Content Isn't King ...

[vimkar]

A certain myth is common on the Internet. It is the myth that Content is King.

Bill Gates may have started this Content is King hysteria back in 1996 with a column published 1/3/96, by the title of Content is King, wherein Mr. Gates opined thus:

"Content is where I expect much of the real money will be made on the Internet....

I expect societies will see intense competition-and ample failure as well as success-in all categories of popular content-not just software and news, but also games, entertainment, sports programming, directories, classified advertising, and on-line communities devoted to major interests....

If people are to be expected to put up with turning on a computer to read a screen, they must be rewarded with deep and extremely up-to-date information that they can explore at will. They need to have audio, and possibly video...

For the Internet to thrive, content providers must be paid for their work. The long-term prospects are good, but I expect a lot of disappointment in the short-term as content companies struggle to make money through advertising or subscriptions. It isn't working yet, and it may not for some time....

In the long run, advertising is promising. An advantage of interactive advertising is that an initial message needs only to attract attention rather than convey much information. A user can click on the ad to get additional information-and an advertiser can measure whether people are doing so....

...technology will liberate publishers to charge small amounts of money, in the hope of attracting wide audiences. "

He was wrong


A content site with 1,000,000 uniques, and over four million pageviews per month displaying Google Adsense achieves a CTR of 2.5% with an average click at $0.20. Twenty-five thousand click though's and the grand prize is a paltry $5,000.

By contrast, an ecommerce site with the same 1,000,000 uniques per month, selling hosting at $100 per year with a conversion ratio of 4% just grossed $ 4,000,000.

Ecommerce sites - not content sites - are where the bulk of the money is being made

what do you think ??

:kickass:

 

[dgaussin]

Content sites don't need to invest a lot, just in content.. if you have ecommerce website, whatever you sell hosting or real things, you'll have to invest to buy this thing then resell.. You can't just compare like that so.

 

[Mark]

I still say that "content" and "Stickiness" Rule overall ~ It is what Brands a site or domain .... Something Good to bring folks back !

 

[StudioWorks]

I think both are good. That was a interesting read btw.

- SW

 

[greatone]

Hi,

For me content is always the king when it comes to search engine optimization. This is good way to start getting more traffic from surfers. Your web site design is also important to convert this fraffics to sales or signups.

 

[trishan]

Fresh content is certainly important with emphasis on the fresh. The more up-to-date and new the content is the better a site will do.

 

[vimkar]

Fresh content is certainly important with emphasis on the fresh. The more up-to-date and new the content is the better a site will do.

Depending on your market, fresh content may not be a requirement. If the information your pages contain do not go out of date then updating may not be necessary. If your market is more news based for example, then changes regularly are a must. In general changes don't necessarily have to mean fresh content. They could involve simple edits to current content.

 

[snareklutz]

Content costs as well

 

[nicholas]

Loosely taken, ecommerce can be a form of content too.

Normally, 'content' by strict definition is articles, news, text and other forms of copy. But content can actually take on different forms, including those that aren't directly obvious. For example, ecommerce, or forums (where posts aren't articles per se, but are still a form of content that gives great value to people visiting it).

It just so happens that in ecommerce, *transactions* take the top priority, but it doesn't mean that's all that the site is about.

eBay for example, isn't just about auctions (which can be a form of content when you browse through the info about the listings) but has community, etc. Amazon is even a better example. By all accounts it's supposed to be a quintessential ecommerce operator. But many people (myself included) frequent the place to read the reviews, and get more info about books and authors.

 

[RogueWriter]

I agree with nicholas, ecommerce sites have content as well.

'Content' is in the eye of the surfer. If I am looking for a way to buy red widgets, and your site sells red widgets, you have provided the content I am looking for.

 

[vimkar]

I agree with nicholas, ecommerce sites have content as well.

'Content' is in the eye of the surfer. If I am looking for a way to buy red widgets, and your site sells red widgets, you have provided the content I am looking for.

exactly.....

 

[kbossons]

Buy two eCommerce sites that have identical products, however make sure one of them has a lot more information...maybe even a customer review feature. Then tell us if content is king or not :D

You're comparing apples to oranges bud

 

[Zeeble]

A content site with 1,000,000 uniques, and over four million pageviews per month displaying Google Adsense achieves a CTR of 2.5% with an average click at $0.20. Twenty-five thousand click though's and the grand prize is a paltry $5,000.

By contrast, an ecommerce site with the same 1,000,000 uniques per month, selling hosting at $100 per year with a conversion ratio of 4% just grossed $ 4,000,000.

Ecommerce sites - not content sites - are where the bulk of the money is being made

what do you think ??

:kickass:

The biggest thing that you just missed out there is this:

That maybe so, but how did the sites get the traffic in the first place? The content rich site put almost NO money into ads, wheras the ecommerce site must have spent more than its income to get that many visitors in the first place.