexa,

      Let me give you a real-life example of when approval times have mattered to me.

      About a year ago I developed a new area of interest (Marketing for Introverts). I developed a special marketing funnel for that topic, and an annual seminar on the topic. When it was time to add articles to that funnel, I write a series of articles and contracted with an article distribution service to send the articles out. Unfortunately this service had a backlog and the articles were not distributed until after the ideal time for getting people into that funnel that year had passed.

      The article distribution still benefited me, but not as much as I had hoped had the article distribution been timely.

      Given that so people start their promotions much later than they should (I have observed this for years!), I completely understand that any unexpected delays might make folks upset.

      Marcia Yudkin
      Signature
      Check out Marcia Yudkin's No-Hype Marketing Academy for courses on copywriting, publicity, infomarketing, marketing plans, naming, and branding - not to mention the popular "Marketing for Introverts" course.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564403].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Bozigian
        People dont like change but change may be good.

        Since people are accustomed to not having change. Change to them means it is either good or bad. Since Ezine is not really changing as a whole, it has become more strict and it just takes longer. This is not a change, but a change of properties that people have discovered with Ezine and because Ezine has changed its properties, it is considered as a bad change to its people.

        People dont want to wait, but they depend on one independent property because they dont want to change and are impatient. and because they are impatient, any change to them will cause a "bad" change. Thus ezine has changed its propertiers but has not "changed"

        ------------
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564428].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Valtan
      Originally Posted by frankfihn View Post

      very true!
      However,.. you can produce good content and submit it to EZA
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3606549].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jordan Kovats
    I think that people in general, don't like change. So, the fact the Ezine 'changed' things last month, brings a big 'unknown' to this month. For example, I put up a dozen or so articles the end of the first week of the month...by week 2, they are usually published, and I go off and do my thing. This month, I maintain my routine, but it is now the end of the 3rd week, and those same articles have not yet been publshed. Therefore, what I knew, i.e. my routine, has now changed.

    I agree with your initial synopsis, it doesn't really matter when they get published. I will adapt. So I have to exchange my week 2 and week 3 activities, big deal. The fear of change and the fear of the unknown, usually gets a lot of people complaining, but if you put it in perspective, it really isn't that big of a deal.

    P.S. If I based my SEO strategy around what Matt Cutts said, I probably wouldn't rank at all. just sayin...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564392].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author spycraft
    Personally, i don't care about approval times, but approval. EZA doesn't seem to approve anything after the update.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564587].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cypherslock
    Some people might have clients that are awaiting links.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564770].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author alcymart
    It all comes down to "Patience" concerning EZA. I doubt they are turning their thumbs around down there. It must be very busy, and that's what makes it better than others. We get our Money's worth if I can say it that way...

    Bernard
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564785].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author rts2271
      This is like asking, why is Sanskrit so hard?

      Who cares, it's a dead language. People need to quit kicking this dead horse and accept the fact that the smell, the flies, the rigor, mean it's dead.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564799].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Damani Tabor
        Originally Posted by rts2271 View Post

        This is like asking, why is Sanskrit so hard?

        Who cares, it's a dead language. People need to quit kicking this dead horse and accept the fact that the smell, the flies, the rigor, mean it's dead.
        The horse has turned to crude oil and I'm still bitching over EZA! lol
        Signature

        For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.
        - Google beware!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3565828].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Martin Luxton
          Alexa,

          Speed is vital - ya snooze ya lose!

          This is why I use Godaddy instead of Namecheap.

          A new Godaddy domain propagates on the internet in 8 minutes 14 seconds (on average) while a Namecheap domain takes 8 minutes 19 seconds.

          I'd be stupid to use Namecheap and leave money on the table.


          Martin
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3565981].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author thedog
            If you're reviewing a new product, is it not better to get your articles approved on authority article sites, such as EZA, asap?

            Yes, you can have your article on your own blog, but chances are, people will find it through EZA or the like... when it eventually appears.

            It's the difference between your competition getting their articles up in 3 days compared to you in 3 weeks.

            I thought this was obvious? or maybe I'm missing something here?

            If you're developing a long term niche then there's no real rush, but it's nice to see your articles up, generating traffic sooner rather than later.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3566070].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Steve Faber
    Alexa,

    Don't we just want all the whiners to stop submitting their (generally sub par) articles to EZA altogether anyway? Just a thought.
    Signature
    For Killer Marketing Tips that Will Grow Your Business Follow Me on Twitter Now
    After all, you're probably following a few hundred people already that aren't doing squat for you.....
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3564817].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
    Doug, ignore Dave, he just loves to argue.

    What Dave and his ilk are unable to comprehend is that professional article marketers do not use EZA for traffic or SEO, we use EZA as a bridge. A bridge to build connections with ezine and blog owners who wish to syndicate our content, putting it in front of their readers. And in doing so, send us a load of highly targeted pre-sold traffic, far superior to what Google could ever send us.

    Dave is one of a large group of unfortunate people who are under the false illusion, that in order to have a successful online business, Google is the be all and end all when it comes to traffic, and decided to build his business's foundation on sand.

    Chris
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3565380].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Chris Worner View Post

      Doug, ignore Dave, he just loves to argue.

      What Dave and his ilk are unable to comprehend is that professional article marketers do not use EZA for traffic or SEO, we use EZA as a bridge. A bridge to build connections with ezine and blog owners who wish to syndicate our content, putting it in front of their readers. And in doing so, send us a load of highly targeted pre-sold traffic, far superior to what Google could ever send us.

      Dave is one of a large group of unfortunate people who are under the false illusion, that in order to have a successful online business, Google is the be all and end all when it comes to traffic, and decided to build his business's foundation on sand.

      Chris
      Haha. You're funny. I've been doing "Article Syndication" since 2006. I just also find it easier to actually put my best foot forward in the search engines and through syndication...and that usually doesn't entail just *******izing my content across the web.

      The whole "Article Syndication Is The Answer" movement will probably pass in a few months, but I do think it's funny to see this in action. A handful of diehards fawning over a certain poster and making syndication out to be some kind of miracle worker. Haha.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3565621].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
        Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

        Haha. You're funny. I've been doing "Article Syndication" since 2006. I just also find it easier to actually put my best foot forward in the search engines and through syndication...and that usually doesn't entail just *******izing my content across the web.

        The whole "Article Syndication Is The Answer" movement will probably pass in a few months, but I do think it's funny to see this in action. A handful of diehards fawning over a certain poster and making syndication out to be some kind of miracle worker. Haha.
        Hi Dave.

        I'm amazed at this gem of wisdom. You are an article syndicator and have been doing it since 2006? Wow, I would never have guessed that in a million years, I can only assume you've failed miserably at it, with the way you seem to talk about it. You are the one person that syndicates articles but always comes in to argue with the people that do what you do. You think it'll pass in a few months too? Dave, I've only been doing it a year and the results have been astounding for me.

        If you're struggling and you'd like me to show you how to do it well, send me a PM, I could mentor you!

        Clearly article syndication isn't the answer for you but it works and hasn't been affected in any way, for me, by these changes. It's not the answer, it's something, when done correctly, that works. For some anyway.

        A handful of diehards fawning over a certain poster and making syndication out to be some kind of miracle worker. Haha.
        Or a handful of very successful people doing syndication, making it work and agreeing with someone that's doing very well indeed?

        But then, we see the world in different ways.

        Beside, this is off topic, the thread title is...

        Why do you care about EZA approval times?
        Signature

        Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3566518].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
        Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

        The whole "Article Syndication Is The Answer" movement will probably pass in a few months,
        I strongly doubt it, actually.

        Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

        ... but I do think it's funny to see this in action.
        Yes; hilarious. :rolleyes:

        For myself, it's just frustrating. I laugh not because I want to, but because it's preferable to gauging out my own eyes with a rusty spoon and chewing them.


        Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

        A handful of diehards fawning over a certain poster and making syndication out to be some kind of miracle worker. Haha.
        Fawning?

        I know you're referring to Alexa when you say "over a certain poster". And what do you think—the people agreeing with her and backing her up only do so because she has a hot avatar photograph in which she's scantily-clad, or something?

        Well ye... NO. :rolleyes:

        Change your avatar and I doubt it'll much affect how many here respond to you in discussions like this.

        Nope ... the simple truth of the matter is that she commands more respect and attention, when it comes to article marketing, because her logic is far more sound and consistent than yours. Huh huh huh—now that's funny.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3566804].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Frank Marker
          Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

          Fawning?

          I know you're referring to Alexa when you say "over a certain poster". And what do you think--the people agreeing with her and backing her up only do so because she has a hot avatar photograph in which she's scantily-clad, or something?

          Well ye... NO. :rolleyes:

          Change your avatar and I doubt it'll much affect how many here respond to you in discussions like this.

          Nope ... the simple truth of the matter is that she commands more respect and attention, when it comes to article marketing, because her logic is far more sound and consistent than yours. Huh huh huh--now that's funny.
          Alexa writes very coherent posts. However, what she writes is opinion.
          Looked at objectively, there is no evidence provided to prove that what she says works or doesn't work. I can appreciate that people don't want to post links to articles they have written or websites they operate.

          Undoubtedly, if you have a female username and a hot picture, you will receive more attention that those that don't. Her posts are usually followed by comments that, with the best will in the world, are best described as 'fawning'. I have seen several threads in which she has made the same point as other posters but their efforts don't receive quite as many enthusiastic hurrahs.

          Having said this, none of it detracts from her as knowledgeable person when it comes to article marketing. With the possible exception of her avatars, there's not much she can do about the fawning.

          To answer the original question: Alexa already knows why people care about approval times. Surely this thread would have been more useful as an article on the subject rather than a question directed at the forum in general when the answer doesn't really matter.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567083].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
            Originally Posted by Frank Marker View Post

            Alexa writes very coherent posts. However, what she writes is opinion.
            Looked at objectively, there is no evidence provided to prove that what she says works or doesn't work. I can appreciate that people don't want to post links to articles they have written or websites they operate.

            Undoubtedly, if you have a female username and a hot picture, you will receive more attention that those that don't. Her posts are usually followed by comments that, with the best will in the world, are best described as 'fawning'. I have seen several threads in which she has made the same point as other posters but their efforts don't receive quite as many enthusiastic hurrahs.

            Having said this, none of it detracts from her as knowledgeable person when it comes to article marketing. With the possible exception of her avatars, there's not much she can do about the fawning.

            To answer the original question: Alexa already knows why people care about approval times. Surely this thread would have been more useful as an article on the subject rather than a question directed at the forum in general when the answer doesn't really matter.
            Hello Frank,

            I do actually know how successful she is and how much she earns. So, if you feel what she says is opinion and that in actual fact she may be working in McDonalds for all you know, there's not much point listening to her.

            As for whether what she does works, I'll explain briefly how I got into article marketing. I originally wrote articles and posted them all over the article directories so I'd get lots of backlinks and lots of traffic. Sadly I didn't get much of a backlink boost and the traffic made very few sales. When I came here I began reading a lot of her posts, I began implementing what she was doing and in the last 6 months, I've done very nicely out of it (it is only a small part of my business, not all of it). Now of course this may just be my opinion and it's just based on her opinion etc. Everything you see here could just be opinions. The question is, are her and others opinions based on facts or assumptions?

            I'm sure there are people here that fawn over her and there are others like myself and Mike who happen to respect her and from my point of view, I'm grateful to have learned from her and to have had my income supplemented as a result of it.

            Surely this thread would have been more useful as an article on the subject rather than a question directed at the forum in general when the answer doesn't really matter.
            I think Frank, it was in response to the endless threads being started on exactly the subject she decided to write upon. I'd imagine, in an effort to put an end to them as they were a bit tedious. If the answer didn't matter, it wouldn't have been one of the most discussed topics since the farmer update.
            Signature

            Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567197].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

        Haha. You're funny. I've been doing "Article Syndication" since 2006. I just also find it easier to actually put my best foot forward in the search engines and through syndication...and that usually doesn't entail just *******izing my content across the web.

        The whole "Article Syndication Is The Answer" movement will probably pass in a few months, but I do think it's funny to see this in action. A handful of diehards fawning over a certain poster and making syndication out to be some kind of miracle worker. Haha.

        Dave: You are the article marketing troll, because you provide just enough information in your posts to irritate people. Your real motivation would be better understood if you were answering posts with something more than a snipe.

        For those who want to understand Dave Rodman, the article marketing troll, read this.

        I would suggest that article syndication really is the holy grail for people "with talent and commitment to their readers".

        As I know you are aware, you must write great content to be considered by newsletter publishers. And I know you are well aware that the gold in article marketing is in the few newsletters that can help your articles reach the precise audiences you want to reach.

        Article syndication cannot save those who don't have any talent or commitment to their readers.

        Yet, it will always be a blessing for those who care about their readers and write the kind of content that helps publishers and readers achieve a specific goal.

        Great writers will always discover ways to find their audiences, through syndication.

        Poor writers will always look for shortcuts to impress Google and lure unsuspecting souls into their nets.

        Article syndication through EZA is only a small part of the process. I would be surprised if you disagreed, but I never knew which newsletter publishers mattered to me until I was published in those newsletters.

        Once published in a specific newsletter, I knew which publishers precisely that I would take my articles to in the future.

        Exclusive Reprint Rights? For the right newsletter, absolutely.

        But until you know which newsletters matter to your business, EZA is one of my recommended sources to use to seek out an audience for your articles.

        Dave, you may have grown beyond the need to use EZA or any other method to find your audience, but you should refrain from mocking those who are still looking for their best places to be published.
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567883].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
          Banned
          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

          Dave: You are the article marketing troll, because you provide just enough information in your posts to irritate people. Your real motivation would be better understood if you were answering posts with something more than a snipe.

          For those who want to understand Dave Rodman, the article marketing troll, read this.

          I would suggest that article syndication really is the holy grail for people "with talent and commitment to their readers".

          As I know you are aware, you must write great content to be considered by newsletter publishers. And I know you are well aware that the gold in article marketing is in the few newsletters that can help your articles reach the precise audiences you want to reach.

          Article syndication cannot save those who don't have any talent or commitment to their readers.

          Yet, it will always be a blessing for those who care about their readers and write the kind of content that helps publishers and readers achieve a specific goal.

          Great writers will always discover ways to find their audiences, through syndication.

          Poor writers will always look for shortcuts to impress Google and lure unsuspecting souls into their nets.

          Article syndication through EZA is only a small part of the process. I would be surprised if you disagreed, but I never knew which newsletter publishers mattered to me until I was published in those newsletters.

          Once published in a specific newsletter, I knew which publishers precisely that I would take my articles to in the future.

          Exclusive Reprint Rights? For the right newsletter, absolutely.

          But until you know which newsletters matter to your business, EZA is one of my recommended sources to use to seek out an audience for your articles.

          Dave, you may have grown beyond the need to use EZA or any other method to find your audience, but you should refrain from mocking those who are still looking for their best places to be published.
          Oh, I think you're misunderstanding the thread. I'M not the one mocking. Go back and read the thread more closely.

          1) OP posts a question.

          2) People respond with "You know why they care, because they are article directory marketers...hahahahaha. When will they learn like we have?!?!?!"

          3) I question why people would put their original content on their site AND another site.

          4) Responses from the Article Syndication Syndicate about how I'm stoopid for not seeing the brilliance of article syndication.

          5) Me clarifying that I do article syndication, but am doing the same thing I have been doing when I pop in these threads. Present the other side.

          See, where some people think I'm bashing article syndicating. I'm actually in favor of it, but not exclusively.

          And people putting their own content on their site AND EZA is bad advice. The response from The Article Syndication Syndicate? "Oh!!! Look at Dave. Just ignore him. He bows to the Almighty Google!!!! He's just not doing Syndication right. He hates article marketers!!!!"
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568047].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
            Dave Rodman - Article Syndication Syndicate about how I'm stoopid for not seeing the brilliance of article syndication.
            Hi Dave, I don't think you're stupid at all chap. I just don't see the point in the snipeing. From what I can see, you syndicate stuff in a very similar fashion to Bill. You say you...

            Present the other side.
            ....If you did that in a well structured and slightly less belittleing manor, perhaps Bill wouldn't be calling you a troll? Look at ExRat Roger, he nearly always presents "the other side" but he does so in a way that encourages nothing but friendly discussion.

            This isn't a case of the article syndication syndicate (notice how you've coined that phrase) ganging up on you but the way you conduct yourself.

            Today genuinely was the day I realised you had anything to do with article marketing at all, such was the strength of your arguements for "the other side", I like you better now, knowing you're really a secret member of the syndicate! :p
            Signature

            Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568198].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

          you should refrain from mocking those who are still looking for their best places to be published.

          Like I said, I submit Exhibit A on the subject of who is mocking who.


          Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

          Genius.

          You're so right. When I want to find something out, I don't Google it, I spend hours looking through EZA.

          If I want to know what's happening in the world, I don't watch the news, I go to EZA.

          When my Mum wants to find out the latest hair fashion stuff, she doesn't look for fashion stuff online, she goes to EZA.

          When my Dad was ill, he didn't go to the Doctors, he went to EZA.

          I kneel down to them all the time. I love them. I kiss my screen whenever I see EZA on my computer screen. Woooooooo. :rolleyes:

          Exhibit B:

          I mocked him too...

          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

          Originally Posted by thecodemeist3r View Post

          ezine is the no1 article directory on the planet, everyone goes there to find out quality information - thats why you want to kneel down to Ezine

          Jim Jones loves ya man...

          He is grateful that you are encouraging people to kneel down at the Kool-Aid bowl. :rolleyes:

          You aren't above mocking others yourself... :p

          Exhibit C:

          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          I thought was going to be "TAKE MASSIVE ACTION!!!!!"

          Exhibit D:

          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Wow. So there is a push-button system that can triple traffic?!?!?!?!

          Exhibit E:

          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Really? THe warriorforum is a forum? And the digitalpointforum is a forum too?

          Exhibit F:

          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          You're right. It makes total sense that people would ask to buy from an individual they don't know over a large well-known company. I'm sure that happens all the time. :rolleyes:

          We can put this part of the argument behind us, eh?

          After all, Richard mocks people, I mock people, and you mock people... LOL


          This is the comment I was referring to when I said you were mocking people in this thread:

          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          A handful of diehards fawning over a certain poster and making syndication out to be some kind of miracle worker. Haha.
          On review, it is just "snide" rather than "mocking".

          So I will stand corrected in my suggestion to "refrain from mocking"...

          LOL

          Definition of Mocking - derisive: abusing vocally; expressing contempt or ridicule.

          Source
          Definition of Snide - supercilious: expressive of contempt.

          Source
          Note to Self: While both words describe contemptuous behavior, "mocking" involves more substantive ridicule...


          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Oh, I think you're misunderstanding the thread. I'M not the one mocking. Go back and read the thread more closely.

          1) OP posts a question.

          2) People respond with "You know why they care, because they are article directory marketers...hahahahaha. When will they learn like we have?!?!?!"

          3) I question why people would put their original content on their site AND another site.

          4) Responses from the Article Syndication Syndicate about how I'm stoopid for not seeing the brilliance of article syndication.

          5) Me clarifying that I do article syndication, but am doing the same thing I have been doing when I pop in these threads. Present the other side.

          See, where some people think I'm bashing article syndicating. I'm actually in favor of it, but not exclusively.

          And people putting their own content on their site AND EZA is bad advice. The response from The Article Syndication Syndicate? "Oh!!! Look at Dave. Just ignore him. He bows to the Almighty Google!!!! He's just not doing Syndication right. He hates article marketers!!!!"

          Dave: I am not going to defend other folks in this thread, because you are mostly right.

          A lot of what people had said to you and about you was incorrect.

          That is the reason my OP to you also almost :p defended you in part:

          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

          For those who want to understand Dave Rodman, the article marketing troll, read this.

          Yet, I stand behind my post, especially where I said to you:

          Originally Posted by tpw View Post

          Dave: You are the article marketing troll, because you provide just enough information in your posts to irritate people. Your real motivation would be better understood if you were answering posts with something more than a snipe.

          You attract a lot of negative energy to you.

          And you do so, because few people are clear on exactly what you believe about this subject.

          And you also attract a lot of negative energy, because you seem to make it your mission to destroy the credibility of the "Article Syndication Syndicate" as you describe it, without clearly defining "why" they are wrong.

          Because you don't always define the "why", it appears that you have a personal axe to grind against the "who", as evidenced in this post:

          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          A handful of diehards fawning over a certain poster
          That good sir looks like a personal smear of several people...

          When you appear to be targeting the "who" instead of the "why", your behavior angers people and attracts negative attention to you.

          You can fix this perception of you, if you are inclined to do so.

          While I do occasionally snipe and mock others, there is rarely doubt as to why I am doing so... Because people generally already know where I stand in the overall conversation...

          You may think I am wrong, and you are free to say so... As long as you are willing to show why I am wrong, I will listen without getting angry...

          And if I think you have it wrong, I will tell you why, and you can take it as you want.

          That is what they call a discussion, and that is the reason the forum exists -- to foster discussion of topics important to the participants...

          Your turn...
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568917].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KatyaSenina
    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


    Why do so many people care about approval time so much that they're apparently altering their business model over it?
    I guess, many marketers depend on them for traffic? Maybe they think it slows their business down as they are in a hurry for fast traffic? I don't know (I personally wouldn't depend on them for it) I've noticed that it's just a waste of time to bother with article directories for traffic...as the traffic you usually get from them will be very poor anyway. It might increase overtime, but still, it's not worth it, unless you get into the most viewed/most published section and stay there or unless your article ranks in google.

    Anyway, I have something else I wanted to ask you, I recall you once said in some thread, can't remember which one, that your articles were already syndicated BEFORE they even appeared on EZA. Makes me wonder; why do you still bother with EZA?

    Do many people really find your articles on EZA and re-publish them on their sites? Just curious, cuz I feel like it's very rare (for most people for that to happen)... I mean EZA has tons of articles, what are the chances someone will pick up and re-publish one of their articles?

    I guess my point is, what purpose does EZA really serve in your business? I mean if you already have your articles published somewhere else before they get on EZA (or shortly after EZA has approved them), why bother with EZA?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3565766].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author KatyaSenina
      Ok this thread has gotten way out of hand. People arguing and trying to prove their points. But whatever.

      Alexa, if you read this, I wanted to ask you something... the quote below goes into more detail. I think you've overlooked my reply with all the fuss going on in this thread. I'm really curious what purpose EZA serves in your business... I don't want to repeat myself, but I think you might want to read the quote below as it goes into more detail. Thank you.

      Originally Posted by KatyaSenina View Post

      Alexa, I have something else I wanted to ask you, I recall you once said in some thread, can't remember which one, that your articles were already syndicated BEFORE they even appeared on EZA. Makes me wonder; why do you still bother with EZA?

      Do many people really find your articles on EZA and re-publish them on their sites? Just curious, cuz I feel like it's very rare (for most people for that to happen)... I mean EZA has tons of articles, what are the chances someone will pick up and re-publish one of their articles?

      I guess my point is, what purpose does EZA really serve in your business? I mean if you already have your articles published somewhere else before they get on EZA (or shortly after EZA has approved them), why bother with EZA?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574819].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KenJ
        Originally Posted by KatyaSenina View Post

        Ok this thread has gotten way out of hand. People arguing and trying to prove their points. But whatever.

        Alexa, if you read this, I wanted to ask you something... the quote below goes into more detail. I think you've overlooked my reply with all the fuss going on in this thread. I'm really curious what purpose EZA serves in your business... I don't want to repeat myself, but I think you might want to read the quote below as it goes into more detail. Thank you.
        Brilliant question (In the original post by KatyaSenina) - This is the sort of stuff that I think about too!!
        Because I am unsure of the answer I work. And that brings me success. But I would love to know the answer.

        Once Again - Brilliant question - Thankyou

        Kenj
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577013].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author KenJ
      Originally Posted by KatyaSenina View Post

      I guess, many marketers depend on them for traffic? Maybe they think it slows their business down as they are in a hurry for fast traffic? I don't know (I personally wouldn't depend on them for it) I've noticed that it's just a waste of time to bother with article directories for traffic...as the traffic you usually get from them will be very poor anyway. It might increase overtime, but still, it's not worth it, unless you get into the most viewed/most published section and stay there or unless your article ranks in google.

      Anyway, I have something else I wanted to ask you, I recall you once said in some thread, can't remember which one, that your articles were already syndicated BEFORE they even appeared on EZA. Makes me wonder; why do you still bother with EZA?

      Do many people really find your articles on EZA and re-publish them on their sites? Just curious, cuz I feel like it's very rare (for most people for that to happen)... I mean EZA has tons of articles, what are the chances someone will pick up and re-publish one of their articles?

      I guess my point is, what purpose does EZA really serve in your business? I mean if you already have your articles published somewhere else before they get on EZA (or shortly after EZA has approved them), why bother with EZA?
      This is the post I should have quoted above - Its late here in the UK - night night

      Kenj
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577031].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kierkegaard
    Everyone writes as if we're all promoting the same product or service. For some niches having your article on an authority website may bring in more traffic, or better traffic, than an article appearing on EZA. For other niches there are no appropriate authority websites.

    This is besides the point. The reality is that the people worrying about waiting times for EZA are the people struggling with article marketing. They are anxious to see if the one or two articles they've managed to write have gone live or not. With experience, you know that all your articles will be accepted, pretty much how much traffic you'll get per article, and that the submission process is boring. This being so, you only visit EZA to drop off your articles and leave.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3565950].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author sellerscompanion
      I never really cared about the approval times at EZA either. I don't normally submit to article directories anymore, but even when I did it regularly it was just a part of daily business. Once I hit submit, I moved on with the next task I needed to do. It would be far too distracting to worry over the exact timing of my approval, so I would rather control what I can control.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577274].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Frank Marker
    My point about opinion was that until evidence is presented to support a person's claims then these claims can only be taken as opinion.

    Everyone has an opinion. If I get a strange pain, lot's of people offer an opinion but the opinion I trust most is my doctor's opinion. After he's carried out tests, he can show me evidence to support this opinion. Then, if my doctor says I've got a stomach ulcer, I'm pretty sure I have one.

    Due to the nature of the forum, people can not provide evidence to support their opinions. When it comes to article marketing, Alexa may be more like at doctor and less like the man in the pub who thinks he's a medical expert. Referring to her posts as opinion isn't intended to detract from them in any way.

    I disagree with her on several key points and this comes from my own personal experience. Based on what I know, I can predict with reasonable accuracy, that some people following her advice will gain by it and others will lose by it. But she isn't offering advice on an individual, case by case, basis so we can't expect single unified theory of article marketing.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567251].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by Frank Marker View Post

      I disagree with her on several key points and this comes from my own personal experience. Based on what I know, I can predict with reasonable accuracy, that some people following her advice will gain by it and others will lose by it. But she isn't offering advice on an individual, case by case, basis so we can't expect single unified theory of article marketing.
      Hello again Frank,

      I like your Doctor analogy and I see where you're coming from.

      I think the problem is that what works for one person, simply won't for someone else. This is clearly something that applies to you as you've experienced this. I think with the products I'm promoting and the way I'm doing so, I have seen a lot of success, this may not be the case for others.

      I think it's this diversity that allows forums like this to flourish, especially when you have 2 people doing the same thing, in a different manner but both having a good level of success.

      I always hit head on with Dave Rodman but the fact is we are both doing well and a lot of what we do is the same, we just rarely agree with each other. That doesn't mean either of us are right or wrong and in that sense it is indeed just our opinion.

      I also agree that there isn't a "single unified theory of article marketing" and it's this fact that causes these discussions.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567359].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Bacchus
    I care about EZA approval times because I want to post my articles to my site. Sometimes in the past, people have scrapped my site, and copied my articles. It can be difficult to get them to remove the articles they have stolen. If they do this in between posting to my site and EZA publishing, I am afraid EZA won't accept the article.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567668].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kierkegaard
    Go Articles is instant.

    About the only time instant approval is really useful is the very rare occasion that you spot something in the news that you know will suddenly become very popular but at the moment there is very little information available on the internet.

    Let's just say for example that you visit a news website and read a report, just gone live, about a brand new exercise craze called Bum-Bopping.

    You can quickly register a domain name like bum-bopping.com and stick up a Wordpress site filled with as much information as you can find. Leave your URL in a comment on the article on the newspaper site. Submit 4 or 5 articles to Go Articles for instant approval and then send 5 more to EZA.

    Your Go Articles will be in the top spots for Google and will be read several thousand times each, every day, sending traffic to your site like crazy.

    When EZA catches up and your articles are live the internet will be awash with your articles.

    Those instant Go Articles articles will give you a list 1000s of people strong in a couple of days.

    These situations are very rare though.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567811].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thecodemeist3r
    ezine is the no1 article directory on the planet, everyone goes there to find out quality information - thats why you want to kneel down to Ezine
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567923].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by thecodemeist3r View Post

      ezine is the no1 article directory on the planet, everyone goes there to find out quality information - thats why you want to kneel down to Ezine

      Jim Jones loves ya man...

      He is grateful that you are encouraging people to kneel down at the Kool-Aid bowl. :rolleyes:
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3567944].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by thecodemeist3r View Post

      ezine is the no1 article directory on the planet, everyone goes there to find out quality information - thats why you want to kneel down to Ezine
      Genius.

      You're so right. When I want to find something out, I don't Google it, I spend hours looking through EZA.

      If I want to know what's happening in the world, I don't watch the news, I go to EZA.

      When my Mum wants to find out the latest hair fashion stuff, she doesn't look for fashion stuff online, she goes to EZA.

      When my Dad was ill, he didn't go to the Doctors, he went to EZA.

      I kneel down to them all the time. I love them. I kiss my screen whenever I see EZA on my computer screen. Woooooooo. :rolleyes:
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568053].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
        Banned
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        Dave, you may have grown beyond the need to use EZA or any other method to find your audience, but you should refrain from mocking those who are still looking for their best places to be published.
        Like I said, I submit Exhibit A on the subject of who is mocking who.

        Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

        Genius.

        You're so right. When I want to find something out, I don't Google it, I spend hours looking through EZA.

        If I want to know what's happening in the world, I don't watch the news, I go to EZA.

        When my Mum wants to find out the latest hair fashion stuff, she doesn't look for fashion stuff online, she goes to EZA.

        When my Dad was ill, he didn't go to the Doctors, he went to EZA.

        I kneel down to them all the time. I love them. I kiss my screen whenever I see EZA on my computer screen. Woooooooo. :rolleyes:
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568115].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Like I said, I submit Exhibit A on the subject of who is mocking who.
          Davey, Davey, Davey.

          If you don't want to look stoooopid, you would understand my mocking this statement...

          ezine is the no1 article directory on the planet, everyone goes there to find out quality information - thats why you want to kneel down to Ezine
          ...or no doubt you want to present the "other side" and agree it is where everyone in the world goes for their high quality information and you yourself regularly go down on both knees for the almighty EZA
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568210].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author clever7
    Of course everyone wants to have their articles approved the fastest possible. Now, we have to show understanding to EZA's problems. They are delaying, while before they would approve all articles very fast (for Platinum members).

    You have to submit more articles, so that you may have one being accepted almost everyday.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568135].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
    Its funny.

    People sit on forums for days on end, and then whinge about "delays" from article approval teams.
    Signature

    BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3568373].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Raindance
    @Kierkegaard - I belong to the same category. Even I prefer writing separate articles for article directories. Recently, I was considering using the same content to give article syndication a try but I stopped with the excuse of requiring more education about it.

    @tpw - now I do have a better understanding of the whole thing.

    Thanks a lot both of you
    Signature
    Making Money without Websites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569624].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Grant
    I've had to stop using them for my seo service because of the lag time. I switched directories
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569641].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
      Banned
      Because you don't always define the "why", it appears that you have a personal axe to grind against the "who", as evidenced in this post:
      I don't have an axe to grind by the way. Look at this thread though. I made a comment about it not being a good idea to put your original content on your site AND an article directory. Without hesitation, The Article Syndication Syndicate comes into the thread and making the counter-point. Sorry, but my advice is commonsense. And just because YOU don't want search traffic, doesn't mean others reading their threads don't want it.

      This isn't an ego thing for me wanting to be right. Personally, article sydnication is just another tool in the toolbox. But the Article Syndication Syndicate will have you (Really, newbies) believe that you do it that way, even if it's to the detriment of other methods of generating SIGNIFICANT traffic i.e. search traffic. I don't consider wanting to get more search traffic to be bowing down to Google. I consider it taking advantage of an opportunity. Some of my pages convert at 9% with Google traffic. And if I'm throwing that out cause the Article Syndication Syndicate says "Google be damned", then I'm missing out on lots of money.

      But the Article Syndication Syndicate tries to create some false social proof by just thanking each other back and forth to legitimize their point.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569751].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
        Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

        I don't have an axe to grind by the way. Look at this thread though. I made a comment about it not being a good idea to put your original content on your site AND an article directory. Without hesitation, The Article Syndication Syndicate comes into the thread and making the counter-point. Sorry, but my advice is commonsense. And just because YOU don't want search traffic, doesn't mean others reading their threads don't want it.
        Dave,

        Why do you keep referring to article syndication and SEO as though they're mutually exclusive, and syndicated articles cannot or will not rank in the search-engines and bring in any search traffic?

        I have no problems ranking well any of those articles I've written and syndicated.

        The trick is, I publish them and have them indexed on my own sites first, and over time I build backlinks to them. My original copies always outrank any subsequently republished copies on other sites. So will other people's, if they go about it the same way.

        So what are you getting at, exactly? Why is it a bad idea? :confused:
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569830].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          I don't do article marketing at all
          That seems fairly unambiguous (and entirely unsurprising) to me. If you'll excuse the observation, it was pretty clear from the level of expertise on display, here, after all?

          Guys, may I respectfully suggest, as the starter of this thread and the person who dropped out of it, long ago, on the previous page, that the conversation's no longer really fulfilling any useful purpose? It's become fairly clear what's going on here, and what the participants' respective motivations for posting are. It would be rather a shame for this to end up being a locked or (even worse?) deleted thread, perhaps? Just a thought ...
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569861].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
          Banned
          Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

          Dave,

          Why do you keep referring to article syndication and SEO as though they're mutually exclusive, and syndicated articles cannot or will not rank in the search-engines and bring in any search traffic?

          I have no problems ranking well any of those articles I've written and syndicated.

          The trick is, I publish them and have them indexed on my own sites first, and over time I build backlinks to them. My original copies always outrank any subsequently republished copies on other sites. So will other people's, if they go about it the same way.

          So what are you getting at, exactly? Why is it a bad idea? :confused:
          You don't think it diminishes the value of your website to have it entirely duplicated on syndication sites? So your site has ZERO unique content on it, it's all duplicated elsewhere on the web.

          I don't know. ...seems kinda self-explanatory to me.

          How do you know your article will be viewed as "The One" by Google? If the article serves the original purpose of submitting it to directories, it will theoretically have lots of backlinks pointing to it. So you're going to be in a race with EZA to see who can build backlinks faster?

          Seems like a waste to me. Keep your content on your site unique from content you syndicate.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569910].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            You don't think it diminishes the value of your website to have it entirely duplicated on syndication sites? So your site has ZERO unique content on it, it's all duplicated elsewhere on the web.
            Not necessarily.

            Diminishes the value of my site to whom?

            Google? Google will just filter out the subsequent copies so they'll seldom be found. That's fine by me, so long as my original copy still ranks well.

            Visitors? Readers referred to my site through one of my articles elsewhere, will likely only have seen one of them. When they land on my site and see 10, 50 or 100 more, they'll all be new to them. How is that not valuable?

            Do you honestly think every potential reader of my site will already have seen everything it has to offer, elsewhere, before even arriving? :confused:

            Either way, I never said every page of my site is syndicated. Some stuff I may put on my sites (product reviews/pre-sells, and various other bits and pieces) won't be suitable for syndication. So they're unique. But everything that is suitable for syndication, will indeed be syndicated.

            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            I don't know. ...seems kinda self-explanatory to me.
            Evidently not.

            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            How do you know your article will be viewed as "The One" by Google? If the article serves the original purpose of submitting it to directories, it will theoretically have lots of backlinks pointing to it. So you're going to be in a race with EZA to see who can build backlinks faster?
            (1) Just in case Google takes the date/order of publication/indexation into account, I always publish to my own sites first and wait for the content to be indexed there.

            (2) Every page on my site has backlinks built to it, manually, over time. This is in addition to those received through the syndication of my articles and anyone else who happens to voluntarily link to it. It's extremely rare for anyone who republishes someone else's articles, to then go out and spend a significant amount of time building quality links those pages, it seems. So syndicated copies of my articles will seldom acquire (m)any backlinks.

            The result is that my original copies always outrank other people's syndicated copies.

            It works in my favour every single time. So long as it works, I'll keep doing it.

            But if you enjoy needlessly creating new, unique content ... fine. Your choice. :p
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570149].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              Haha. You're funny. I've been doing "Article Syndication" since 2006. I just also find it easier to actually put my best foot forward in the search engines and through syndication...and that usually doesn't entail just *******izing my content across the web.

              The whole "Article Syndication Is The Answer" movement will probably pass in a few months, but I do think it's funny to see this in action. A handful of diehards fawning over a certain poster and making syndication out to be some kind of miracle worker. Haha.
              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              You don't think it diminishes the value of your website to have it entirely duplicated on syndication sites? So your site has ZERO unique content on it, it's all duplicated elsewhere on the web.

              I don't know. ...seems kinda self-explanatory to me.

              How do you know your article will be viewed as "The One" by Google? If the article serves the original purpose of submitting it to directories, it will theoretically have lots of backlinks pointing to it. So you're going to be in a race with EZA to see who can build backlinks faster?

              Seems like a waste to me. Keep your content on your site unique from content you syndicate.
              Couple of points, although DireStraights has covered most of the first one...

              I don't remember ever saying that every piece of content on every site I have is syndicated. As was pointed out, some content is not suitable for syndication.

              And, as Bill hinted at, there are times when it's more beneficial to abstain from posting a particular piece on one's own site if it fosters the relationship with an important publisher.

              The second point you and a few others seem to miss is that many people do not have just "a" site. Some sites are set up to drive traffic to other sites in the network. These traffic drivers get the articles indexed before they are submitted to any directory.

              While I haven't yet arrived at it, my goal is to have a network that catches prospects at almost all stages in the buying process and leads them down my road to my money sites, my lists, and so on. I consider content I syndicate on other sites, archived newsletters, etc. as part of that growing web.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570293].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                Banned
                Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

                The second point you and a few others seem to miss is that many people do not have just "a" site. Some sites are set up to drive traffic to other sites in the network. These traffic drivers get the articles indexed before they are submitted to any directory.

                While I haven't yet arrived at it, my goal is to have a network that catches prospects at almost all stages in the buying process and leads them down my road to my money sites, my lists, and so on. I consider content I syndicate on other sites, archived newsletters, etc. as part of that growing web.
                I don't agree with that approach personally. I used an approach similar to that about 5 years ago and it wasn't nearly as effective. I want the traffic to come to the money site...that's where my conversions are the highest. More traffic doesn't mean more money.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570466].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
              Banned
              Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

              Not necessarily.

              Diminishes the value of my site to whom?

              Google? Google will just filter out the subsequent copies so they'll seldom be found. That's fine by me, so long as my original copy still ranks well.

              Visitors? Readers referred to my site through one of my articles elsewhere, will likely only have seen one of them. When they land on my site and see 10, 50 or 100 more, they'll all be new to them. How is that not valuable?

              Do you honestly think every potential reader of my site will already have seen everything it has to offer, elsewhere, before even arriving? :confused:

              Either way, I never said every page of my site is syndicated. Some stuff I may put on my sites (product reviews/pre-sells, and various other bits and pieces) won't be suitable for syndication. So they're unique. But everything that is suitable for syndication, will indeed be syndicated.



              Evidently not.



              (1) Just in case Google takes the date/order of publication/indexation into account, I always publish to my own sites first and wait for the content to be indexed there.

              (2) Every page on my site has backlinks built to it, manually, over time. This is in addition to those received through the syndication of my articles and anyone else who happens to voluntarily link to it. It's extremely rare for anyone who republishes someone else's articles, to then go out and spend a significant amount of time building quality links those pages, it seems. So syndicated copies of my articles will seldom acquire (m)any backlinks.

              The result is that my original copies always outrank other people's syndicated copies.

              It works in my favour every single time. So long as it works, I'll keep doing it.

              But if you enjoy needlessly creating new, unique content ... fine. Your choice. :p

              Given the amount of crappy sites that will take content from EZA, strip out your links, and then repost your content, I'm not sure why you'd want to even put it on EZA. But that's another story.

              But anyways, if you think it's less work to manually build links to a site just so it beats out the EZA copy, then be my guest. Seems easier to just get another unique version ranked though.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570340].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
                Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                But anyways, if you think it's less work to manually build links to a site just so it beats out the EZA copy, then be my guest. Seems easier to just get another unique version ranked though.
                Dave, I hope when you say "another unique version", you're referring to a standard higher than simply passing some mechanical measurement (like what you get at Copyscape). Confusing the words 'unique' and 'original', or more often simply using them interchangeably, leads people to believe the drivel spit out by mechanical spinners is good content because it's 'XX% unique'...
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570372].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author myob
                Aside from advertising, my sales are nearly completely dependent upon live eyeballs reading my syndicated articles. Article directories such as EZA can be the start toward the path of such syndication.

                Being in some of the most hotly competitive niches (and extremely lucrative I might add), my sites never rank closer than the top 10,000 no matter what I do, so ranking and backlinks are irrelevant. With a direct syndicated network of high authority publishers, however, these articles get republished to many times more addtional outlets.

                This is the power of syndication, and is indeed "article marketing" taken to its highest potential. As so many of the most successful article marketers have tried to explain, this is what I have found to be a best practice, especially in highly competitive niches.
                Signature
                “If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” – Isaac Newton
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570381].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
                Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                Given the amount of crappy sites that will take content from EZA, strip out your links, and then repost your content, I'm not sure why you'd want to even put it on EZA. But that's another story.
                If they do that, they'll get a DMCA via email. So will Google and their web-host. Those pages won't remain live for long.

                But even if they did, it's not such a big deal. Since those sites are so crappy, they'll never have anywhere near enough authority to come close to outranking my original article copies. Doesn't pose a problem for me at all. :p

                Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                But anyways, if you think it's less work to manually build links to a site just so it beats out the EZA copy, then be my guest. Seems easier to just get another unique version ranked though.
                Hah. Using unique content doesn't remove the need for backlinks to be built, Dave. Most if not all of the keywords I'd be targetting in my articles will require off-page SEO to be conducted before they'll rank on page 1 (or more specifically, in the top 5), anyway. Whether those articles remain unique or have been syndicated to other sites, really doesn't make a blind bit of difference.

                But clearly, over time, as my sites are built out and gradually become more authority-laden, new pages will require less off-page SEO to rank well. So, in effect, my sites become "just as good as EZA" (a whole lot better, in fact) for fast rankings, without the need for so many - if any - backlinks.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570453].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Dave,

      I'm sure this is perfectly innocent and I'm grabbing the wrong end of the proverbial stick but I'm sure you'll understand my confusion.

      In this thread here, you said this...

      I have no problems with article syndication/marketing or whatever. I have been doing it that way since I joined stompernet back in 2006
      But in this thread, you said this...

      Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

      I don't do article marketing at all so I'll claim ignorance on this one.
      Like I said, I'm sure it's just the syndication/directory/whatever thing, I'm just a touch confused, they do seem to be conflicting statements :confused:.

      There's no syndicate Dave, you made that up and it only exists in your mind.

      But the Article Syndication Syndicate tries to create some false proof by just thanking each other back and forth to legitimize their point
      Seriously Dave, you're worrying me. This isn't a gang of people working in unison. I think you're getting a bit para. Chill out Dave, you'll have a funny turn thinking like that.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569757].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
        Banned
        Eh, that's actually not correct because I made it clear later in the thread that people were talking about different things. Some were talking about Syndication, while others were talking about submitting to directories. I admitted to not submitting to directories.

        That's what I assumed you were talking about, but I don't think that's what people are talking about when they refer to "Article Marketing". I'm not saying it's not lumped in there, but most people seem to be talking about, including TPW and TimG, their articles ranking in article directories.
        PS. Article Syndication Syndicate in action above. Heh Heh.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569819].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Eh, that's actually not correct because I made it clear later in the thread that people were talking about different things. Some were talking about Syndication, while others were talking about submitting to directories. I admitted to not submitting to directories.
          Sorry Dave.

          If you'd made that clearer it wouldn't have caused the confusion.

          I do find it strange though when someone says...

          I don't do article marketing at all so I'll claim ignorance on this one.
          What you really mean is, you do in fact write articles and you even market them so they are syndicated but in a thread on article marketing, you say you don't do it at all :confused:

          It also rather contradicts this statement. Notice the bolded bits, it'll help you better comprehend my complete confusion...

          Dave Rodman - But look at a lot of the article marketers on this forum. Do you ever hear them talking about anything outside of syndication? Most are affiliate marketers and don't appear to have a real business at all.
          So in the above quote what exactly is an article marketer?

          In one statement you say you don't do article marketing at all, the next statement you say article marketers are syndicators but you want me to understand you've been syndicating since 2006?

          :confused:
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569917].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

            Sorry Dave.

            If you'd made that clearer it wouldn't have caused the confusion.

            I do find it strange though when someone says...

            What you really mean is, you do in fact write articles and you even market them so they are syndicated but in a thread on article marketing, you say you don't do it at all :confused:

            It also rather contradicts this statement. Notice the bolded bits, it'll better help you comprehend my complete confusion...

            So in the above quote what exactly is an article marketer?

            In one statement you say you don't do article marketing at all, the next statement you say article marketers are syndicators but you want me to understand you've been syndicating since 2006?

            :confused:
            The boss really has you soldiers working hard today eh?

            I don't really see what's that difficult to understand about it. That thread was about submitting to directories, I said I don't do that. Read the original post in that thread.

            And about the other quote, I don't get your confusion. Most people that talk about syndication don't talk about anything else. They *******ize their site by taking all the content and submitting it to directories, therefore leaving their websites with no content that can't be found elsewhere. So where's their value? It's not on their website! So what do they own?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3569997].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              The boss really has you soldiers working hard today eh?

              I don't really see what's that difficult to understand about it. That thread was about submitting to directories, I said I don't do that. Read the original post in that thread.

              And about the other quote, I don't get your confusion. Most people that talk about syndication don't talk about anything else. They *******ize their site by taking all the content and submitting it to directories, therefore leaving their websites with no content that can't be found elsewhere. So where's their value? It's not on their website! So what do they own?
              The boss really has you soldiers working hard today eh?
              Snipe, snipe, snipe.

              Dave my point was pretty clear and your attempt to wriggle out was even clearer. I like the way when you've no leg to stand on you resort back to snipeing. Any how, I'm better than that. You're back to assumptions again while I just re quote your comments - facts.

              They *******ize their site by taking all the content and submitting it to directories, therefore leaving their websites with no content that can't be found elsewhere
              ...just goes to show how little you, not only know about syndication but how little you read about the "syndicates" methods. Directories are a minor part, but maybe you're getting confused between directory and syndicate marketing?

              Good night Dave. See you in the morning.
              Signature

              Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570057].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

                Snipe, snipe, snipe.

                Dave my point was pretty clear and your attempt to wriggle out was even clearer. I like the way when you've no leg to stand on you resort back to snipeing. Any how, I'm better than that. You're back to assumptions again while I just re quote your comments - facts.

                Good night Dave. See you in the morning.
                I think my points were pretty clear cut. You have to understand that in that thread you were pointing to that everyone was talking about Article Directory marketing, then Alexa comes in talking about syndication. Personally prior to that, I never considered that article marketing. Not that it's not, but most of the WF conversations were around submitting directories, so that's what I assumed people were talking about. You'll notice in that thread that I clarify what Alexa is talking about by asking her.

                Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

                just goes to show how little you, not only know about syndication but how little you read about the "syndicates" methods. Directories are a minor part, but maybe you're getting confused between directory and syndicate marketing?
                I know directories are a little part. But if they are such a minor part, why would you submit all the content on your website to EZA, for example? And that's what Alexa has recommended in the past. There was a thread where she said it would be ok to put all your website content onto EZA.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570271].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
                  I think my points were pretty clear cut. You have to understand that in that thread you were pointing to that everyone was talking about Article Directory marketing, then Alexa comes in talking about syndication. Personally prior to that, I never considered that article marketing. Not that it's not, but most of the WF conversations were around submitting directories, so that's what I assumed people were talking about. You'll notice in that thread that I clarify what Alexa is talking about by asking her.
                  I don't feel they're clear cut Dave but that can be a difference in opinions. I think what is clear though, looking at my posts quoting you, there's very little you say that's clear.

                  I know directories are a little part. But if they are such a minor part, why would you submit all the content on your website to EZA, for example?
                  I'm afraid Dave you're making assumptions again. No where did I say all my content goes on EZA just the stuff I find syndicatable. I do have content on my site that is only there, unique to my sites. The stuff that goes to EZA is the same stuff I consider syndicatable. That also goes to the authority sites that want my articles. This is the same stuff that you say brings a trickle of traffic not a flood, so you assume wrong again there.

                  Quote-
                  Most articles placed on other sites wind up bringing trickles of traffic, not necessarily swarms of traffic.
                  As you just said to Tina...

                  Content for me converts far higher when the traffic is coming directly from the SERPS
                  That's why my sites are getting SERP traffic but they are also getting traffic from authority niche sites. How can this be wrong? How can a train spotter looking on the SERPS be any better converting than a train spotter looking on a highly trusted niche site that the owner recommends, on train spotting? What happens when I have both? Like with the Warrior Forum, do you not realise that these people actually have places they come to, they don't spend all day trawling Google for sites. Eventually they find the best sites for their passion. When my articles are put there, you think it gets a trickle of traffic? That's why I know you're wrong or doing it wrong. Unless your version of a "trickle" is vastly different to mine.

                  And to what you said to John...

                  I used an approach similar to that about 5 years ago and it wasn't nearly as effective
                  What I was doing 5 years ago is almost obsolete now.

                  Notice Dave, you spend all this time argueing with other people doing what you claim to do. Doesn't that say something about you? Notice how we're all in the "syndicate" that you made up and you're not? Isn't that telling you something here Dave?
                  Signature

                  Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570484].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Tina Golden
              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              This isn't an ego thing for me wanting to be right. Personally, article sydnication is just another tool in the toolbox. But the Article Syndication Syndicate will have you (Really, newbies) believe that you do it that way, even if it's to the detriment of other methods of generating SIGNIFICANT traffic i.e. search traffic. I don't consider wanting to get more search traffic to be bowing down to Google.
              Dave, do you get MORE search engine traffic by keeping only unique content on your site and syndicating other unique content? Do you target the same keywords or different when posting to your site as opposed to syndication?

              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              Most people that talk about syndication don't talk about anything else. They *******ize their site by taking all the content and submitting it to directories, therefore leaving their websites with no content that can't be found elsewhere. So where's their value? It's not on their website! So what do they own?
              You do have a point here but I am curious as to what sort of evidence you might have as to whether this actually is detrimental. As long as the content has YOUR name on it, I wouldn't think it would matter whether they read it at your website, on EZA or on someone's blog as a guest post. I could be wrong about that, of course, which is why I would like to hear more detail about WHY you say this.
              Signature
              Discover how to have fabulous, engaging content with
              Fast & Easy Content Creation
              ***Especially if you don't have enough time, money, or just plain HATE writing***
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570080].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Tina Golden View Post

                Dave, do you get MORE search engine traffic by keeping only unique content on your site and syndicating other unique content? Do you target the same keywords or different when posting to your site as opposed to syndication?

                You do have a point here but I am curious as to what sort of evidence you might have as to whether this actually is detrimental. As long as the content has YOUR name on it, I wouldn't think it would matter whether they read it at your website, on EZA or on someone's blog as a guest post. I could be wrong about that, of course, which is why I would like to hear more detail about WHY you say this.
                Content for me converts far higher when the traffic is coming directly from the SERPS. FAR BETTER. Why wouldn't it? It's basically them coming SERP>Page as opposed to SERP>ARTICLE>PAGE.

                And yes, I do know this for a fact (in my case) because when I first started online I used to give away a free PDF in exchange for an email address. The same year, 2 other sites approached me and asked if they could use that same content for their site. I said ok. In the last 5 years, that PDF has generated me over 50K opt-ins for my site and hundreds of thousands in sales. I've gotten sales from my partner sites, but I don't think it was worth the extra competition...even if the competition was from myself.

                I would never duplicate my site and just put it out there. I want my own stuff to be 100% unique. That's the safe way to play it. Why would I take the chance and let the algorithm figure out what is the original source? When my own site is converting at 9% conversions and other sites are converting at less than 1%, why take the chance when it's easier to just provide them other content?
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570419].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author bretski
            While I am a bit of a lazy humanoid at times I find that the various delays in getting articles published and then hopefully syndicated is a plus and not a minus. I would like to say that I work hard every day at my business but this simply isn't true so delays work out in my favor. Sporadic publication of articles in various directories would also look more natural to search engines, I would think. But what do I know? I just know about the results that I have seen.

            As a side note, I've sort of stayed away from EZA since the slap given that some authors have gotten their accounts disabled. I'm just going to stand really still and hope they don't see me Nothing going on here... I'm a shrubbery
            Signature
            ***Affordable Quality Content Written For You!***
            Experience Content Writer - PM Bretski!
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570006].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    As with E = MC2, beauty is most often found in the simplest of concepts. And the following two ideas are such concepts:
    1. The way to make more money online is to provide more Buy Buttons.
    2. The way to get more people to consider your Buy Buttons is to provide more ways for people to find them.

    The second part is what Article Marketing is used to achieve, although all article marketers have similar but different ways of reaching that end.

    Just as article marketing is only one tool in our marketing toolbox, EZA is just one tool in our article marketing toolboxes and EZA is certainly not the only or most important tool in our toolboxes. It is just one more tool.

    Most of the threads about EZA and article marketing in recent weeks have been started by people who proclaim that since EZA no longer has favored status in Google, the tool must be broken so they are going to throw away the tool.

    Most of the comments made by the "Article Syndication Syndicate" have been along the lines of: The EZA tool is much more powerful than something that can be used to tweak your Google rankings. Since the tool is more valuable than just Google and traffic from EZA, why would you throw away the tool?

    And I have taken the premise that if you think the EZA tool is broken, then those of you who quit it will make the tool more useful for those of us who see its value as something more than what you give it credit.
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570614].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      As with E = MC2, beauty is most often found in the simplest of concepts. And the following two ideas are such concepts:
      1. The way to make more money online is to provide more Buy Buttons.
      2. The way to get more people to consider your Buy Buttons is to provide more ways for people to find them.

      The second part is what Article Marketing is used to achieve, although all article marketers have similar but different ways of reaching that end.

      Just as article marketing is only one tool in our marketing toolbox, EZA is just one tool in our article marketing toolboxes and EZA is certainly not the only or most important tool in our toolboxes. It is just one more tool.

      Most of the threads about EZA and article marketing in recent weeks have been started by people who proclaim that since EZA no longer has favored status in Google, the tool must be broken so they are going to throw away the tool.

      Most of the comments made by the "Article Syndication Syndicate" have been along the lines of: The EZA tool is much more powerful than something that can be used to tweak your Google rankings. Since the tool is more valuable than just Google and traffic from EZA, why would you throw away the tool?

      And I have taken the premise that if you think the EZA tool is broken, then those of you who quit it will make the tool more useful for those of us who see its value as something more than what you give it credit.
      Bill...that was simply brilliant. Thank you for bringing some sanity and
      common sense to this interesting thread.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570916].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author westgateok
    I personally do not mind the wait times at all. I am new to all of this, and I can understand being overwhelmed by tons of stuff! EZA can feel free to take as long as they need, as of yet they have never not accpeted one of my articles (not that I have written many...) and whenever they post works for me.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570634].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tina Golden
      Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

      Content for me converts far higher when the traffic is coming directly from the SERPS. FAR BETTER. Why wouldn't it? It's basically them coming SERP>Page as opposed to SERP>ARTICLE>PAGE.

      I would never duplicate my site and just put it out there. I want my own stuff to be 100% unique. That's the safe way to play it. Why would I take the chance and let the algorithm figure out what is the original source? When my own site is converting at 9% conversions and other sites are converting at less than 1%, why take the chance when it's easier to just provide them other content?
      Dave, I do see where you're coming from and you do make some good points. One more question because I didn't make it clear the first time, I don't think.

      You say above that SERPs>PAGE produces the best results and that makes sense. However, you did say earlier that you syndicate content, just not the exact same content as your site. What types of sites do you syndicate to and what kind of traffic are you seeking that way, since it's apparently not organic?

      That's why I asked if you target different keywords with your syndicated content - in other words, I am assuming your goal is to get traffic directly from those sites that you are syndicating to and not organic for those articles.

      Thanks!
      Signature
      Discover how to have fabulous, engaging content with
      Fast & Easy Content Creation
      ***Especially if you don't have enough time, money, or just plain HATE writing***
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3570854].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Tina Golden View Post

        Dave, I do see where you're coming from and you do make some good points. One more question because I didn't make it clear the first time, I don't think.

        You say above that SERPs>PAGE produces the best results and that makes sense. However, you did say earlier that you syndicate content, just not the exact same content as your site. What types of sites do you syndicate to and what kind of traffic are you seeking that way, since it's apparently not organic?

        That's why I asked if you target different keywords with your syndicated content - in other words, I am assuming your goal is to get traffic directly from those sites that you are syndicating to and not organic for those articles.

        Thanks!
        I'd say there are 3 levels of sites that I can place my content at. Level 1 might be just general purpose blogs that are actively managed by the owner who is looking for content. These are personal relationships from people that I've known over the years, but their readers are not necessarily going to go out and buy my product. Think of these as my own personal REAL blog network. Those links are good just for SEO purposes. And I link back to whatever pages I want to promote that month. Level 3 is more the equivalent of a JV, so the link isn't necessary. Level 2 would be somewhere in-between. They might create a small amount of sales that adds up over the years.

        This content that I produce for others is exclusive to their site. The Article Syndication Syndicate hates when people mention the duplicate content filter. They think links from duplicate pages count just as much. I personally don't believe that. And my belief comes from my own testing, testing while I was in stompernet, and teaching from people I respect (Dan Thies). I believe that if your page gets filtered, so does the link.

        Now, here's the bottom line. I think it's stupid to duplicate content you place on your site. You're taking a risk where YOUR content can get filtered. And if you don't think that's possible for YOUR site to get filtered because of duplicates, go talk to Brad Fallon. But if you're syndicating content STRICTLY for traffic purposes, then take an article (that's not on your site) and submit it to a bunch of sites. Just realize your link will get filtered most likely. But maybe you don't care? Maybe all you care about is the traffic. And that's fine, but just realize that going in.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574404].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
          Banned
          One more thing. The root of the Article Syndication Syndicate's belief is that Google knows the difference between "Syndicated" and "Duplicate" content. In reality, it's the same thing to Google. Kurt gave the Article Syndication Syndicate a schooling on this in another thread.

          If you don't care about search traffic, then let the duplicate content fly. But if you have a direct channel to a website and CAN post original content, then why wouldn't you? Here's why you should NOT listen to the Syndicate if you care about search traffic.

          1) Because Google says to "Syndicate Carefully"

          2) Because Google can't always determine which copy is the original source, so they even started using a special tag to specify the source.

          3) Because you can't say "Well, the AP does it and they aren't penalized". And that's the exact reason Google Keeps Exception lists when certain high value sites are impacted negatively by particular algorithm changes.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574728].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            One more thing. The root of the Article Syndication Syndicate's belief is that Google knows the difference between "Syndicated" and "Duplicate" content. In reality, it's the same thing to Google. Kurt gave the Article Syndication Syndicate a schooling on this in another thread.

            Why should you not listen to them if you actually want to get traffic from the SERPS?

            1) Because Google says to "Syndicate Carefully"

            2) Because Google can't always determine which copy is the original source, so they even started using a special tag in Google News

            3) Because you can't say "Well, the AP does it and they aren't penalized". And that's the exact reason Google Keeps Exception lists when certain high value sites are impacted negatively by particular algorithm changes.
            Dave,

            For crying out loud.

            When I received notification of your earlier post, I'd resolved to refrain from taking you up on any of your nonsense.

            But you just can't let it drop, can you?

            Not only do you always take a contrary stance - which in itself is absolutely fine, if you're just expressing your beliefs - but you have to word your posts in such a way as to be condesceding and bigoted.

            I didn't want to agree with Bill Platt when he called you a troll, but with each passing day I'm becoming more and more certain that that is exactly the case. I'm convinced you're out just to stir this stuff up. :rolleyes:

            So, pretty soon, you'll be the first ever person to take up residence within my ignore list, I think. Not that you'll mind, I expect. That's the aim of trolls, after all, isn't it? Isn't that why they live under bridges, away from the rest of society?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574861].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
              Banned
              Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

              Dave,

              For crying out loud.

              When I received notification of your earlier post, I'd resolved to refrain from taking you up on any of your nonsense.

              But you just can't let it drop, can you?

              Not only do you always take a contrary stance - which in itself is absolutely fine, if you're just expressing your beliefs - but you have to word your posts in such a way as to be condesceding and bigoted.

              I didn't want to agree with Bill Platt when he called you a troll, but with each passing day I'm becoming more and more certain that that is exactly the case. I'm convinced you're out just to stir this stuff up. :rolleyes:

              So, pretty soon, you'll be the first ever person to take up residence within my ignore list, I think. Not that you'll mind, I expect. That's the aim of trolls, after all, isn't it? Isn't that why they live under bridges, away from the rest of society?
              I'm not a troll. I just saw this theory being repeated in threads that Google views syndicated and duplicate content differently. One person said duplicate content is only on your site, syndicated is across sites. They just made that definition up. Then i saw someone else saying that it's ok to submit your entire site to EZA because Dup Content is a myth?!?!?!?!?! Based on, what, Drudge Report? Oh, ok...well if you are a Top 500 site, then maybe you can start duplicating some content.

              The reality is that the advice of "Syndication" is based on limited experience. And it's based on the theory that the duplicate content penalty is a myth or that there is no filter. So you have to go to the extreme and say "Sure, duplicate anything you want. It's a myth!!!".

              That's just bad advice, so you can expect me to disagree with that anytime it comes up. If a newbie reads that, they might actually do it.

              If you went to any SEO professional, NOBODY would tell you to duplicate content on your site. And I've never really hard anyone say that, if you have the opportunity to provide unique content, that you should still send them duplicate content. Why would you?

              But that (bad) advice flows freely here, courtesy of the Article Syndication Syndicate.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574912].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                Banned
                By the way, it's funny that you say that I can't let it drop because your buddy is still chiming in on the thread. Should he let it go? Or just me because you don't agree with me?
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574924].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
                Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                I'm not a troll. I just saw this theory being repeated in threads that Google views syndicated and duplicate content differently. One person said duplicate content is only on your site, syndicated is across sites. They just made that definition up. Then i saw someone else saying that it's ok to submit your entire site to EZA because Dup Content is a myth?!?!?!?!?! Based on, what, Drudge Report? Oh, ok...well if you are a Top 500 site, then maybe you can start duplicating some content.

                The reality is that the advice of "Syndication" is based on limited experience. And it's based on the theory that the duplicate content penalty is a myth or that there is no filter. So you have to go to the extreme and say "Sure, duplicate anything you want. It's a myth!!!".

                That's just bad advice, so you can expect me to disagree with that anytime it comes up. If a newbie reads that, they might actually do it.

                If you went to a search conference or talked to any SEO professional, NOBODY would tell you to duplicate content on your site. And I've never really hard anyone say that, if you have the opportunity to provide unique content, that you should still send them duplicate content. Why would you?

                But that (bad) advice flows freely here, courtesy of the Article Syndication Syndicate.
                Except that none of the article syndicators here denounce the existence of the "duplicate content penalty", Dave. At least, none that I've ever seen.

                They openly acknowledge its existence - but so far as penalties go, it only applies to content duplicated across multiple pages of the same site, if Google thinks the reason behind it is to spam their SERPs using doorway pages (for example) and the like.

                Yes, the filtration applies to both duplicated and syndicated content, but the penalties don't.

                And you know that, Dave, yet despite that you continue to make these accusations and these "subtle" (and sometimes not so subtle) jabs towards others.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574955].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author tpw
                  Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                  Except that none of the article syndicators here denounce the existence of the "duplicate content penalty", Dave. At least, none that I've ever seen.

                  Technically, I do in regards to duplicate content across domains here:
                  Article Marketing and the Duplicate Content Penalty Myth

                  I talk about the Dupe Content Penalty Myth and the very real Dupe Content Filter.
                  Signature
                  Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                  Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574980].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                  Except that none of the article syndicators here denounce the existence of the "duplicate content penalty", Dave. At least, none that I've ever seen.

                  They openly acknowledge its existence - but so far as penalties go, it only applies to content duplicated across multiple pages of the same site, if Google thinks the reason behind it is to spam their SERPs using doorway pages (for example) and the like.

                  Yes, the filtration applies to both duplicated and syndicated content, but the penalties don't.

                  And you know that, Dave, yet despite that you continue to make these accusations and these "subtle" (and sometimes not so subtle) jabs towards others.
                  So you're saying the same page will not get filtered if it is placed on 1000 pages? And you're saying that links off the those pages count the same as if you had 1000 unique articles?

                  I guess we should define penalty and filter. I view a filter as just ignoring the page (links and all) and choosing the best result out of those duplicates. I would only consider it a penalty if your site was actually slapped.

                  But realistically, if the pages are filtered, isn't that kind of a penalty?
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575025].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author tpw
                    Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                    So you're saying the same page will not get filtered if it is placed on 1000 pages? And you're saying that links off the those pages count the same as if you had 1000 unique articles?

                    If I have a 1000 links to my website, who cares if Google ignores 999 of them?

                    LOL

                    You got irritated at someone earlier for suggesting you believe, "Google is the be all and end all when it comes to traffic".

                    Yet, you are arguing this based on what Google thinks...
                    Signature
                    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575057].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                      If I have a 1000 links to my website, who cares if Google ignores 999 of them?

                      LOL

                      You got mad at someone earlier for suggesting you believe, "Google is the be all and end all when it comes to traffic".

                      Yet, you are arguing this based on what Google thinks...
                      Bill, it's not like I actually think there is any harm to having your content out there 1000 times.

                      It's more the idea that people seem SO CONFIDENT that there is no filter, they would go so far as to suggest someone submit their entire site to EZA....AND pass up an opportunity to provide unique content to a webmaster.

                      Spinning vs. No Spinning when submitting to directories...I don't really care much either way. But submitting your entire website to a directory has lots of potential downside and little upside.

                      Especially when you're just giving that advice out without knowing much about the OP.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575087].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author tpw
                        Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                        Spinning vs. No Spinning when submitting to directories...I don't really care much either way. But submitting your entire website to a directory has lots of potential downside and little upside.

                        I do see people putting article on their own site, then syndicating that content.

                        And they do so with everything worthy of syndication.

                        I see no issue with that, because although they are syndicating a lot of content from their website, the pages that really matter to the profitability of their businesses are unique and only on their websites. (i.e. the Buy Buttons)

                        There are two basic for-profit website models: advertising platforms and product/service offers.

                        If you operate an advertising platform where you sell advertising to others, then it is of the utmost importance to have your best stuff on your own website. In those cases, syndication of your best content is not recommended.

                        If you sell product/service offers, the only thing that needs to remain on your site unpolluted is the actual sales pages where you make your offers. All of your content, whether on your site or syndicated, are entrance points in your sales funnel, intended to bring people to your sales pages.
                        Signature
                        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575165].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                    Banned
                    I'll summarize the points...

                    1) I think a filter will filter out most of the duplicates. Sure, some might slip through.

                    2) You can't point to large news sites as "evidence" to support duplicate content, not when there are white-lists in place.

                    3) It's one thing if an article gets duplicated after being picked up from EZA. But if you have a direct channel to the webmaster, why would you NOT provide unique content to them?

                    4) Regardless of your belief. Do you really think that it's a good idea to SO FIRMLY hold onto the view that you recommend other people submit their entire site to EZA, without knowing a THING about their business.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575063].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author tpw
                      Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                      But if you have a direct channel to the webmaster, why would you NOT provide unique content to them?

                      Who says we don't?

                      Diversification in traffic sources is always recommended.

                      Never put all of your eggs in one basket.


                      p.s. Because I like to always be in control of the sales funnel, I don't spin. I always want to put my best foot forward, whether writing for syndication or unique content for specific websites or publications.
                      Signature
                      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575091].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                        Banned
                        That's not really my point what they are doing, it's more what they are saying to support their point. Telling people to submit their entire website to EZA? Because if they DON'T say that is ok, then it's basically admitting that maybe the filtering process is not perfect and maybe there is a penalty.

                        But honestly, would you submit your entire site to EZA?

                        And even better, would you tell someone to do that if you knew nothing about their business?
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575135].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author drmani
                          Everyone's forgetting BRANDING!

                          And when it comes to the brand named YOU, ubiquity is KING!

                          That's where syndication really rocks.

                          If you're ignoring that, or claiming it's "wrong" or "unnecessary",
                          then maybe you'd also like to argue with Coke or Nike or Gucci that
                          they should stop running brand ads - because they don't DIRECTLY
                          result in more "sales"!

                          Also, another apt point to bring up is one of "modes".

                          On eBay, a browser is in "buying" mode. On SERPs, she is in "searching"
                          mode. On article sites, she is in "learning" mode.

                          And a good sales process taps INTO that mode, and shifts it subtly
                          into buying mode.

                          To the extent you do it well, you make sales. I've read articles by
                          some experts that almost instantly converted me into a customer - and
                          I've read sales letters that turned me off buying something I wanted
                          to!

                          Article marketing (and syndication) is NOT formulaic.

                          Like marriage, one person's idyllic paradise will be another's living
                          hell!

                          All success
                          Dr.Mani
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575173].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author drmani
                            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                            I just saw this theory being repeated in threads that Google views syndicated and duplicate content differently.
                            It does, when the syndication is done correctly. You referenced the Google Webmaster article in a post earlier on, which explains how canonicalization can do that effectively.

                            One person said duplicate content is only on your site, syndicated is across sites. They just made that definition up.
                            Two broad kinds of duplicate content are:

                            * same (or very similar) content on multiple pages of the same website
                            * same (or very similar) content on multiple websites, that makes them almost identical with each other

                            No one knows just how much "uniqueness" is enough to set them apart as "different" in Google's eyes, though some experts have stated a ballpark figure of 30% - which, with most article directories, is provided by the templates and other content on the page.

                            Then i saw someone else saying that it's ok to submit your entire site to EZA because Dup Content is a myth?!?!?!?!?!
                            It isn't. But the duplicate content PENALTY is - because it's only a FILTER (except in malicious content duplication, which is explained on Google Webmaster forum in rather specific terms).

                            The reality is that the advice of "Syndication" is based on limited experience.
                            Sorry, but no, it isn't.

                            And it's based on the theory that the duplicate content penalty is a myth or that there is no filter.
                            There is a filter. There are guidelines to ensure your content stays safe from it. And the "penalty" is a myth, especially when you're talking about ethical content SYNDICATION and not mass-spamming multiple resources with near-identical content for back-link count increases alone.

                            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                            3) It's one thing if an article gets duplicated after being picked up from EZA. But if you have a direct channel to the webmaster, why would you NOT provide unique content to them?
                            Agreed. Except that it isn't mandatory, if what you're after from the syndication effort is access to a new set of eyeballs, rather than higher SERP rankings for your article.

                            It all boils down to whether you'd rather take a #1 rank on Google versus exposure to 50,000 readers of a niche ezine as your higher priority choice

                            All success
                            Dr.Mani
                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575242].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
                          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                          That's not really my point what they are doing, it's more what they are saying to support their point.
                          Dave, will please wake up from your dream world and read what people say to you. You really have no idea what I'm doing nor have you taken on board what I've told you in this thread.

                          You clearly consider me part of your fairytale, make believe syndicate so lets get this straight.

                          I've explained I don't submit my whole site to Eza or syndicate it. I write and create content and put it on my site. I pay a lot of money for very good content I syndicate. Did you catch that Dave? That's two different things. Outside of your realm, not everything is black and white. The sites I syndicate too (forget directories, if you can. I'm talking relevant sites that are passionate about my article) publish my articles and readers that want to see it, read it. From my results, which you have no idea about at all, I get good results.

                          In light of the fact that I don't submit all my content to EZA, or syndicate it, as you think everyone but you does, what possible reason have I got to listen to a single word you say?

                          But honestly, would you submit your entire site to EZA?
                          No Dave and that's one of the reasons people come back at you. You're the "assumption King". That's why you label anyone that doesn't agree with you as the "syndicate". Why don't you find out the facts before you argue?

                          Notice what Barry said? 40-50% in his case. You are the one that said we put our entire site on Eza. You made those assumptions and failed to look beyond the basics. You are the one telling the syndicate (which you invented) without any actual fact based knowledge.

                          It's more the idea that people seem SO CONFIDENT that there is no filter
                          Go through everyone one of my posts and find me mention the word filter Dave. If this is the basis of your arguement, then it's brutally flawed.

                          The reality is that the advice of "Syndication" is based on limited experience.
                          Well done on this one Dave. Unquestionably the most assumptive, ridiculous and nonsensical statement I've read since I've arrived here. I am amazed at this. Absolutely amazed.

                          I truly believe that in your world, unless we do as you do, we become labeled, by you.

                          TPW - I see no issue with that, because although they are syndicating a lot of content from their website, the pages that really matter to the profitability of their businesses are unique and only on their websites. (i.e. the Buy Buttons)
                          Thank you Bill. I doubt this is black and white enough for Dave though.

                          drmani - It all boils down to whether you'd rather take a #1 rank on Google versus exposure to 50,000 readers of a niche ezine as your higher priority choice
                          ...and thank you drmani. I actually try and take both but according to Dave, I've no idea what I'm doing.

                          Either way, I do respect you Dave, I just find some of what you say a bit too much. We both have E-Commerce businesses. God forbid we ever get talking about that, I'll be labeled as the "E-Commerce" syndicate, unless I do it exactly as you do.
                          Signature

                          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575621].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
                    This is the problem as I see it, Dave: with you, it's constant contradictions, circular reasoning and all the rest. All an encounter with you ever amounts to, for me and (apparently) for others - if I can be so bold as to outwardly express that observation - is pure, unadulterated frustration.

                    It's nothing to do with the fact you have different beliefs, ideas and opinions. Nothing at all.

                    It's the fact you constantly go back on and contradict yourself, put words into others' mouths, and write your posts in an intentionally pompous, condescending manner.

                    I know you're just trying to justify your stance, Dave. The problem seems to be that since your logic is sometimes so flawed, the only way you can explain and justify it is by pretending you said/meant something other than you actually did, by dodging and weaving around the points others challenge you with, and by attempting to ridicule and discredit them if you cannot see any other way of being victorious in winning a debate.

                    Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                    I guess we should define penalty and filter. I view a filter as just ignoring the page (links and all) and choosing the best result out of those duplicates. I would only consider it a penalty if your site was actually slapped.
                    Thanks for stating the obvious, Dave. I'm well aware of the difference between a filter and a penalty. I've made that distinction many times myself, in many threads, for the benefit (or so I hope) of so many.

                    But now, apparently, I'm one of those confused people. First you distinguish between a filter and a penalty, then you say this ...

                    Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                    But realistically, if the pages are filtered, isn't that kind of a penalty?
                    ... and imply that, as far as you're concerned, they're one and the same thing (or ought to be).

                    The simple reality, Dave, is that syndicating your content won't result in a site-wide penalty being adminstered by Google against your site.

                    But it's possible, in my experience, if Google believed you were insidiously duplicating content within a single site, for the purpose of creating "doorway pages" (just for example), or other stuff it disapproves of.

                    (I absolutely recognise that this is very rare, and that in most normal circumstances duplicate content is simply filtered out and isn't responsible for any adverse effects on your site.)

                    Google doesn't penalise you for stuff that happens outside of your control. But it can and will penalise you - in some cases - for stuff that's well within your control, on your own site.

                    Now that I've made that clear (I hope), will you be offended if I politely decline to partake in any more discussions with you on this subject? Only every single time you try your best to be contradictory, and each time you're challenged, your posts tend to descend into the realm of mind-boggling absurdity, extreme inconsistency and egotistical mockery of others.

                    Enjoy the rest of this (now extremely off-topic) thread.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575332].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          The Article Syndication Syndicate hates when people mention the duplicate content filter. They think links from duplicate pages count just as much.
          It was going so well Dave but I was constantly aware a snipe would be involved somewhere.

          For the sake of others in this thread though, I think we need to understand one or two points.

          Dave, have you noticed the way you say the "syndicate" (the phrase you made up) say this...

          because they are article directory marketers...hahahahaha. When will they learn like we have?!?!?!"
          Sounds rather like the way you speak to the "syndicate". I guess that's ok though.

          Lets also be clear that this "syndicate" that Dave has very bizarrely made up and imagined in his own mind, doesn't actually exist. Just like fairies and Father Christmas don't either.

          See, where some people think I'm bashing article syndicating. I'm actually in favor of it, but not exclusively.
          No Dave, what people think is that you like bashing, albeit unsuccessfully, the other people that do syndication as part of their business.

          Thanks for the link to go and chat to Brad Fallon too, can you find out what he thinks now though? Only the link goes to an article that Dan Thies wrote three and a half years ago.

          I'm just upset Dave that all of us in the syndicate haven't really earned any money and do everything wrong. I wish we more like you Dave, I've always wanted to be psychic.
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574737].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

            It was going so well Dave but I was constantly aware a snipe would be involved somewhere.

            For the sake of others in this thread though, I think we need to understand one or two points.

            Dave, have you noticed the way you say the "syndicate" (the phrase you made up) say this...

            Sounds rather like the way you speak to the "syndicate". I guess that's ok though.

            Lets also be clear that this "syndicate" that Dave has very bizarrely made up and imagined in his own mind, doesn't actually exist. Just like fairies and Father Christmas don't either.

            No Dave, what people think is that you like bashing, albeit unsuccessfully, the other people that do syndication as part of their business.

            Thanks for the link to go and chat to Brad Fallon too, can you find out what he thinks now though? Only the link goes to an article that Dan Thies wrote three and a half years ago.

            I'm just upset Dave that all of us in the syndicate haven't really earned any money and do everything wrong. I wish we more like you Dave, I've always wanted to be psychic.
            Dan Thies was the guy that Brad Fallon hired to fix the mess. I thought that was common knowledge though.

            Anyways, if you've read my posts, you'd realize that I never said you shouldn't syndicate duplicate articles all over the web if that's what works for you. But giving advice to others like "Hey, go ahead and duplicate your own site! The duplicate content penalty is a total myth!". Nevermind the fact that what they might view as "PROOF" is actually a false-positive or a white-listed site. Duplicate content links must count as much as links from pages with unique content right....nothing could go wrong there right? :rolleyes:
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574851].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              I thought that was common knowledge though.
              Indeed, I was well aware of the article and the story too. Though I must admit that was three and a half years ago and I'd forgotton all about it.

              Anyways, if you've read my posts, you'd realize that I never said you shouldn't syndicate duplicate articles all over the web if that's what works for you.
              That's right Dave you said this instead.

              Most people that talk about syndication don't talk about anything else. They *******ize their site by taking all the content and submitting it to directories, therefore leaving their websites with no content that can't be found elsewhere. So where's their value? It's not on their website! So what do they own?
              and this.

              I think it's stupid to duplicate content you place on your site
              You didn't say you shouldn't, you said it was stupid and bad advice. That's fine Dave.

              Look Dave, you have a nice evening, my days over now. All of this is a waste of my time anyway.

              I'm off for a nice cold Ice cold beer, then we're all flying out to Oklahoma to meet Bill and have a syndicate meeting in Oklahoma. We need to get our harmonica playing just right for when we run out of thanks, thanking each other the next time.

              Sorry, I couldn't resist a bit of humour to liven things up a bit.
              Signature

              Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575019].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    I don't try to rank articles in the article directories.

    When I syndicate articles to newsletters and authority websites, the goal is ARTICLE > SALES PAGE.

    When I place content on my own site, the goal is SERPS > SALES PAGE.

    I may occasionally get some traffic via SERPS > ARTICLE > SALES PAGE.

    When I set up free reports, the goal is ARTICLE > FREE REPORT > SALES PAGE.

    The point I am making is that all configurations drive traffic to sales pages. The goal is to get sales, period.

    The articles, free reports, serps, etc. are all simply a means to an end -- they are part of the overall marketing process.

    I don't care where people enter the system in their journey to my sales pages, so long as they start the journey and follow my sales funnel to my sales pages.

    I convert better with an ARTICLE before a SALES PAGE. Your experience is obviously different than mine Dave.

    I believe that the reason my conversion rates are higher when an ARTICLE or a FREE REPORT is involved in the process is because people get the chance to learn to value and trust me and my words, before they see my SALES PAGES.

    When people are coming to me via SERPS > SALES PAGE, I don't get that opportunity to pre-sell me and to pre-qualify my prospects before they see my SALES PAGES, therefore that process produces fewer conversions.

    I have unique content on my blogs, blogs where I guest post, articles on my sites, articles on other people's sites, in other people's newsletters, in free and paid reports floating around, etc.

    I have syndicated content on my blogs, blogs where I guest post, on my own sites, on other people's sites, in other people's newsletters, in free and paid reports floating around, etc.

    The answer for me is to create more Buy Buttons and more links to my Buy Buttons.

    And unique and syndicated content are the most effective tools in my arsenal that makes sales possible for me, by introducing people to the many sales funnels I have built that lead people where I want them to go.
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3571128].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    1. The way to make more money online is to provide more Buy Buttons.
    2. The way to get more people to consider your Buy Buttons is to provide more ways for people to find them.

    If Google does not like my model, then they should quit sending me traffic.

    They sent me traffic in the six-figures last year... And the numbers are on the rise since Panda...
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3574940].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Barry Unruh
    Hey Dave,

    I just hit a "Thanks" on your last post, not because I agree with what it says. The THANKS is for making this thread GREAT.

    Without your statements, questions, and challenges, this thread would not contain a lot of wisdom.

    Personally, I do put all content on my sites first. (Unless written for the exclusive use as a guest post, newsletter article, etc..) I put some of the content on EZA, perhaps 40 to 50%.

    My blogs have added content in the form of comments, embedded YouTube videos, pictures, etc..

    This combination results in my site being wildly different than anyone else who syndicates my content, or EZA.

    btw, Did you miss your invitation to join the Syndicate? I know we dropped it in your PM box....

    Take care,

    Barry
    Signature
    Brain Drained...Signature Coming Soon!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575405].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bettersocial
    You hit the nail on the head Alexa. It makes little difference what the approval times are once you have the entire cycle going.

    Just queue up a bunch of articles and they will keep on getting approved after some initial time in the queue.

    What I can't get behind is writing articles exclusively for EZA. Writing articles is hard, especially the good stuff. It takes me at least 30 minutes to write a good article in a niche I'm comfortable with, 45 minutes for an unfamiliar niche. A generic, no-frills article would probably take me 15 minutes.

    Because of this time issue, exclusive articles for EZA make no sense at all. If you are outsourcing, I'm afraid EZA's new editorial guidelines would mean paying through your nose for an article that would actually get approved.

    So here's what I feel: article marketing through EZA is viable right now only for two kinds of people:
    a) Those who can write quality articles themselves
    b) Those who have the financial strength to hire high quality staff to write for them.

    If you fall into the latter category, there are probably far better things you can do with your money than article marketing. For the former group, EZA is still highly effective, perhaps more so after the changes.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575413].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CliveG
    "But none of these observations answers the question that puzzles me: why do you care?"

    The short answer to this is that I, personally, do not care; I actually like the changes, at least how they are described. I use EZA for the results that it provides.

    If the question is why do people, in general, care, do they really? Clearly some people are shouting very loudly but are the majority remaining silent and happy. It's frequently a huge mistake to take too much notice of a vocal minority.

    One side effect of the internet seems to be that "everyone" wants what they want NOW and FREE. Then they move on as if they had never wanted it in the first place. Is this healthy for society in general - I'll let you decide.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575737].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
    Banned
    I gotta be honest. I'm not even reading past the first couple lines of a lot of these posts that try to go line by line...mostly because you're missing the point. Filter vs. Penalty? Whatever. If a link off a "filtered' page doesn't count, some might call THAT the penalty. Personally, if it works for you, then what do I care? (PS. I don't care, really).

    In general, do you really think that it's good to recommend that people submit THEIR website content to EZA? Even though that you know nothing about that person's business. You're essentially risking that THEIR content could get filtered..for what upside? What if that's a page where they convert 9% of the traffic they get from SERPS? Is it still a good idea to put that page at risk?

    PS. Maybe WF should start filtering (or penalizing) "Thank Yous" from the Article Syndication Syndicate. Thank Yous would definitely drop 90%. Heh, heh.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575932].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
      Banned
      No Dave and that's one of the reasons people come back at you. You're the "assumption King". That's why you label anyone that doesn't agree with you as the "syndicate". Why don't you find out the facts before you argue?
      Giving advice that it's ok to put every page of the site to EZA.

      http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post3216790

      And from the 1st page on this thread.

      They'll already have it published indexed on their own sites, won't they, prior to EZA submission, surely? Sorry if I'm being dense, but why would that be relevant?
      So Richard, I would assume based on your comments that you think that's BAD advice?

      That really is, and always has been, the only question.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3575957].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

      If a link off a "filtered' page doesn't count, some might call THAT the penalty.

      If it worked that way, that would be a concern for those using article marketing to influence their Google rankings and relying on Google for their future success.

      The filter only affects the pages shown in the Google's SERPs.

      The pages that give value to the linked website only apply that value if there is value to share, as measured by link popularity of the linking page.

      More than one copy of an article can attract link popularity to them, which will then be shared out.

      But since a large percentage of articles never gain any link popularity, on account of the articles not being share-worthy, people assume that the fault is in the filter, when the real fault is in the article or where the article was posted.

      The thing is that people have to link to a copy of an article, before the article will have link popularity to share within another site.

      And generally the only copies of an article that get the link popularity to share will be the copies of the article on an authority website.

      Sometimes a particular copy of an article will fail because the article has no value to the people who read it. Sometimes the article is of excellent value, but posted on a website that has no value to the general public.

      There are a number of reasons why a particular copy of an article will have no link popularity to share. But none of those reasons are the result of Google's filter.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576064].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

      I gotta be honest. I'm not even reading past the first couple lines of a lot of these posts that try to go line by line...
      Dave, I think that's been more than apparent from the start, so I'll keep this nice and short for you as you've just proved you're not even reading the point, let alone understanding it.

      PS. Maybe WF should start filtering (or penalizing) "Thank Yous" from the Article Syndication Syndicate. Thank Yous would definitely drop 90%. Heh, heh.
      Snipe, snipe, snipe.

      Maybe you should get your facts straight before leaping in and making baseless accusations Dave. Heh, heh.

      Giving advice that it's ok to put every page of the site to EZA.
      Read what I wrote properly, your skimming the thread, Dave. This is what I said...

      Go through everyone one of my posts and find me mention the word filter Dave
      This is Richard talking to you now Dave. Not Alexa. Where do I say it???

      Stop seeing the world as black and white and realise we're not your make believe syndicate but different human beings.

      So Richard, I would assume based on your comments that you think that's BAD advice?
      I think you should speak to her Dave, as you say, we're the syndicate, surely you already the know the answer and what I say is an irrelevance? Crikey, I can't see you reading it even, we're way beyond the first few lines now.

      As I said, you grouped us all together from your own nonsensical logic. Try and wake up Dave and realise we're not all the same person. I'm not Alexa, what she does and I do are our own business. Your problem is you've assumed we're a syndicate that do the same thing. We're not.

      Henceforth your totally flawed and paranoid arguement and the very reason, by accusing us all together, when you're one of us, you attract so much flak.

      If you don't agree with Alexa, say so. Don't say we're all the same, otherwise you become the assumption King, which you are. :rolleyes:

      Your problem Dave is your total inability to even begin to see another humans point of view. That's why you group them together.

      Here's a fact.

      You syndicate, I syndicate, all the people you made up and put in the "syndicate", syndicate. We're all in different markets, we all do things in different ways, we all learn from each other and respect what we all do. We don't JV, share niches or anything else. We simply respect the fact that we do something similar and we're willing to learn something from one and other.

      Except you.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576151].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author drmani
      Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

      You're essentially risking that THEIR content could get filtered..for what upside? What if that's a page where they convert 9% of the traffic they get from SERPS? Is it still a good idea to put that page at risk?
      It's NOT putting a page "at risk".

      To clarify:

      The Google 'duplicate content' filter has a specific purpose - to
      prevent their SERPs being cluttered up by results pointing to the
      SAME or SIMILAR content more than once.

      Which means, if ALL the submitted versions of your article BUT ONE
      get filtered out, it STILL means you'll have a listing on the SERPs
      ... and syndicated the right way, that article will bring readers
      back to YOUR WEBSITE!

      Yes, even if the URL of your website is NOT the one listed on the
      SERPs.

      That's the part about content syndication that is so powerful -
      and wearing SEO glasses with tunnel-vision prevents one from
      seeing the incredibly vast potential that's hidden inside this.

      To put it into a nutshell:

      EVEN IF your submissions are hit by the 'duplicate content filter'
      you will still have ONE of the syndicated submissions listed -
      and so it is NOT a "penalty" of any kind.

      There IS a duplicate content penalty that's issued for malicious
      syndication, which may lead to your site being DE-INDEXED.

      Here are the referenced sections from Google Webmaster Central
      about "duplicate content" (bolded bits are my emphasis):

      Duplicate content generally refers to substantive blocks of content within or across domains that either completely match other content or are appreciably similar. Mostly, this is not deceptive in origin. Examples of non-malicious duplicate content could include:

      * Discussion forums that can generate both regular and stripped-down pages targeted at mobile devices
      * Store items shown or linked via multiple distinct URLs
      * Printer-only versions of web pages

      If your site contains multiple pages with largely identical content, there are a number of ways you can indicate your preferred URL to Google. (This is called "canonicalization".) More information about canonicalization.

      However, in some cases, content is deliberately duplicated across domains in an attempt to manipulate search engine rankings or win more traffic. Deceptive practices like this can result in a poor user experience, when a visitor sees substantially the same content repeated within a set of search results.

      Google tries hard to index and show pages with distinct information. This filtering means, for instance, that if your site has a "regular" and "printer" version of each article, and neither of these is blocked with a noindex meta tag, we'll choose one of them to list. In the rare cases in which Google perceives that duplicate content may be shown with intent to manipulate our rankings and deceive our users, we'll also make appropriate adjustments in the indexing and ranking of the sites involved. As a result, the ranking of the site may suffer, or the site might be removed entirely from the Google index, in which case it will no longer appear in search results.
      Right from the horse's mouth.

      I'm quoting this NOT for personal debate purposes, but because
      others reading this discussion may otherwise carry away mistaken
      impressions about what duplicate content is, what risks it entails,
      and how to minimize these risks - so that THEY can make informed
      decisions about whether or not to syndicate their content widely.

      In the end, it's a business' choice - and smart business owners
      and entrepreneurs learn the rules from the right source, and
      make informed decisons about what's best in view of their desired
      outcome.

      All success
      Dr.Mani
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577692].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author drmani
        Maybe it's because I practice medicine in an ego-driven speciality
        (heart surgery), but I've usually ignored 'personality' when it
        comes to 'content' - and have learned from people I personally don't
        much admire, simply because some (or much) of what they say makes
        sense and is rooted in fact/experience.

        Too many people on this thread are personalizing this about Dave Rodman,
        when actually a LOT of his argument is relevant to the topic we're
        talking about - publishing one's content to EZA *first* versus on
        one's own property or somewhere else. And about using *unique*
        content for syndication purposes.

        Now, when someone has studied under Dan Thies, I certainly do NOT
        dismiss him/her as a crank when it comes to SEO. And I believe
        some comments made would detract from the value Dave is adding to
        the conversation through some thorny comments - thorny not so much
        from the tone or words used (though some react to it), but from the
        perspective that it gets you to THINK critically before following
        'popular advice'.

        My comments have been focused on ONE serious mis-understanding I
        believe Dave's comments have been perpetuating - that the duplicate
        content PENALTY could destroy a site's SERP rankings... and my post
        shows that will NOT happen if you do it the right way, and for the
        right reasons.

        Apart from that, I'm inclined to intuitively agree that:

        a. One should use original/unique content for syndication, when
        you can do so (many others will agree, I mean won't we create a
        fresh article for publishing on a big newsletter or authority
        website?)

        b. Posting ALL your content on an article directory, leaving
        little else that's unique and exclusive to your own site might
        not be the best strategy.


        Both are points Dave has been making REPEATEDLY - yet are getting
        lost in the clutter and noise surrounding his style and tone of
        commenting, more by the intense reactions responders seem to have
        developed against it.

        My principle has been this: Arrogance backed by knowledge,
        experience and quality is perfectly acceptable when it comes
        to teaching/learning a new/rare skill or art.

        Don't let the 'clutter' and 'drama' detract from valid content
        marketing issues raised in this discussion.

        It's why I keep coming back to it to learn.

        All success
        Dr.Mani
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577735].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
          Banned
          Yes, even if the URL of your website is NOT the one listed on the
          SERPs.
          DrMani, I get what you're saying and I agree with you 100%. But let me throw this situation out. For my niche, articles don't convert visitors like traffic that comes right from the SERP. I have 2 keywords that are BIG money for me, that convert at 9-10%.

          Now, would you think it's a good idea to take the content off the page and syndicate it? You said it yourself, it might stay, but it MIGHT get filtered. So is that worth the risk?

          And yeah, I gave you an extreme example. But what if the numbers are closer. Visitors to a certain page convert at 1%, but your average article converts at .5%. Again, why risk getting the higher converting page filtered?

          If your articles are consistently converting higher than serp traffic, then what you're suggesting makes sense. But what if someone is more in my boat where SERP traffic does convert higher. And they see this thread where people are saying that Google will choose YOUR page because it's on your site first. Clearly, due to the invention of the "Original Source" tag, it's not a perfect science. So why take the chance of getting a higher converting page filtered? Why not take a different article altogether and syndicate it from here to neverland.

          PS. I just read your 2nd comment and agree 100%. And for the record, I do not think that your site will incur a duplicate content penalty for syndicating. My entire point was that Google is a machine, and even if you do things right, you are taking a chance that the machine will filter out the pages that happen to convert BEST for you.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577809].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author drmani
            And they see this thread where people are saying that Google will choose YOUR page because it's on your site first.
            Whoever said that is NOT stating facts. (Or at least, not mentioning
            the need for doing other things that make such a desirable outcome
            more likely - it doesn't happen automatically)

            Yahoo and MSN/Bing make an effort to identify the original source
            (maybe successfully?) while Google puts the onus on webmasters to
            do that, through canonicalization and other ways (source indicating
            tags for Google News etc.)

            None of them are fool-proof, as far as I can tell from my research
            and experience. And so in the situation you outlined, it would be a
            real issue to consider before syndicating the same content.

            PERSONALLY, with my own content marketing efforts, I will create a
            unique version of content (fuller, lengthier, containing additional
            material, links, or with something more) for my own Web properties,
            and a scaled down yet wildly informative and valuable piece for
            content syndication across broad properties like article directories.

            With publishers I have a relationship with, or insist on unique
            content only, I decide if the reach and visibility I'll get are
            worth creating fresh content for - and then take a call on it.

            On this discussion, I'm not pushing MY approach as 'best' or 'ideal'
            but pointing out different angles of content syndication so readers
            can pick and choose what's best for THEIR business.

            And I believe you're doing the same too, coming at it from a slightly
            different angle.

            Thank you!

            One thing I'm wondering about in your example is this:

            ...articles don't convert visitors like traffic that comes right from the SERP
            The SERPs will list a page (your article) - that's either on your site
            or the directory. A visitor reading that article still needs to click
            on a link to take action.

            As long as that link points to the same sales process entry page, what
            would make the experience significantly different, based on the source
            of traffic?

            Are we comparing apples and oranges here? Do you mean the visitor from
            engines is going DIRECTLY into the sales funnel, and you're comparing
            that visitor against one who lands on an article on a directory first
            before clicking through to the sales page?

            Just curious to know what may cause such a difference in response,
            when the same article is published in two different places.

            All success
            Dr.Mani

            EDIT: Incidentally, the 'duplicate content' filter is NOT domain-wide
            but for the specific URL/page which hosts the duplicate content - so
            syndicating content can actually get you EXTRA listings on SERPs
            that supplement another page on your site which enjoys higher
            organic ranking for a particular keyword/search term.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577891].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kurt
              Originally Posted by drmani View Post

              One thing I'm wondering about in your example is this:

              The SERPs will list a page (your article) - that's either on your site
              or the directory. A visitor reading that article still needs to click
              on a link to take action.

              As long as that link points to the same sales process entry page, what
              would make the experience significantly different, based on the source
              of traffic?

              Are we comparing apples and oranges here? Do you mean the visitor from
              engines is going DIRECTLY into the sales funnel, and you're comparing
              that visitor against one who lands on an article on a directory first
              before clicking through to the sales page?

              Just curious to know what may cause such a difference in response,
              when the same article is published in two different places.
              Hey Dr. Mani, (again)

              The answer is because of psychographics and how the person reached the syndicated article.

              The psychographics are what the user is thinking at the exact moment he's doing something online. The psychographics of a searcher is very specific about what the user is thinking at the exact time they are typing. The simple act of typing shows a very specific thought (and interest) in the search query.

              So if a person found a syndicated article through a Google search, the psychographics would be the same for both pages. But if the person was surfing the web and "happened upon" a link, then clicked through to the article, the psychographics would be totally different. In this case, the link was suggested whereas finding the page by typing in the keyword phrase was very intentional.
              Signature
              Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
              Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577968].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author tpw
            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            I have 2 keywords that are BIG money for me, that convert at 9-10%.

            Now, would you think it's a good idea to take the content off the page and syndicate it? You said it yourself, it might stay, but it MIGHT get filtered. So is that worth the risk?

            Absolutely not.

            The purpose of high converting sales pages are to put buyers into your payment system.

            Only syndicate those things that contribute to that end, without giving your goldmine to others.
            Signature
            Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
            Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577949].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
              Banned
              Originally Posted by tpw View Post

              Absolutely not.

              The purpose of high converting sales pages are to put buyers into your payment system.

              Only syndicate those things that contribute to that end, without giving your goldmine to others.
              Right. Which is why I started the conversation a few pages back. It was in response to the, somewhat blanket suggestion, that it's a good idea to put it on your site first and then syndicate. Which, all things being equal, might seem like a good idea. Since, after all, one of the versions will be displayed and that one version is your content, regardless of the domain it resides. But all things MIGHT NOT be equal. Content could behave very differently on your site vs. a syndicated site.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578036].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kurt
        Originally Posted by drmani View Post

        That's the part about content syndication that is so powerful -
        and wearing SEO glasses with tunnel-vision prevents one from
        seeing the incredibly vast potential that's hidden inside this.

        ...

        In the end, it's a business' choice - and smart business owners
        and entrepreneurs learn the rules from the right source, and
        make informed decisons about what's best in view of their desired
        outcome.

        All success
        Dr.Mani
        Hey Dr. Mani...

        There's two different point of views, and IMO neither is wrong and both are correct. We have the SEOers and the Pro-Syndicators.

        SEOers are more concerned with link value and doop content issues. SEOers are also more likely to be in micro-niches, selling affiliate products and not their own stuff.

        Syndicators are selling their writing, or more specifically, themselves and not so much other people's products.

        Speaking purely from an SEO point of view, and my own perspective as someone that's tried to build my own SEs for 15 years and given it a lot of thought, how about if the phrase "duplicate content penalty" was actually called "original content bonus"?

        We know Google tries to determine if a page is a doop, it's even in Dr. Mani's source he cited.

        We also know Google and Copyscape have business relationships, such as "Google Alerts". (Copyscape is the tech behind Alerts).

        Logically, if we accept that Google has this info (regardless of how they get it), why wouldn't they use it in their algos?

        We all hear about the 200 "on page" criteria Google has, but I've never come up with more than about 70. Why not use "uniqueness" and/or "originality" as a couple of the 200 factors?

        While there's a lot of room for debate as to "how much" should originality and uniqueness matter, but IMO, it should at least matter a little.

        And what about "link doop"? What if not only the content scored low on "uniqueness", what if the out-going links were also identical to the other pages on the "doop meter"?

        Same content and same links.

        IMO, this directly relates to the old Google "Hilltop", which is part of trust rank to determine if two pages that link are "affiliated" with each other. In this case, "affiliated" means connected by the same interests/ownership.

        If we assume Hilltop is a factor in link "value", doop content with doop links could be a red flag and be a factor in the actual value of the links.

        For SEOers I think it comes down to the logic that doop content may not hurt, but original content will never hurt. And using different words means showing up in more potential SERPs as well as avoiding any potential doop content filters.

        Disclaimer: My definition of "unique" content means unique INFO, not merely "unique" strings of text that have the same info.
        Signature
        Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
        Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577914].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author drmani
          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          ... was actually called "original content bonus"?
          Love it!

          As much as I loved your "trust rank" from way back

          For SEOers I think it comes down to the logic that doop content may not hurt, but original content will never hurt.
          Years ago, in 2003 I believe, after reading your "Big Page of SEO", I went
          and did some deep research. That included reading some patent filings of Google
          regarding pattern recognition. My impression, at that time, from putting
          two and two together, was that Google had the TECHNOLOGY to identify strings
          of words that were as short as THREE-WORD PHRASES for "similarity" - which
          made me smile at 'content spinners' that hit the market ever since!

          IF Google wanted to, they'll de-construct ANY spun article effortlessly.

          (btw, I'm also reading Ray Kurzweil's "The Singularity is Near" which is
          about the incredibly mind-blowing power of computing today, with trends
          showing that by 2030 we'll have regular laptop sized nano-tech driven
          machines which have the processing potential of collective human intelligence!
          So any argument about the enormous computing power needed to do such complex
          analyses is moot!)

          Which makes this point remarkably powerful:

          And using different words means showing up in more potential SERPs as well as avoiding any potential doop content filters.
          And 'KILLER' in combination with this"

          Disclaimer: My definition of "unique" content means unique INFO, not merely "unique" strings of text that have the same info.
          All you have to do, Kurt, is bundle this with a way to squeeze an
          extra hour or ten out of a 24 hour day, and you're my hero!

          (Hey, wait, you already ARE )

          All success
          Dr.Mani
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577986].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Martin Luxton
            Originally Posted by drmani View Post


            (btw, I'm also reading Ray Kurzweil's "The Singularity is Near" which is
            about the incredibly mind-blowing power of computing today, with trends
            showing that by 2030 we'll have regular laptop sized nano-tech driven
            machines which have the processing potential of collective human intelligence!
            So any argument about the enormous computing power needed to do such complex
            analyses is moot!)
            Dr Mani,

            Slightly off topic, but thank you very much for this reference - I'm checking out his website now Singularity is Near -SIN Graph - Countdown to SIN Logarithmic

            That is the kind of site where you think, "Why has nobody ever told me about this before?????"


            Martin
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578453].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kurt
            Originally Posted by drmani View Post

            Love it!

            As much as I loved your "trust rank" from way back



            Years ago, in 2003 I believe, after reading your "Big Page of SEO", I went
            and did some deep research. That included reading some patent filings of Google
            regarding pattern recognition. My impression, at that time, from putting
            two and two together, was that Google had the TECHNOLOGY to identify strings
            of words that were as short as THREE-WORD PHRASES for "similarity" - which
            made me smile at 'content spinners' that hit the market ever since!

            IF Google wanted to, they'll de-construct ANY spun article effortlessly.

            (btw, I'm also reading Ray Kurzweil's "The Singularity is Near" which is
            about the incredibly mind-blowing power of computing today, with trends
            showing that by 2030 we'll have regular laptop sized nano-tech driven
            machines which have the processing potential of collective human intelligence!
            So any argument about the enormous computing power needed to do such complex
            analyses is moot!)

            Which makes this point remarkably powerful:



            And 'KILLER' in combination with this"



            All you have to do, Kurt, is bundle this with a way to squeeze an
            extra hour or ten out of a 24 hour day, and you're my hero!

            (Hey, wait, you already ARE )

            All success
            Dr.Mani
            Hey Dr. Mani...

            Back then some of us Bombers came up with a n-gram of 4-6 words to be what Copyscape was using, and figured Copyscape would be close to what Google used because of their relationship.

            4-6 words seems to be the realistic limit, with shorter n-grams being possible with pure computing power...But in reality, shorter phrases would probably be too common, such as "weight loss tips".

            "Weight loss tips" is too short to be much of an indication in many cases.

            And of course, you have to also worry about breaking up the text vectors between the n-grams.

            Note those that need it: n-grams are groups of words Google combines as a phrase to mark places on a page. Text vectors are how far apart these phrases are.

            Google uses these n-grams and text voctors as a "map" to tell where they are in relation to each other. This is how Google probably detects duplicate content on multiple pages.

            So, in order to avoid doop detection, you can't have a lot of similar 3-6 word phrases in similar positions to other 3-6 word phrases. Most spinning styles probably don't really change the text vectors well enough to have a big impact.

            Also, I don't believe that it's a pass/fail, doop/original. Instead, it's probably a number like "98% unique" or "32% unique". Then take this "unique factor" and plug it into the algo with the 199 other things.
            Signature
            Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
            Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579521].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author drmani
              Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

              Back then some of us Bombers came up with a n-gram of 4-6 words to be what Copyscape was using, and figured Copyscape would be close to what Google used because of their relationship.

              4-6 words seems to be the realistic limit, with shorter n-grams being possible with pure computing power...But in reality, shorter phrases would probably be too common, such as "weight loss tips".
              Oh, that patent filing was FASCINATING, Kurt. Will see if I can find
              a link on Google. (EDIT: I believe it was this one)

              Not only do they look at text strings, but PATTERNS - and as you know,
              those are more like finger-prints, with just about every *human* (read
              non-machine) writer having favorites that can be identified and tracked.

              Yesterday, I was reading a FAST COMPANY article about Larry Page taking
              over the reins at Google Inc. again, and it mentioned how they went about
              Google's machine translation development. While they attempted to recruit
              him, linguistics expert Franz Och kept turning down their invite saying
              "too much data" was needed to make translation possible.

              Page persisted. Research began. In 5 years, they can translate some 58
              languages.

              "Google, he (Och) says, simply had far more resources -- more data,
              more computing power, more money -- than he ever thought possible.


              All success
              Dr.Mani
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579649].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                Originally Posted by drmani View Post

                Not only do they look at text strings, but PATTERNS - and as you know,
                those are more like finger-prints, with just about every *human* (read
                non-machine) writer having favorites that can be identified and tracked.
                About the same time I first brought up PeopleRank I also hypothesized about something I call "YouRank".

                YouRank is sort of like a credit report and it is all about YOU and what info Google has on you.

                For example, let's say by using our Adsense affiliate ID, Google knows this about our sites:

                Dr. Mani - No red flags associated with any page using his Adsense ID.

                Kurt - Has 3 red flags associated with pages containing his Adsense ID.

                Some guy we'll call "KenThompson" allegedly had his Adsense account banned.

                Assuming everything else was equal, YouRank would rank three pages using the same keywords:

                1 Dr. Mani
                2 Kurt
                3 Some guy we'll call "KenThompson"

                As these pages would be ranked based on how much Google trusted us.

                Again, YouRank is an hypothesis and doesn't even qualify as a theory and really meant for discussion...But on the other hand, if Google has the info on us, why not use it? It is something to think about.
                Signature
                Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
                Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579827].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author KenThompson
                  Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                  About the same time I first brought up PeopleRank I also hypothesized about something I call "YouRank".

                  YouRank is sort of like a credit report and it is all about YOU and what info Google has on you.

                  For example, let's say by using our Adsense affiliate ID, Google knows this about our sites:

                  Dr. Mani - No red flags associated with any page using his Adsense ID.

                  Kurt - Has 3 red flags associated with pages containing his Adsense ID.

                  Some guy we'll call "KenThompson" allegedly had his Adsense account banned.

                  Assuming everything else was equal, YouRank would rank three pages using the same keywords:

                  1 Dr. Mani
                  2 Kurt
                  3 Some guy we'll call "KenThompson"

                  As these pages would be ranked based on how much Google trusted us.

                  Again, YouRank is an hypothesis and doesn't even qualify as a theory and really meant for discussion...But on the other hand, if Google has the info on us, why not use it? It is something to think about.
                  A Ken sighting... ?

                  Hardly... regarding your prior-stated conclusion regarding casual surfers.

                  Google may not trust me, but I know you do - and that's all that matters.

                  I think KurtRank has much more flair.


                  Ken
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3580962].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author tpw
              Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

              Hey Dr. Mani...

              Back then some of us Bombers came up with a n-gram of 4-6 words to be what Copyscape was using, and figured Copyscape would be close to what Google used because of their relationship.

              4-6 words seems to be the realistic limit, with shorter n-grams being possible with pure computing power...But in reality, shorter phrases would probably be too common, such as "weight loss tips".

              "Weight loss tips" is too short to be much of an indication in many cases.

              And of course, you have to also worry about breaking up the text vectors between the n-grams.

              Note those that need it: n-grams are groups of words Google combines as a phrase to mark places on a page. Text vectors are how far apart these phrases are.

              Google uses these n-grams and text voctors as a "map" to tell where they are in relation to each other. This is how Google probably detects duplicate content on multiple pages.

              So, in order to avoid doop detection, you can't have a lot of similar 3-6 word phrases in similar positions to other 3-6 word phrases. Most spinning styles probably don't really change the text vectors well enough to have a big impact.

              Also, I don't believe that it's a pass/fail, doop/original. Instead, it's probably a number like "98% unique" or "32% unique". Then take this "unique factor" and plug it into the algo with the 199 other things.

              Interesting stuff.

              Keep in mind that no one can actually acquire 100% unique, in that there are certain phrases that are used often in the English language.

              The very presence of "same" words precludes the existence of 100% unique.

              I once built my own version of the CopyScape tool to make sure that my ghost writers were not selling me stolen content.

              In my version, I converted all one- and two-letter words to blocks on non-text for calculation purposes. Then I counted how many words in each valid block, and I put all word blocks with more than four words into an array and tested them against the content on the web using Google and Yahoo API's.

              The software then outputted to a list the search results, so I could manually verify the possible matches.

              Interestingly, my experience was able to discern very similar conclusions to yours.

              What I found was that the 6- to 8-word range could deliver consistently the actual article elsewhere without the false positives.

              This leads me to agree that most 4- and 5-word strings will be on the list of common phrases used by Google and other data aggregates.
              Signature
              Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
              Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3580800].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
          Banned
          The SERPs will list a page (your article) - that's either on your site
          or the directory. A visitor reading that article still needs to click
          on a link to take action.

          As long as that link points to the same sales process entry page, what
          would make the experience significantly different, based on the source
          of traffic?

          Are we comparing apples and oranges here? Do you mean the visitor from
          engines is going DIRECTLY into the sales funnel, and you're comparing
          that visitor against one who lands on an article on a directory first
          before clicking through to the sales page?
          I'm talking about SERP>Article>abc.html does not convert as good as SERP>abc.html. That may be obvious, but that's the point. That is why I wouldn't want to take the chance of submitting the content from abc.html to an article directory. Sure, MOST likely they'll choose my original site as the one to display. But what if they choose the article? I'd much rather take an additional unique piece of content, syndicate it through the channels, and get additional benefit.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578004].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author tpw
            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            Content could behave very differently on your site vs. a syndicated site.
            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            For my niche, articles don't convert visitors like traffic that comes right from the SERP. I have 2 keywords that are BIG money for me, that convert at 9-10%.
            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            I'm talking about SERP>Article>abc.html does not convert as good as SERP>abc.html. That may be obvious, but that's the point. That is why I wouldn't want to take the chance of submitting the content from abc.html to an article directory. Sure, MOST likely they'll choose my original site as the one to display. But what if they choose the article? I'd much rather take an additional unique piece of content, syndicate it through the channels, and get additional benefit.

            Curiously Dave. I have to ask...

            As I have said before, do not syndicate your sales pages that are converting well on your website.

            You have demonstrated two variable situations...
            • SERP > SALES PAGE
            • SERP > ARTICLE > SALES PAGE

            You are getting 9% conversion on the first one, and less conversion on the second.

            The traffic from the SERPs is better-qualified, because they are searching for your keywords, and your sales page gets the job done well. They effectively pre-qualified themselves.

            Isn't it true that we really have no idea how the article is converting on someone else's site?

            So the only measure that you have to judge is the traffic arriving on your site from the article?

            Could perhaps the conversion rate from the articles be the fault of the article, or more to the point, its resource box?

            A well-written article and resource box should effectively pre-qualify your traffic, right?

            So if the traffic coming from your article is not the same quality as what is coming from the search engine, couldn't it be argued that your article failed to pre-qualify your traffic effectively, in effect, sending a bunch of people with $5 in their pocket to buy a $20 item?

            Do you see what I am saying here?
            Signature
            Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
            Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578135].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
              Banned
              Originally Posted by tpw View Post

              A well-written article and resource box should effectively pre-qualify your traffic, right?

              So if the traffic coming from your article is not the same quality as what is coming from the search engine, couldn't it be argued that your article failed to pre-qualify your traffic effectively, in effect, sending a bunch of people with $5 in their pocket to buy a $20 item?

              Do you see what I am saying here?
              Well, what I'm selling is pretty cut/dry, so I don't think there'd be any surprises once they got to the product page. I suspect it just has more to do with how the person got to the article. Obviously, in some of these cases, I have no clue how they got there. Some through the SERPS, others through just bouncing around the site. Maybe the ones that landed through the SERPS have higher conversion rates, but there is still a huge differnce. And I suspect it's because I lose people as they have to click more.

              My concern is more with the filtering though. Because I'm not talking about theory here, it HAS happened to me. Probably the only time I gave someone else content that was on my site. Back in 2006, I gave a community site a couple pages of my content. The only difference was I had an opt-in on the page and they chose not to do one. In the end, the community site becomes wildly successful and my pages ended up getting filtered in the results. And these were pages that were there 9 months prior to the other site having them AND that had probably PR3. Now, on the plus side, I still get traffic from this site because my content is branded with my info. But I'm not getting near the opt-ins that I was before because the only way people find the page is through internal navigation...they aren't coming directly from the SERPS.

              I could've done some things differently, but I had just started out. And it's definitely not as simple as "Put it on your site first and build links to it"
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3580776].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          For SEOers I think it comes down to the logic that doop content may not hurt, but original content will never hurt. And using different words means showing up in more potential SERPs as well as avoiding any potential doop content filters.

          I suspect that the only question of matter on dupe content filter is whether Google counts links from two or more different sources on the same article.

          I believe they can, but usually don't for other factors I described here.

          Honestly, if you could see evidence of a particular article in two locations delivering link popularity value to your website, much of your concern about syndicating content would evaporate, wouldn't it?

          If that is true, then let me put forward a question to you. And I am not trying to be a smart ass here. This is an honest question.

          How would someone orchestrate a setup to prove the concept?

          Would the proof be found in Google Webmaster Tools? Or would we need to look to some other factor for proof of concept?

          My point is that I would be willing to put it to the test, if I knew how to construct the test, to satisfy everyone who is interested.

          That is what we SEO-brainiacs do, right? Construct tests, evaluate the results, and take into practice the lessons learned?
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578049].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kurt
            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            I suspect that the only question of matter on dupe content filter is whether Google counts links from two or more different sources on the same article.

            I believe they can, but usually don't for other factors I described here.
            We know they can do it, again it's really a matter of "if" and "how much" and "will it change", and should plan for all three.


            Honestly, if you could see evidence of a particular article in two locations delivering link popularity value to your website, much of your concern about syndicating content would evaporate, wouldn't it?
            For the general "you", I agree...But for me specifically, wouldn't change my theories. I'll explain it more below...


            If that is true, then let me put forward a question to you. And I am not trying to be a smart ass here. This is an honest question.

            How would someone orchestrate a setup to prove the concept?

            Would the proof be found in Google Webmaster Tools? Or would we need to look to some other factor for proof of concept?

            My point is that I would be willing to put it to the test, if I knew how to construct the test, to satisfy everyone who is interested.

            That is what we SEO-brainiacs do, right? Construct tests, evaluate the results, and take into practice the lessons learned?
            This is a legit point(s). I'm not as big on testing as most other SEOers. I believe there's too many variables to get accurate results. Plus by the time you've spent any time at all just gives Google more time to tweak it's algo one more time, skewing all research.

            I've always approached SEO from a different point of view: As a poker player.

            1. The most important thing is numbers. Lots of words on lots of pages in lots of combos and get lots of links to those pages.

            How many pages does Google have indexed and how many of those are mine?

            How many links does Google have indexed and how many point to my pages?

            Of course this is over-simplified and we need to "optimize" these strategies, but these simple points are the most important, IMO.

            2. Try to think about how to make a good search engine and "read" what Google is (will) try to do. They are really bound by logic.

            3. Also, back in 1997 I created my first niche search engine. IMO, the best way to learn SEO is to have your own SE and really try to get the results to be the "best". It was a very basic SE, but I still learned more SEO from that than anything else.

            So this has always been the foundation of my own SEO. And here's what my SEO advice boils down to:

            There's no one way to do SEO. I've never seen a "perfectly SEOed" page ever rank #1 for a competitive keword. And if there was a "perfect" way to become #1, all the #1 pages for all keywords would look a lot more alike. I've even posted in the past that the engines probably use some type of "randomness" to the results, to mess with reverse-engineering.

            So, the strategy is to use all reasonable strategies. In this particular case as mentioned above cocerning the use of doop content or not, it isn't a case of one or the other, but instead BOTH.

            There are two sides making (at times) reasonable arguments for and against doop content. My suggestion is to do both. If you have an article submitter, blast out 100 of the same articles to various directories for linking purposes.

            And even take it a step further, on some of your web resources you can use unchanged PLR content. For those that believe there is no negatives for doop content (or the risks are small or worth taking) you may as well blast away with unchanged PLR.

            In addition to the doops, I suggest finding ways of "dedooping" content, as well as repurposing doop content using methods like converting to other file formats, videos, mp3s, etc.

            Reasonable people say there are advantages for both...So to me the strategy is to use ALL reasonable strategies and do BOTH, not either/or. I think people that know me can say I've said this pretty consistently over the years.
            Signature
            Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
            Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578245].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author tpw
              Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

              We know they can do it, again it's really a matter of "if" and "how much" and "will it change", and should plan for all three.

              For the general "you", I agree...But for me specifically, wouldn't change my theories. I'll explain it more below...

              This is a legit point(s). I'm not as big on testing as most other SEOers. I believe there's too many variables to get accurate results. Plus by the time you've spent any time at all just gives Google more time to tweak it's algo one more time, skewing all research.

              I've always approached SEO from a different point of view: As a poker player.

              1. The most important thing is numbers. Lots of words on lots of pages in lots of combos and get lots of links to those pages.

              How many pages does Google have indexed and how many of those are mine?

              How many links does Google have indexed and how many point to my pages?

              Of course this is over-simplified and we need to "optimize" these strategies, but these simple points are the most important, IMO.

              2. Try to think about how to make a good search engine and "read" what Google is (will) try to do. They are really bound by logic.

              3. Also, back in 1997 I created my first niche search engine. IMO, the best way to learn SEO is to have your own SE and really try to get the results to be the "best". It was a very basic SE, but I still learned more SEO from that than anything else.

              So this has always been the foundation of my own SEO. And here's what my SEO advice boils down to:

              There's no one way to do SEO. I've never seen a "perfectly SEOed" page ever rank #1 for a competitive keword. And if there was a "perfect" way to become #1, all the #1 pages for all keywords would look a lot more alike. I've even posted in the past that the engines probably use some type of "randomness" to the results, to mess with reverse-engineering.

              So, the strategy is to use all reasonable strategies. In this particular case as mentioned above cocerning the use of doop content or not, it isn't a case of one or the other, but instead BOTH.

              There are two sides making (at times) reasonable arguments for and against doop content. My suggestion is to do both. If you have an article submitter, blast out 100 of the same articles to various directories for linking purposes.

              And even take it a step further, on some of your web resources you can use unchanged PLR content. For those that believe there is no negatives for doop content (or the risks are small or worth taking) you may as well blast away with unchanged PLR.

              In addition to the doops, I suggest finding ways of "dedooping" content, as well as repurposing doop content using methods like converting to other file formats, videos, mp3s, etc.

              Reasonable people say there are advantages for both...So to me the strategy is to use ALL reasonable strategies and do BOTH, not either/or. I think people that know me can say I've said this pretty consistently over the years.

              First off, I am totally not saying this to kiss up... :p

              But your stock has just risen in my eyes. I found myself repeatedly chuckling and agreeing with what you said.


              I have also built my own search engine, and it was very inspirational to refine the algorithms to get the results that I thought the software should supply to my end-users.

              I also do not really do enough "testing".

              Instead, I tend to trust my gut instinct about how I would build Google to be a better search engine, mixed with observations about how the results come out as expected and unexpectedly.

              Earlier this evening, I wrote an article about the Panda-Farmer update, where I indicated that it was important to look for similarities and anomalies in the data to be able to reach conclusions about exactly what had happened in the update and how to utilize those findings in your own SEO activities.

              In the very simplistic of terms, the search engines are converting words, pages, links, etc. into numbers and adding the numbers up to determine what page should rank where in the SERPs.

              And if you can analyze words on a page, links to the page, etc., in a numerical fashion, you will be better able to draw useful conclusions in your SEO endeavors.

              As you said, Google is moving the goal post with each algorithm update, and those updates are coming fast and furious these days. Shoot, they did two major updates in the first 60 days of 2011. Whereas, they did two major updates in all of 2010.

              Granted, they probably also did daily changes to their algorithms, but the only ones we ever hear about are those that leave a noticeable footprint in the SERPs.

              I found a really big smile on my face when you said:

              There's no one way to do SEO. I've never seen a "perfectly SEOed" page ever rank #1 for a competitive keword. And if there was a "perfect" way to become #1, all the #1 pages for all keywords would look a lot more alike.
              I smiled because I understand that if there was one perfect way to do SEO and all webmasters worked the process the exact same way, then Google would have to move the goal posts a few hundred yards instead of a few yards at a time.

              Anything automated by large numbers of people will eventually come to nothing.

              If everyone is doing the exact same thing, then everyone in effect nullifies themselves.

              As was said in the movie Highlander, "There can be only one!"

              And applied to SEO, there can be only one web page in the #1 spot.

              Yes diversity is always key in SEO and article marketing.

              That is why when I syndicate articles, sometimes I use my own service, and sometimes I use my competitors. :p Sometimes I use both, and sometimes I use a combination of many.

              I shuffle things around, so that my footprint for one article always looks different than the footprint from the next article and the next.

              Those are the things I do to enhance my chances of getting some Google Love. But as always, at the end of the day, I run my business as I see fit, not as Google tells me I should do it.
              Signature
              Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
              Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578381].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                First off, I am totally not saying this to kiss up... :p
                Maybe next time.


                I have also built my own search engine, and it was very inspirational to refine the algorithms to get the results that I thought the software should supply to my end-users.


                I also do not really do enough "testing".

                Instead, I tend to trust my gut instinct about how I would build Google to be a better search engine, mixed with observations about how the results come out as expected and unexpectedly.
                I honestly believe this is the best SEO training there is, and that's to have your own search engine where you actually care about the quality of the SERPs. The thought process totally changes.


                As you said, Google is moving the goal post with each algorithm update, and those updates are coming fast and furious these days. Shoot, they did two major updates in the first 60 days of 2011. Whereas, they did two major updates in all of 2010.

                Granted, they probably also did daily changes to their algorithms, but the only ones we ever hear about are those that leave a noticeable footprint in the SERPs.
                Not only is the goal post moving...I've always felt there were multiple algos in play. If I'm correct, then variety is the key strategy, as it seems to me the more variety in the SERPs should mean more variety in your own SEO strategies.

                And if we take this into the future, we'll have more personalized, mobile and geo influenced SERPs. This means even more variety for pages that will be in the Top 10.

                The effect this would have is that it will be easier to get some traffic, but harder to get a lot of traffic, UNLESS you have a wide variety of SEO strategies.




                I found a really big smile on my face when you said:

                I smiled because I understand that if there was one perfect way to do SEO and all webmasters worked the process the exact same way, then Google would have to move the goal posts a few hundred yards instead of a few yards at a time.
                I REALLY want to see a page with the keyword in all 200 places.


                Yes diversity is always key in SEO and article marketing.

                That is why when I syndicate articles, sometimes I use my own service, and sometimes I use my competitors. :p Sometimes I use both, and sometimes I use a combination of many.

                I shuffle things around, so that my footprint for one article always looks different than the footprint from the next article and the next.
                And IMO, this is how to do things. In many ways I think variety is more important that quantity and maybe even rivals quality.

                For example, take Article Marketing Robot. Instead of always submitting to 1000 sites, submit to only 100 different ones each time. Then spend the time saved converting the article to pdf and doc files and submit them to the relevant directories, etc.
                Signature
                Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
                Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579655].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael D Forbes
    As for me, I'm pretty new with EZA and don't know much. I haven't gotten much of a return from EZA but for all I know, I might be doing it all wrong.

    That said, I don't care how long it takes. As Alexa said right up front, I just keep dripping them in, and they keep approving them. It mattered for my first few articles because I wanted results NOW, but it took me about 2 weeks to realize I have plenty of ther things to do then habitually check and see if my articles are approved. Now I just wait for the confirmation email.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576047].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bgean
    Alexa,

    Apparently some have never heard the expression, good things come to those who wait. <wink>

    However, be that as it may -- the courses teaching people that EZA is where you need to place your articles first, aren't 100% correct in their instructions.

    There is a faster way to get your articles indexed into Google.... aside from EZA. I'm surprised people make such a fuss over getting into their directory when they can easily get into Google within a day versus waiting to get listed for the same article through EZA within 5 days or longer.

    There's plenty of other resources where you can use that material. I won't go into it entirely here. Heck, I could make a product that would show you just how many different ways that one article could bring you traffic -- and it doesn't rely on EZA!

    Set your sights on other resources. You would be surprised just how many are out there that aren't being used and should be!
    Signature
    ----- ** -----

    BonnieGean.com · Building Community
    Free Reports & Tutorials for Budding Entrepreneurs
    Creator of Infographics KickStart
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576203].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by bgean View Post

      Alexa,

      the courses teaching people that EZA is where you need to place your articles first, aren't 100% correct in their instructions.
      They're certainly not. "100% incorrect" would be a much more accurate description. Which is why I've been trying for over a year to draw everyone's attention to this important thread, to which I post links about twice a day, in which so many successful, experienced, professional article marketers explain in such detail, and with such (rare) uniformity why submitting your articles to EZA in the first instance is such a mistake.

      (Of course, "those courses" are typically incorrect in a large number of other ways, too. Some of which boil down the fact that they purport to be teaching "article marketing" whereas what they're actually trying to teach is only "article directory marketing".)

      Originally Posted by bgean View Post

      There is a faster way to get your articles indexed into Google.... aside from EZA.
      Clearly. There are many ways - several of which I've outlined in posts here over the last couple of years.

      As I said in the OP here, I don't really understand the hurry, anyway, myself, but there it is. I think we can agree anyway (even if we're not completely agreed about our reasons for it) that submission to EZA is, in fact, a dreadful way to get your article into Google.

      Originally Posted by bgean View Post

      There's plenty of other resources where you can use that material.
      Indeed. And the first and foremost one is on your own site.

      When a potential customer puts one of my keywords into Google as his search-terms, the last thing I want him finding is an article-directory copy of my work: I want him coming to my own site, of course (if they go to an article directory, I'm going to lose about 60%+ of them before they ever even see my site, aren't I? This is a real no-brainer ...)

      I'm all in favour of using article directories as part of my article marketing, but I'm certainly not giving them content before I've published it myself: I'm in business to develop my websites and income, not theirs.

      The idea of submitting new, unpublished articles to directories is absolutely loopy.

      Directories get away with people doing this only because:-

      (a) So many people don't understand what the concepts of duplicate/syndicated content and original/unique content are really all about, and ...

      (b) So many people imagine that it's "difficult" to outrank an article directory and don't understand that they're getting published there only on a non-context-relevant PR-0 page.

      But I'm really happy for all my competitors to do that.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576274].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
      Banned
      You syndicate, I syndicate, all the people you made up and put in the "syndicate", syndicate. We're all in different markets, we all do things in different ways, we all learn from each other and respect what we all do. We don't JV, share niches or anything else. We simply respect the fact that we do something similar and we're willing to learn something from one and other.
      I know you won't say it, but you implied it. And that is that telling someone to submit all their website content to EZA is bad advice. And that was my whole point when I first posted.

      The whole "Article Syndication Syndicate" bit started when you were all circling the wagons and not admitting that it is piss-poor advice.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576292].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
        Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

        I know you won't say it, but you implied it. And that is that telling someone to submit all their website content to EZA is bad advice.
        The whole "Article Syndication Syndicate" bit started when you were all circling the wagons and not admitting that it is piss-poor advice.
        No Dave, where you see me implying something I don't. That's the beauty of life, as you know. You are so full of contradictions and a complete refusal to look facts in the face, I'm almost yawning myself to sleep here.

        "you were all" - I love the way you see yourself as something different as opposed to a complete refusal to accept you're dealing with individuals in different circumstances, aims and goals.

        Don't talk about what I implied or we could go back to your "I've been syndicating for 5 years" post and your "I've never done article marketing/syndication" post. :rolleyes:

        I don't have to agree with you Dave. Just like you have a carte blanche refusal to even listen to others, which you do religiously, so why would I listen to you?

        Read what I said. Just read it.

        You syndicate, I syndicate. the difference Dave, between you and me, is I don't know what you do, therefore don't criticise it. You on the other hand assume and wade in, with no evidence. You think we're all the same, yet you're no different to the syndicate you made up!

        I know you won't say it, but you implied it.
        I think we've very clearly established what you think is one thing and what everyone else thinks is something else. So if you feel I'm implying anything, that's your perception of events, which I believe is very much wrong.

        EDIT. If you find other peoples advice so p*** poor and you've become the go to man for advice, instead of spending your time trying to discredit others, why not go and help some people here that are struggling?
        Signature

        Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576477].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

          "you were all" - I love the way you see yourself as something different as opposed to a complete refusal to accept you're dealing with individuals in different circumstances, aims and goals.
          This sums up my point. Everyone has different circumstances, which is why they take different approaches.

          Which is why it's horrible advice to give someone the green light on putting their entire website on EZA, without knowing anything about their business.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576551].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            This sums up my point. Everyone has different circumstances, which is why they take different approaches.
            At last, we're getting somewhere.

            So why have you coined the phrase for everyone but yourself that syndicates are "The Syndication Syndicate" and referred to them as "they" throughout, when in actual fact you admit...

            Everyone has different circumstances, which is why they take different approaches.
            At least we agree here, briefly, Dave.

            There is no syndicate, just lots of different people in a big forum.

            I'm off to bed Dave, all this yawning is making me sleepy.

            No hard feelings chap. We've had a good debate tonight. I enjoy our chats.
            Signature

            Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576585].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
          Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post


          Lets also be clear that this "syndicate" that Dave has very bizarrely made up and imagined in his own mind, doesn't actually exist. Just like fairies and Father Christmas don't either.
          Hey! Fairies do exist! You stop that you big meanie.

          Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

          I'm off for a nice cold Ice cold beer, then we're all flying out to Oklahoma to meet Bill and have a syndicate meeting in Oklahoma. We need to get our harmonica playing just right for when we run out of thanks, thanking each other the next time.
          Can I join? I will show you my personal book of fairy evidence. I make some mean drinks too.
          Signature

          "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576592].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
            Originally Posted by Jill Carpenter View Post

            Hey! Fairies do exist! You stop that you big meanie.

            Can I join? I will show you my personal book of fairy evidence. I make some mean drinks too.
            Fairies, drink, where are you?

            I'll start rowing now but I want at least three drinks on the table when I get there.

            Then I'll start believing in fairies again.
            Signature

            Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576611].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Tina Golden
              Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

              Fairies, drink, where are you?

              I'll start rowing now but I want at least three drinks on the table when I get there.

              Then I'll start believing in fairies again.
              Couple more drinks and he might even start seeing them.
              Signature
              Discover how to have fabulous, engaging content with
              Fast & Easy Content Creation
              ***Especially if you don't have enough time, money, or just plain HATE writing***
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576627].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

          You think we're all the same

          Well, we do all put our pants on one leg at a time...

          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576630].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
            Banned
            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            Well, we do all put our pants on one leg at a time...

            And some of you can do that and play the harmonica at the same time (or so I've been led to believe).
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576639].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
              Listen,

              I'm on a small boat rowing across the big ocean to see Jill for a heavy nights drinking. When we're suitably rat a**ed we're going to find fairies.

              Apparently Father Christmas is lining up shots of tequila as I speak.

              Must go, don't want my battery to go "mid crossing".

              Good night all.
              Signature

              Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576670].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author myob
                Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

                Listen,

                I'm on a small boat rowing across the big ocean to see Jill for a heavy nights drinking. When we're suitably rat a**ed we're going to find fairies....
                Come on down to West Hollywood, California on June 10 and I'll show you some real fairies in full dress regalia. Other such syndicated parades by the Syndicate are also scheduled at about that same time in San Francisco, Miami, Houston, New York, Paris, Moscow, Vancouver, Toronto, Sao Paulo, Tel Aviv, Amsterdam, and other major cities around the world for your convenience. Many of them are highly accomplished harmonica players.
                Signature
                “If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” – Isaac Newton
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576879].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            Well, we do all put our pants on one leg at a time...

            You people wear pants?

            And I thought this was the streaking syndicator syndicate.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576669].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Boricua
    Hi Alexa,

    Approval times matters. I've a premium account on my end with ezinearticles.com and the approval is usually 24hrs hours quicker then having any of the unlimited free accounts.

    I'll recommend ezinearticles.com as a Google ranking booster as first priority in the beneficial seo mindset. For traffic, it's good if you do great with rare niches. One of my articles has 100,000+ views, but for the regular niche topics that are the usual highly competitive ones that I market for my websites and clients on my portfolio, I recommend you pay for a premium membership on EZA if submissions are in the 100's. The saved bio box benefit is another plus on my end, I rather have it saved for my sites then have to copy/paste new bio boxes.

    For traffic and faster rankings, logically, consider other article submission networks...it will help greatly!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576263].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
    Dave, you have just made it onto your first ignore list. I encourage the rest of you to add him to yours as well. He has made it clear he is not reading posts, therefore I see no reason to engage him, let alone acknowledge him at all.

    Chris
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576511].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
      Originally Posted by Chris Worner View Post

      Dave, you have just made it onto your first ignore list.
      Dude - you're way behind... it's definitely not his first.
      Signature

      nothing to see here.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576922].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
        Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

        Dude - you're way behind... it's definitely not his first.
        Perhaps I should clarify by stating that he has the honor of being the first inductee into my hall of people to ignore.

        Chris
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576944].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

        Originally Posted by Chris Worner View Post

        Dave, you have just made it onto your first ignore list.

        Dude - you're way behind... it's definitely not his first.

        I think he meant to say that his Ignore List has its first resident.


        p.s. Given how much guff I give skimmers, Dave should be careful what he believes about some of my posts.
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576946].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
    Banned
    So why have you coined the phrase for everyone but yourself that syndicates are "The Syndication Syndicate" and referred to them as "they" throughout, when in actual fact you admit...
    Because so many circle the wagon when bad, blanket advice is given. Which is why this thread even went off on that tangent.

    Submitting your entire site to EZA, despite your beliefs on duplicate content, is not a good strategy when all the facts aren't known.

    I don't think I am alone in that. Pose that question to Matt Cutts, Dan Thies, anyone at Webmaster World, etc.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3576828].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

      Because so many circle the wagon when bad, blanket advice is given. Which is why this thread even went off on that tangent.
      Actually Dave, go back and see your original few posts and see how you solely and by yourself not only started this but are the sole person responsible for dragging this conversation away from Alexas intended subject and down the route it's gone.

      First post:

      Dave Rodman - Wait, do people put original content on their site and then submit the same content to EZA?

      Hopefully not, for their sake.
      Followed immediately with oneplusone questioning why you're here..

      What's this got to do with the approval times :confused:
      You then went on to mention Alexa, the person you like to argue with most.

      Then, by just your 4th post here, you begin the snipeing.

      Haha. You're funny.
      usually doesn't entail just *******izing my content across the web.
      The whole "Article Syndication Is The Answer" movement
      but I do think it's funny to see this in action.
      A handful of diehards fawning over a certain poster and making syndication out to be some kind of miracle worker. Haha.
      All in your 4th post and you wonder why people react to you like they do?

      Pretty obvious really.

      Sorry drmani and others, that feel Dave has been treated unfairly but other people here have quite adequately and without being rude, entered this discussion with reasonable and fully believable and very valid points without resorting to the sort of snipeing seen above that only serves to drag the level of conversation down.

      So you see Dave, you're wrong and just to prove the point, a few posts after the post I'm answering now you say...

      Right. Which is why I started the conversation a few pages back
      Alexa mentioned her point and you just had to come in argue, as you do, every time she speaks. If you could learn to conduct yourself without the snipeing and comments I've highlighted in just the one post above, I'm sure a reasonable and educational discussion, will ensue in future.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579013].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author drmani
        Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

        [B]Sorry drmani and others, that feel Dave has been treated unfairly...
        It's less about being "treated unfairly" and more a word of caution about not throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

        If there's one lesson Life has taught me, it's that everyone matters - and has some value to share, if only we are open enough to see and receive it. (esoteric, metaphysical, maybe?!)

        All success
        Dr.Mani
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579160].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Originally Posted by drmani View Post

          It's less about being "treated unfairly" and more a word of caution about not throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

          If there's one lesson Life has taught me, it's that everyone matters - and has some value to share, if only we are open enough to see and receive it. (esoteric, metaphysical, maybe?!)

          All success
          Dr.Mani
          Hi drmani,

          I agree entirely. In fact the way Kurt does things, isn't the way I do things but I admire him all the same. He's been doing it far longer than me and is someone I should and do listen too and learn from, as are you. The fact is, I meet many people here whose views may clash with mine but I always enjoy a discussion and come away learning something new.

          Dave is a clever guy with a successful business, I've learned things from him too. The problem is and it's not just me, is the inability to discuss things with him as he just belittles and snipes people that don't meet his views and degrades the discussion until everyones against him. Then he'll switch about and say he can't understand why people get annoyed with him.

          I agree everyone has some level of value and I've said Dave has lots to offer this forum, more than most I'd say. Sadly his conduct betrays that. As Bill said earlier, he could become someone people look up to here but to do that, he needs to do things differently.

          I appreciate you taking the time to reply drmani and look forward to reading more of your splendid posts in the future.
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579351].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
          Originally Posted by drmani View Post

          It's less about being "treated unfairly" and more a word of caution about not throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

          If there's one lesson Life has taught me, it's that everyone matters - and has some value to share, if only we are open enough to see and receive it. (esoteric, metaphysical, maybe?!)

          All success
          Dr.Mani
          Thanks Mani.

          I love it when you cut through the crap and remind us that we've forgotten simple things. It's much appreciated.

          Andy
          Signature

          nothing to see here.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579365].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    I will let Alexa answer her own question, but in my mind, it is access to new eyeballs.

    The thing is, if you haven't found everyone who wants to publish your articles yet, then you should go to where publishers are looking for content to makes yourself known to them.

    New publishers usually get started looking for content in EZA, so we should at least have a presence there.

    We never know who exactly will become our next best outlet, until they make themselves known to us.
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577064].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Sorry, Katya ... I'm embarrassed to say I hadn't read all the thread.

      I confess I stopped taking it seriously when someone who, a couple of weeks ago, was saying "I don't do article marketing at all" announced here that he's been syndicating his articles since 2006. It all just seemed to be too surreal and ludicrous to be worth my attention, and to be honest I was regretting having started the thread in the first place.

      I kept returning to it only when I was getting private messages about it.

      However, all of that was perhaps churlish and unfair of me - and I learned quite a bit from several replies about the possible reasons that some people with very specific, time-sensitive business models do have for being concerned about approval times; so thank you to all concerned.

      Originally Posted by KatyaSenina View Post

      I guess, many marketers depend on them for traffic?
      Well, "they should know better".

      Depending on an article directory for traffic is very forlorn, and pretty misguided, and has been ever since I've been online (and all the more so now, surely?).

      Here's what I see as the "key point": when a potential customer puts one of my keywords into Google as his search-terms, the last thing I want him finding is an article-directory copy of my work: I want him coming to my own site, of course (if they go to an article directory, I'm going to lose about 60%+ of them before they ever even see my site, aren't I? This is a real no-brainer ...)

      Originally Posted by KatyaSenina View Post

      I've noticed that it's just a waste of time to bother with article directories for traffic
      Agreed ... actually I think it's worse than just "a waste of time": it's something that can (relatively/comparably speaking) actually damage your own site, if you try to get "organic traffic" that way.

      Originally Posted by KatyaSenina View Post

      I recall you once said in some thread, can't remember which one, that your articles were already syndicated BEFORE they even appeared on EZA. Makes me wonder; why do you still bother with EZA?
      For further syndication. There are always webmasters searching EZA (internally, not through Google) looking for content. It takes me only seconds to submit all my articles there: there's no reason not to ... it's "something for nothing". When each of my niche sites is new-ish, I'm more dependent on it, of course. By the time I already have my own "little network of syndicators" lined up, it's less important, but still costs nothing and sometimes leads to interesting and unpredictable places.

      Originally Posted by KatyaSenina View Post

      Do many people really find your articles on EZA and re-publish them on their sites?
      More than I expect to, usually, but in inverse proportion to the age of my site in the relevant niche, of course, simply because the longer it's been running, the more I'll have done through "other arrangements". But in my case many of those "other arrangements" originally started off exactly that way, be "being found at EZA".

      I used to submit everything to about 7 or 8 directories, with a different punctuation-mark somewhere in the article (typically a comma replaced by a semi-colon, or something similar that nobody else would be aware of), just so that I could tell, when I found syndicated copies, what their source had been. And it was almost always EZA.

      Originally Posted by KatyaSenina View Post

      Just curious, cuz I feel like it's very rare (for most people for that to happen)... I mean EZA has tons of articles, what are the chances someone will pick up and re-publish one of their articles?
      If they're written for syndication, I find it's not rare at all.

      If they have a "salesy resource-box", or use "click here" as anchor-text, then obviously almost nobody's going to want them on their website and they'll never get syndicated at all.

      Most articles that I see, myself, in EZA have almost no chance at all of being syndicated, because they're not written for syndication: I think it's as simple as that. They're written for "traffic and backlinks". That's "article directory marketing", not "article marketing". And you and I have already agreed that it's more or less a waste of time. The traffic's hopeless, you don't want to get traffic that way anyway, and the backlinks are crap. :p

      The purpose and function of EZA's existence is syndication. That's why it was called "Ezine Articles": it was a provider of articles for ezines. (More "articles for websites", these days, I suppose, but the principle's the same).

      Originally Posted by KatyaSenina View Post

      I mean if you already have your articles published somewhere else before they get on EZA (or shortly after EZA has approved them), why bother with EZA?
      Some of the ones I'm getting published elsewhere, I'm only getting published elsewhere by having originally had articles "found in EZA".

      I admit that my entire business, as it is now, would never have got off the ground at all without EZA. (I like to think I know more now than when I was starting, and if EZA disappeared tomorrow I'd still manage to keep going, partly with what I've learned from Bill Platt and others here, and partly with what I've discovered on my own, but it would be harder for me). When I start off my next, new affiliate niche-site, I'll get it up and running by using EZA exactly as I have done with my existing ones. I hope.

      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      I will let Alexa answer her own question, but in my mind, it is access to new eyeballs.
      Sheesh ... I was typing for about 10 minutes, and Bill got the same answer into 4 words ...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577217].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Wills
        Wow... Alexa, you have created a monster! This thread just keeps snow balling.

        I don't see what all the fuss is about. Sure article marketing is dead.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577313].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Wills View Post

          I don't see what all the fuss is about. Sure article marketing is dead.

          Absolutely!!

          In fact, the services have been announced to take place on the first of next month at Chris Knight's house.

          The time will be 2pm EST, since most article marketers are awake all night. Chris said that he wanted to schedule at a time where everyone would not be crawling out of bed, yipping about who gets up at this time...

          :p
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577504].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            Well, we do all put our pants on one leg at a time...

            Yes, if you wear them that is. Or not, if you sit on the bed like me and launch both legs in simultaneously, shimmy up, and then stand and hop.


            I thought I should update - Richard Van called to tell me has made it about 50 miles out to sea.


            I've turned on the light house, and making ice cubes for his arrival.
            Signature

            "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577633].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Stardate
    Because majority of us all want it now! Not knowing means no control, at least me personally. But who does not care about approval time, we got things to do, lol, so we need to know that are articles are on there way towards helping us make more money.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577787].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
    Originally Posted by ssohaib View Post

    Well I don't personally care about that
    Thank you for this highly informative and useful information. And thanks for the other useful posts I see you commenting on.

    You appear to be a very helpful new member. So glad you joined.
    Signature

    "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577788].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mcmillad
    I agree with you completely, but people are impatient. So am I. Once you get going on it then everything is ok. If you only submit 1 article a month then I see where people get angered.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3577973].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KenThompson
    Kurt, Bill.. nice conversation going on here.

    It is possible to arrive at the same conclusion with enough analysis of what exists on page one. I've seen very 'seemingly' anomalous results lately. I have often read that there is no real magic bullet with seo and what it takes to get to number one. What I have found on my own, through research and analysis, only confirms that.

    Just recently I found something, quite by mistake, that seems to violate just about everything most people say, in here at least. I have proof, for myself, going back to the end of last year about this particular example.

    Then, about a month ago, I came across a number one site that optimized the home page in a way most people do not. In fact, the content is clearly written for the search engines and not necessarily for the reader. But this site made it through the latest change with rankings intact. I also know that site has been at number one for at least a full year.

    So... I would not be quick to dispense someone's method just because it seems to not be in line with the mainstream way of doing things, seo wise.

    I know this is way off topic from the OP, but I'm replying to your conversation which I've been reading.


    Ken
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578426].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Martin Luxton
      Originally Posted by KenThompson View Post

      Kurt, Bill.. nice conversation going on here.

      It is possible to arrive at the same conclusion with enough analysis of what exists on page one. I've seen very 'seemingly' anomalous results lately. I have often read that there is no real magic bullet with seo and what it takes to get to number one. What I have found on my own, through research and analysis, only confirms that.

      Just recently I found something, quite by mistake, that seems to violate just about everything most people say, in here at least. I have proof, for myself, going back to the end of last year about this particular example.

      Then, about a month ago, I came across a number one site that optimized the home page in a way most people do not. In fact, the content is clearly written for the search engines and not necessarily for the reader. But this site made it through the latest change with rankings intact. I also know that site has been at number one for at least a full year.

      So... I would not be quick to dispense someone's method just because it seems to not be in line with the mainstream way of doing things, seo wise.

      I know this is way off topic from the OP, but I'm replying to your conversation which I've been reading.


      Ken
      Ken,

      Sometimes I wonder if Google has an algorithm at all - they just have a tribe of monkeys sitting at keyboards zapping sites at random. That way they keep people guessing forever.

      Martin
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578470].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by KenThompson View Post

      Kurt, Bill.. nice conversation going on here.

      It is possible to arrive at the same conclusion with enough analysis of what exists on page one. I've seen very 'seemingly' anomalous results lately. I have often read that there is no real magic bullet with seo and what it takes to get to number one. What I have found on my own, through research and analysis, only confirms that.

      Just recently I found something, quite by mistake, that seems to violate just about everything most people say, in here at least. I have proof, for myself, going back to the end of last year about this particular example.

      Then, about a month ago, I came across a number one site that optimized the home page in a way most people do not. In fact, the content is clearly written for the search engines and not necessarily for the reader. But this site made it through the latest change with rankings intact. I also know that site has been at number one for at least a full year.

      So... I would not be quick to dispense someone's method just because it seems to not be in line with the mainstream way of doing things, seo wise.

      I know this is way off topic from the OP, but I'm replying to your conversation which I've been reading.


      Ken
      Hey a Ken sighting...

      Anyone that's done more than a dozen searches and looked at the #1 pages for various keywords should be able to see that there's a lot of variety, from an SEO point of view.

      And if you look at the Top 10 for the searches, you see even more variety.
      Signature
      Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
      Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579538].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author O0o0O
    It probably has a lot to do with the business model. It's called "Float Time", and the concept is seen predominantly in the banking industry. Business owners would more likely go with a payment processor that processes checks that same day rather than one who processes checks within two days. This is because the daily expenditures are so dependent on that day's cash flow.

    Fiverr pays out every 14 days. Clickbank pays out every 7 days. It takes about 3 days for PayPal merchants to move their money from their PayPal account to their checking account. Amazon takes 3 months to pay out. People are constantly complaining about this because they want their money now. It's no different with EzineArticles approval time. Folks like fast turnaround times, also known as "Float Times". It's easier on their organization skills.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3578829].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author drmani
    Kurt's school of SEO (which is one I subscribe to and follow)
    has always taught that 'success' lies in covering the bases.

    When his "Big Page of SEO" was free access, I read it at least
    once every 6 months to refresh those timeless principles. And
    when it went paid, I bought access, printed it out, and have
    continued.

    What I *love* about that approach is that it factors in EVERY
    variable, present, past, and future, and advocates creating a
    Web presence that'll rise like cream to the top regardless of
    which model is currently in vogue with SEs.

    If you're creating some content with META tags, for instance,
    you may not get an advantage when SEs ignore them - but will
    when they do. Why would you even consider doing either/or
    when it's just a little bit harder to do 'AND'.

    With content creation for syndication purposes, though, there's
    a factor at play which is TIME. Quality content creation takes
    time and effort, both of which are limited and don't scale far
    beyond a point.

    Scripts, tools (like Kurt's excellent Dom Bomb collection) and
    creativity can help generate SEO'd content that fits most of
    the variations - but it's harder to have creative content made
    with such diversity, forcing a content creator to pick and choose
    between options and alternatives.

    * Publish to my site first, or not?
    * Submit to article directories, or not?
    * Syndicate to publishers, or not?
    * All unique content? Duplicate? Original?

    All these choices must be made. And made in a way that fits
    one's own business model.

    The only thing about article marketing through syndication that's
    nicer than staying ahead of the SEO game is that a well-placed
    content piece can pull in traffic for YEARS - and isn't as
    dependent upon the vagaries and shifts of algorithms and trends.

    That's provided the content is worthwhile and valuable in the
    first place!

    All success
    Dr.Mani
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579154].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Frank Marker
    Asking people like Alexa, Dave, TPW, Richard, Kierkegaard, or anyone else what their approach to article marketing is, whether they syndicate (or are in a syndicate), post to ezine first or last or never or did during the supermoon is pointless unless you know exactly why they are doing.

    Alexa is keen on syndication (maybe she's even in a shadowy article writing syndicate, perhaps a racing syndicate too) and doesn't think that, what she calls Article Directory Marketing works.

    Richard Van is keen on syndication too (is that because he's in the the same article writing syndicate or perhaps he just knows Alexa through the racing syndicate? Keep digging Dave the truth is out there).

    But unless you know what articles Alexa and Richard are writing for syndication and what they are marketing then asking what their approach to article writing and what they think of EZA will not tell you very much.

    What is clear from reading the thread is that the people who seem to know what they are talking about, and all joking/mocking/sniping aside, Dave seems to have a good idea of what he saying once you get past the conspiracy theories, do business in totally different ways.

    If this is the case then they will of course have different opinions when it comes to the best way of article marketing because it will be the best way for them.

    Newbies should refrain from seeking absolute judgements from the more experienced. And the more experienced should refrain from offer absolute judgements.

    This is of course unless anyone is prepared to post a few of their successful articles with a covering note on how they use them!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579441].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Hi Frank.

      Nice post and very relevant and to the point as well. Good stuff.

      Just to clarify though, there is no syndicate. That's just something Dave made up on a whim to bunch all the people he disagrees with into one heap and stand out alone on his own.

      Nothing wrong with that and from now on I'm not getting involved in any more arguements with him. I'll also refrain from giving advice to newbies on what works for me just in case it doesn't help them.

      In future, I'll just be telling them what worked for me on a mental level. I was living on the streets of London homeless 7 years ago, worst time of my life and it gives me goose bumps writing this now. Now I have several businesses and fingers in many pies. I did this by working very hard, failing a lot, not giving up and finding out what worked for me. It took me 2 years to earn anything worth mentioning and the last 5 years have been my reward for never giving up. Do what works for you, test everything and keep going forward. What works for me, may not work for you, it's up to you to find the business you need on your own. Take anything anyone tells you as information, act on it if you so please and figure out the best approach because there is no "one size fits all" in this business.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579548].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

        Just to clarify though, there is no syndicate. That's just something Dave made up on a whim to bunch all the people he disagrees with into one heap and stand out alone on his own.

        Nothing wrong with that and from now on I'm not getting involved in any more arguements with him. I'll also refrain from giving advice to newbies on what works for me just in case it doesn't help them.
        No, I don't have a problem with people that disagree with me. I happen to think that one approach works for me very well, but if something works for someone else, then more power to them. I don't think BUM marketing has much sustainablility, but if someone else uses it and makes money and is ok with the downsides, then that's fine by me.

        My "Article Syndication Syndicate" term was clearly just to put a name to what I saw going on. And that was a handful of people defending one another, thanking each other for each post, and making quips like "You know you're doing it the right way. Lets not spend too much time worrying about the "others" or "Alexa, you well know that most people on Warrior Forum aren't article marketers, they are article directory marketers(You coined this term I believe) whom rely on quick approval for quick short term traffic, with the possibility of quick cash."

        Personally, the comments above, I don't really care much about. I'm opinionated in what I think works. The comment I had a problem with was this one, "They'll already have it published indexed on their own sites, won't they, prior to EZA submission, surely?" and then paired it up with the other thread where she says its a perfectly good idea to submit all your website content to EZA, because the duplicate content penalty is a myth.

        Richard, despite what you might think, I don't really have a problem with the approach that you or others take. If it works, it works. But there is some advice that, while it might have worked for one person, DEFINITELY needs to be qualified for the audience. Advice like "Sure, it's ok to put all your website content on EZA" is not the same as saying "Yes, you should include keywords on your page if you wish to rank for them". The latter is advice virtually everyone will agree on. The former is advice that experienced marketers in this thread has said is not likely a good idea.

        And the reason I called you all the Article Syndication Syndicate, is that I couldn't believe how many people started circling the wagon and defending the advice. It wasn't until DrMani came into the thread and said that he doesn't believe in the penalty (or my style), but agrees it's not generally a good idea to just submit all your content to a directory.

        So I was referring to the Article Syndication Syndicate, not because of their ideas, but because

        a) Advice was given out, without qualification, that had some serious downside risk.

        b) The usual suspects come out and don't attempt the clarify the point, they just try and circle the wagons.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3580978].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Dave,

          As far as I'm concerned, as I stated in the post you've responded to, I'm not going to give advice out from now on. As we've discovered there are too many variables at play and what I've found to work, won't work for someone else.

          I have enjoyed helping people here and will continue to help people here but on a level of encouragement, rather than actually giving them any advice that has worked for me.

          I'll continue to do what I do, it works for me, I shall not however, be telling others what I do or telling them it's right.

          This way I'll live a quieter life and be able to plough more effort into growing my business.

          It's been a pleasure discussing it with you Dave and I wish you all the very best in what you do.
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3581043].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bravo75
    Depends what you are aiming for. I have made some nice money using Google Trends to push CPA offers. This would never have been possible with EZA. By the time your article is approved, the trend is gone while others are making bank using articlesbase etc.
    I also find that articlesbase articles get indexed faster as well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3579954].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Robert Puddy
    ok so why hasnt anyone mentioned the fact you can create 800 word articles split them in 2 and put part one on directorys with the sig file simply saying

    ************************************
    to find out more about this topic and to
    read part two of this article vist mysite .com
    ************************************
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3580304].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by Robert Puddy View Post

      ok so why hasnt anyone mentioned the fact you can create 800 word articles split them in 2 and put part one on directorys with the sig file simply saying

      ************************************
      to find out more about this topic and to
      read part two of this article vist mysite .com
      ************************************
      Just a thought though, if people get to your site first, won't they just have the second half of an article to read? :confused:

      My apologies if I've completely missed something .
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3580384].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
        Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

        Just a thought though, if people get to your site first, won't they just have the second half of an article to read? :confused:

        My apologies if I've completely missed something .
        lol.

        So you make one long article - split it into 2. Then you put the first half on your site first - and then on Ezine article. The one you put on Ezine links to part 2 that is on your site.

        :p

        (the fairies told me this)
        Signature

        "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3580656].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Originally Posted by Jill Carpenter View Post

          lol.

          So you make one long article - split it into 2. Then you put the first half on your site first - and then on Ezine article. The one you put on Ezine links to part 2 that is on your site.

          :p

          (the fairies told me this)
          Is this another fun game?

          Ooooh goody. This is just like that nursury rhyme, "Ring a ring a roses...."

          I love games
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3580766].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author myob
        Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

        Just a thought though, if people get to your site first, won't they just have the second half of an article to read? :confused:

        My apologies if I've completely missed something .
        No problemo. Just put a link at the end of the second half of the article on your website:

        ************************************
        to find out more about this topic and to
        read part one of this article vist ezinearticles .com
        ************************************
        Signature
        “If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” – Isaac Newton
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3580737].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Tell you what, why not make a 1200 word article and put the first third on your site, second third on EZA and the third, third back on your site.