Death Blow to Minisite-Makers .... what now?

[alien51]

According to an excerpt from the news in CNN:

"In the post, Google describes minisite as sites with "shallow or low-quality content."

Adding the extension will let users create a "personal blocklist." They won't see content from that site again in Google searches done while using Chrome.

It also sends Google a list of all the sites users have blocked."

Personally, I'm not against Google's algorithm punishing websites with poor content by giving low ranking... but asking users to vote for websites that should be blocked from the internet, leaves the door open for people to sabotage their website competitors by voting them out.

And should this mean that your website should NEVER go online, if it has little content yet???

This also leaves a permanent black-eye to "nice" domain names whose previous owner got stricken out of Google search.

 

[barefoottech]

Hurray DefaultUser
SPOT ON.

 

[alien51]

Consumer marketing is benefiting. As a consumer I want access to information.

I never said that "low quality" websites should rank high.

But what i did say before, is that some people who pride themselves of claiming to write "original content" to make themselves appealing to Google, are just overrated. A lot of "original content" i see around are just a rehash of information taken elsewhere, recycled, re-worded, sprinkled with rants and opinion, and then marketed as original content.

So in effect, the ability to rehash "outsourced" information to present them as "original content" without anyone even doubting its orginality, can perhaps qualify as a "talent".

I don't think there is one guy who can claim to be an original content writer on a portfolio of topics. The only legitimate model i see, is pay writers who are experts in their own fields of interest much like what newspapers do, and get them to write for your website.

But what to do with domainers who own 800 domains? What "moral" options do they have in their hands with their "trashy" domains?

Noomle, Parked, NamePark all have quality standards for the domain name. How totally un-freemarket of them.

It's their servers, so it's their rules.

It's Google's index, so it's Google's rules. No argument there.

I was just explaining the difference between free market in the real world, versus the internet. Because in the internet, you need to be on "somebody's" index for people to find you. In the real world, you can be a hawker on the street like in New York and offer your goods to anyone passing by with no Google Police inspecting your goods if they are up to their own quality standards.

Pickpockets, scam artists are all just trying to make a living too.

Pickpockets and scammers, are criminals. So let's not include them anymore.

But "low quality", this is the one being debated upon.

Again, the "talent" you need in web development is to try not to be a lazy ass that depends on "autoblogs". But try to be like Leonardo DiCaprio's character in "Catch Me If You Can" where he tried to pass himself off as a Medical Doctor, simply by getting his medical infos from watching television soap operas. He's not really a doctor. He's just a "talented" scammer, trying to pass himself off as legit. That's what many "original content" websites are doing. It's difficult to be self-righteous and look yourself in the mirror and say everything i write on my website is my own original idea that did not come somewhere else.

You seem to want Google to be ok with irritating consumers from which I infer you are ok irritating consumers.

I was just saying that i'm not here to be the Police. This Namepros forum is not a Consumers Advocate site. This is a site for people talking about how to make money from domains, whether reselling them, developing them, parking them, or turning them into minisites with crap content. We haven't come to the point yet that we treat minisites the same way we treat Black Hat seos. Otherwise, they should have shutdown the minisite showcase thread here.

 

[mwzd]

I've only seen an upturn on ranking and traffic for our 'minisites', guess goog likes what we're doing.

Now if it only paid a decent revenue share, we'd develop a lot more stuff that would benefit us both, but goog wants to have the cake and eat it too.

Guess you can still make money off minisites, just don't depend on ad revenue, look for alternative revenue streams is all.

 

[Sparhawke]

It's like going to a popular restaurant that has a long list of menu. Instead of trying to sample all the food listed on the menu, you probably would simply ask the waiter what is the Chef's Top Ten Recommendations, and that's what you would probably order. Almost the same analogy with Google as our Chef. Not that the Chef will stop you, if you wanted to taste all the food (junk and all) if you have the time in your hands to do it.

Just to go slightly off-topic here but that last thing you ever want to do is get the cooks opinion. With the exception of Gordon Ramsay, Curtis Stone, Wolfgang Puck and other world class chefs (as well as their Maitre D) you should never get their opinion on what you should order in most cases as (s)he will be more interested in getting rid of the items that do not sell very well. What you want to do is not ask the people on the next table but judge their feedback in secret. If they are nodding their head and grinning then you can take that as a sign of good things to come for you.

This same tactic in a restaurant works the same way as a search engine, for the most part. Google and the others are telling us what we should be buying without any clue what we are actually looking for and what we like to eat. But if you have a hidden little gem of a restaurant it will never be found because the Yellow Pages equivalent will never mention it and the people will not stumble across it?

I tend to write either in a strictly business like fashion which is dry and boring or a whimsical ramble that takes ages to get to the point, when has ever asking someone their opinion who just doesn't get it garnered favourable results?

I tend to actually think the system is not broken...companies still get free advertisement for their wares while they are on the top spot, Google gets their advertisement fees and content from sites competing to be on top and the better sites end up rising.

All this change will do is shove everyone into a Gladiators arena and watch everything turn into a bloodbath when everyone is voting down their competitors.

The one thing that could be done is to give far less credence to spam and link farms but they bring in the cash, so they will not do that.

 

[SpareDomains]

It's interesting to me how domainers are so comfy with low quality results from Google because they lack the ability to make quality websites.

keyword being "domainers" not "developers"

I sold a hand reg yesterday for $1000, I sold a hand reg at the end of last year for $7500 so $8500 for a $15 investment both on topics I have no interest in.

Building sites on domains that cover topics you have no interest in when a "domainers" primary goal is sales makes no sense.

Since 2002 I have run my own servers, done web development, built numerous fully developed sites, sold numerous fully developed sites, done SEO, SEM for companies etc...

I have hundreds of domains parked, hundreds of domains slightly developed and a large handful of fully developed sites all generating income.

The assumption that the forum is filled with only domainers that can't develop is not the case just doesn't make sense to develop something you have no interest in. I park domains I wanna sell, I slightly develop domains I wanna sell but sell down the road for high amounts as more of a protective measure instead of just being a parked page and I fully develop domains I have an interest in.

I get your point and agree fully developed is the way to go for long term growth but that should only be done on domains that relate to something your knowledgeable on as something developed by someone that doesn't have the interest/knowledge on the topic would be better parked until it sells to someone who does so it reaches full potential.

I am not trying to be funny or anything but if someone feels domaining takes almost no talent why bother participating in a forum around that topic. IMHO playing a guitar takes almost no talent but playing one in such a way with tunes guys will pay you to hear does take some talent.

I think it is an interesting point that many domainers do hold so many sites and it will be harder to develop them all + they did not buy to develop rather they bought to resell in most cases and that seems to be an art to me.

for 10 posts you nailed it

 

[firefly]

Bingo SD

Repped both you and the new guy...lol

It is, after all, a domaining forum amongst other things.

 

[DU]

Just to go slightly off-topic here but that last thing you ever want to do is get the cooks opinion. With the exception of Gordon Ramsay, Curtis Stone, Wolfgang Puck and other world class chefs (as well as their Maitre D) you should never get their opinion on what you should order in most cases as (s)he will be more interested in getting rid of the items that do not sell very well.

To go way off topic:

Actually you ask the waiter as they are the ones making money from the experience. In fact, at a decent restaurant, one of the best things to do is to ask the waiter what is good that day. They know what is freshest, what is working and what is not working in the kitchen.

Some restaurant waiters will vary their recs based on who's working in the kitchen

Given restaurant recommendations that I've received - asking other people is the worst thing to do. Of course, I'm kind of a food snob like "Chef"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MixYRIUzVXs

JC.

 

[alien51]

the last thing you ever want to do is get the cooks opinion... you should never get their opinion on what you should order in most cases as (s)he will be more interested in getting rid of the items that do not sell very well.

The cook can do that, but it's a guarantee that he will never have repeat customers. The only reason why i think a chef will do that, is if he wants to sabotage the restaurant because he is getting low wages.

I tend to write .... boring or a whimsical ramble that takes ages to get to the point, when has ever asking someone their opinion who just doesn't get it garnered favourable results?

When the one judging "favourable results" is a contextual machine that relies on backlinks as proof that what you are writing is something somebody would be genuinely interested enough to link to you.

All this change will do is shove everyone into a Gladiators arena and watch everything turn into a bloodbath when everyone is voting down their competitors.

Voting down is still lame.

In other web development forums, there are people who really hunt down websites, take note that the Adsense adverts are too close to a picture or article, then report the website to Google to be punished.

To some people, you have to kill someone to promote fairness. The hapless minisite-maker was probably earning like what, 0.02 cents per click?

 

[Kate]

I park domains I wanna sell, I slightly develop domains I wanna sell but sell down the road for high amounts as more of a protective measure instead of just being a parked page and I fully develop domains I have an interest in.

Same here :blink:

 

[DU]

Same here :blink:

How many people do you employ?

 

[firefly]

How many people do you employ?

What does the question mean Du and what bearing does it have on anything in this conversation?

 

[Kate]

I work as much as a team of five :lol:
I guess the underlying question is, how do you develop hundreds of domains. Well I outsource some stuff but obviously I have too many domains rotting on the development bench. You have to concentrate on a limited set of domains.
That's why I like SpareDomains' approach:

1. domains that are intended for resale
2. domains that might be resold
3. domains that will be developed

 

[DU]

What does the question mean Du and what bearing does it have on anything in this conversation?

Because with statements like:

Sparedomain's:

"The assumption that the forum is filled with only domainers that can't develop is not the case..."

And SdSinc's response:

"Same Here"

People are claiming to have fully developed sites, semi-developed sites and are full-time domaining. I just wonder (a) To what extent developed is developed and (b) To what extent they are developed by the person. I believe that no one has the time to fully manage more than 5 developed sites - and that is if those 5 sites are limited in scope providing mostly a passive medium.

So in most cases I think one person's "fully developed" isn't still much more than a mini-site. It's a round and around semantic argument.

Luckily Google is playing arbiter for the whole world with no competition like some almighty deity so that people like me don't have to worry about it. That and SDSinc can read between my cynical lines..:lol:

Thats all.... you can all go back on topic now.

 

[firefly]

Cynical bugger aren't you. :D

I guess having known both on this forum for quite a long time, I thought their business plans were quite clear...SD said what he does and sdsinc basically agreed with the model.

Don't worry, I picked up on the cynicism as well and I'm glad that Kate (sdsinc) made it ultra clear for you, even though she has no need to explain or defend her business model and how it works.

Thats all.... you can all go back on topic now.

Gee...thanks for your blessing. :D

Just playin'

 

[DU]

Cynical bugger aren't you. :D

Yes I am, but the world still keeps conspiring to let me down.

I guess having known both on this forum for quite a long time, I thought their business plans were quite clear...SD said what he does and sdsinc basically agreed with the model.

I don't know their business model. I just know these vague statements that they have about developing, semi-developing, and rotting on the bench (I do admire the honesty).

I'll say it point blank. 99% of domain that are claimed to be developed by a domainer suck at providing anything of value to a consumer.

Don't worry, I picked up on the cynicism as well and I'm glad that Kate (sdsinc) made it ultra clear for you, even though she has no need to explain or defend her business model and how it works.

It's not really a business model and it's not really explained but she did acknowledge that she doesn't undertake this on her own..

This "own" is the implication when people say "I" and "Domainer" which confers the idea that this is an individual with the skills to develop and domain. Most people reading these forums are individuals - implying that it's possible to develop even 10 sites well is misleading imho.

Gee...thanks for your blessing. :D

Smart arse little bugger aren't we :lol:

Just playin'

Me too..kinda

For what it's worth - I respect Kate and have never had an issue with SpareDomains: even when I thought he was quitting last April 1st

:lol:

 

[firefly]

Yes I am, but the world still keeps conspiring to let me down.

“I am ready for whatever's coming. I expect nothing but to be let down or turned away. I am alone. Goddamn. The shit hurts sometimes, but I realize what I am, what I have become." Henry Rollins

I'll say it point blank. 99% of domain that are claimed to be developed by a domainer suck at providing anything of value to a consumer.

And I will say point blank that a lot of "fully developed" sites don't, in truth, offer very much more, so why deride the people because they are "just" domainers?

Smart arse little bugger aren't we

I ain't little and I prefer well educated bum thanks. :D

Me too..kinda

lol...trying to push my buttons?

I think we should probably take your original suggestion and get it back on topic.

 

[alien51]

I have hundreds of domains parked, hundreds of domains slightly developed and a large handful of fully developed sites all generating income.

What the chap was saying is that "slightly developed" domains are just polluting the internet. It's irritating him as a consumer. Double the irritation when you find out that it was "deliberately" slightly-developed by a domainer. It's like the consumer wasted half his life clicking on your website for nothing.

Google tries to push these slightly-developed domains down the search results as low as possible. While slightly-developed domain owners are always trying to "game" the system to keep their domains up the order.

It's a constant battle.

---------- Post added at 04:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:04 PM ----------

So in most cases I think one person's "fully developed" isn't still much more than a mini-site.

That may be true. You may even call it a highly sophisticated minisite. lol

But at the end of the day, just like you said, it's all just semantics and bantering. The legit, trying to throw dirt to the poser competitor. lol. The derision is understandable.

So again, what domainers should do is be "talented" enough to make your minisite indistinguishable from the "developed site" made by legits, that the consumer cannot tell the difference.

If consumers cannot tell the difference, then your minisite is useful and provides value. And that will make the legits angry. lol

 

[firefly]

LOL...legits. I do understand your point...I just found it tickled my funny bone


At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what anyone says, if the model works, stick with it.

If developing works for you, if parking works for you, if domain flipping works for you, if partial domain development works for you, if it is a combination of these things...stick with it.

Goofle will do what Goofle does and we just have to work around it, adapt to it, or go out of business. And that's the bottom line cause Stone Cold said so....lol

 

[SpareDomains]

What the chap was saying is that "slightly developed" domains are just polluting the internet. It's irritating him as a consumer. Double the irritation when you find out that it was "deliberately" slightly-developed by a domainer. It's like the consumer wasted half his life clicking on your website for nothing.

Google tries to push these slightly-developed domains down the search results as low as possible. While slightly-developed domain owners are always trying to "game" the system to keep their domains up the order.

It's a constant battle.

Understood. Most of my domains will be sold to end users. I park the lower end names 1-10k as a sale is the #1 priority and a parked page usually achieves this better as the sales link doesn't get lost in content.

On domains I appraise will sell xx,xxx-xxx,xxx I slightly develop more along the lines of product stores more for protection against someone saying "it's just parked" and I do think they provide a better experience than a standard parked page for the consumer. Keep in mind your average internet user doesn't gauge quality like a developer does, as long as they find what they need they are happy.

Topics I am knowledgeable on and can see as a stand alone business I fully develop so this usually floats between 5-25 sites. I have been sitting on 50 domains for years for a network of sites I wanna build. I only have so much time so I think I will build 3 of them in the short future and based on results I would outsource the rest to get the network complete.

All of the domains I have sold over the last 9+ years to end users I doubt many of them ranked in google at all and I know for a fact most barely made any parking income. End users don't ask for stats only domainers do and good names sell themselves as the end users know once they build on it then it will rank. Having mainly keyword domains helps as well as whether I'm in google or not doesn't really matter as the traffic still flows.

Guess my point is...

If you are a 100% pure domainer and don't develop anything and are profitable more power to ya.

If you are a 100% developer and don't resell domains and are profitable more power to ya.

If you're like me and mix it up domainer, developer etc... and are profitable more power to ya.

Google making changes shouldn't be the sky is falling hurry up and develop everything you own especially if you have no interest in the topic.

You are better off having 5-10 fully developed sites you care about then hundreds that all suck that you will lose interest in.

My best revenue in terms of ROI has always come from domain sales as 99.9% of what I own are keyword .coms all hand regged/expired bought for $7 over the last 9+ years so falling into the 1-10k range on a $7 investment I would never develop everything just for the sake of developing.

Everyone has a different type of portfolio so find what works for you and run with it whether that is more focused on sales, developing or a combo.

 

[winterwind.com]

The future for minisites is dire. Search engines can tell whether a lot of hard work has gone into a site or not. Its very easy for their spiders to pick out the minisites now capitalizing on their keyword domains. Secondly, if its a minisite and there is one or at most two folders to the whole site, how much linking to that site can really happen. Third, the websites that rank high now and get a high PR are those that are deemed "authorities" in their fields by search engines. How much of an authority can you be on a topic when your site about Plasma TVs only has 5 pages to it.

 

[DU]

Guess my point is...

If you are a 100% pure domainer and don't develop anything and are profitable more power to ya.

If you are a 100% developer and don't resell domains and are profitable more power to ya.

If you're like me and mix it up domainer, developer etc... and are profitable more power to ya.

Great post... overall! Repped you.

I agree with the sentiment here in a purely monetizing standpoint but I hate it from a consumer standpoint.

Much the same way that I feel conflicted about the car I drive... I love it as a car..but hate it for its environmental attributes (22mpg). To be fair, I'm not that confliced.. I LOVE my car But because of these monetizing efforts I very rarely search for anything these days. I have sites defined for everything that I need and I know where to look.

BUT today was different. I was looking for a new vet. The internet is truly an awful user experience. Multiple sites stealing each others comments. Multiple sites with random links to pet care. I found very little value in any of the sites - in fact finding a vet site was very difficult. I think the amount of stolen material is just shocking - no amount of respinning helps. In the end I used the bbb.org and the local Yellow Pages and visited those sites that I could directly link to. I chose the one that looked like it was developed by the head vet's best friend with a home made video. It said "I am a Vet and I don't really like the internet and most of my business is word of mouth - but at least I tried!"

The video made a huge difference to me. I saw the vets, the staff, the building and their interaction with dogs. Video online is HUGE if you are in business.. I mean it makes an incredible difference.

But WHY should I have to wade through all that junk to find a vet? I want REAL reviews. I want REAL information. That's the contention I have and why I hate mini-site developers that use SEO tactics to get ranked. Unranked parked sites don't bother me.

Sites like about.com and ehow?! Destroy them !

Frank Schilling and Rick Schwartz can go on and on about Traffic... but until Traffic is information its just a waste of bits/bytes/electricity and fuel.

IF YOU ARE SMART ENOUGH TO RANK SITES AND TRICK PEOPLE INTO CLICKING LINKS THEN YOU ARE SMART ENOUGH TO DO SOMETHING USEFUL. DO SOMETHING USEFUL! Don't be lazy like me!

Google making changes shouldn't be the sky is falling hurry up and develop everything you own especially if you have no interest in the topic.

Google changes are ostensibly made to improve the experience of things like finding a vet. It's why local pages were introduced (already abused by domainers). I have no qualms with domainers, domain investing, parking or anything else. I have issues with people who claim that creating fake sites are the "good side" and Google is the evil side.

But you are completely right. If you build sites that have value and people find it valuable you should have nothing to fear from Google. Taking it one step further to the cynical extreme - it actually lets SEO and Domainer experts make money so it does fuel some part of the domainer community even if it's not yours directly.

FINALLY.

I only have ONE developed site, and TWO neglected blogs, and one neglected TUMBLR. I also have one new secret site.:lol: I make zero $. I have zero ADS. I will never have ADS on them. Ever. That's my prerogative...just as you having ads might be yours.

Everyone takes different paths. Enjoy yours and try not to ruin mine! :hearts:

The developed site is stctb.org in case anyone cares what I do with my spare time.

---------- Post added at 11:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:45 PM ----------

BTW

I had to remove a Guest Book because of so called "SEO" back linking. A freaking guest book on a non-profit site about Scottish Terriers because "domainers" want to sell some blue pills...

THIS IS WHY I'M CYNICAL!

 

[alien51]

I found very little value in any of the sites - in fact finding a vet site was very difficult... WHY should I have to wade through all that junk to find a vet?

The answer is because you happen to be living in a free world where there is freedom of expression. And when there is freedom of expression, a case of information "overload" comes up. You just have to be smart enough yourself, to tinker with your "optimized" research phrases to extract the information that has value to you at the shortest time possible.

While we see a lot of cynicism, we also see a lot of bigotry around. I was browsing the Yahoo Finance website the other day, and there was this Yahoo Writer who posted an article about "12 Ways To Cut Down Your Credit Card Debt". I mean, WTF? He wrote an article that contained nothing but a complete rehash of information that was perhaps published a million times already since the credit card was invented. And this Yahoo guy is supposed to be legit, right? Absolutely useless article to me with no value or whatsoever. I might even suspect that he probably ripped the info from a GoodHousekeeping Magazine at the hospital because his editor is pressing him on the deadline and he was drunk stupor last night to write anything. But since he writes for Yahoo, everything he writes is always "original content".

 

[Sparhawke]

I would never trust an article like that from Yahoo, the whole finance section looks like it was taken from other places like Reuters and simply rehashed and while most do seem to be from that source there is nothing to really say who is actually writing it.

One of the biggest finance sites in England (one of the biggest of all period at the #60 spot according to Alexa), as I am sure everyone from this country has heard of is MSE (money Saving Expert)...an absolute leviathan of a site which covers absolutely everything about money and saving...

I would trust that because I can actually see who has done their research and who has actually written it.

I think that is the key, people don't want rehashed crap from someone they cannot see, but from someone they can identify with.

 

[alien51]

You see, that's exactly the trick.

We are all CYNICAL because we know how this thing was built from the ground up.

But for ordinary day-to-day internet mortals, it doesn't matter if the information was rehashed. If it was the first time you saw it, or if its just an aggregator website that conveniently pulled together infos from various websites into a single webpage, then your website (or minisite whatever) is valuable to them.

It's just like the Godaddy thread here. Some people hate it when people who "repost" coupon codes already published by someone else gets "repped" for being valuable. They think they are "stealing" their reps that should belong to them.

The bottomline i see, is that those who are in the same "business" usually will hate their competitors. Most especially those they think did not labor as much as they did.