Crappy Sites make more money?

I was reading some "adsense guru's" blurb on making money with adsense (can't remember where now) and he was saying that the crappier the site is .. the more money you will make with adsense.

His theory was that if your site was exellent .. crammed full of content and information .. then a visitor would have lesser need to go elsewhere for info. If however .. the site was crap .. with just enough content to generate revelant ads .. then it would get more ad clicks resulting from visitors wishing to find more info.

What do you guys think? Somehow the creative/moral side of me rebels against the idea.

 

10,000 Spammers and BH publishers can't be wrong.

 

That was Markus' theory when he made plentyoffish.com

 

The theory may be correct but how do you get people to visit such sites if they do not have any thing of value?

 

The same way you would for a decent site I suppose .. but they would'nt know the site was crap untill they landed there .. then they'd click on an ad to go elsewhere. (and probably end up at another crap made for adsense site !)

 

Not really, since it would be that much more difficult to build a brand image. Not too many sites will be willing to link to you, I suppose.

 

I think you can find some truth in that statement, however, that is only if you get traffic to the site. As suggested, it is going to be much easier to get natural links to a quality site vs. a junk site. While there are hundreds of thousands of MFA auto-content generated sites, a lot of people these operations make their money by making a very little per site, but operating thousands of them. I talked to one person who had 3,000 sites and his target was to make 25 cents per day, per site ($275,000 per year combined) - so when you see these sites, don't assume that an individual site must be doing well or otherwise they wouldn't be so many of them. There are so many because it only works with volume.

Google is also supposedly moving to a manual review of top ranking sites, so I think the future is a lot more bleak for those junk sites - although I don't see them ever being eliminated entirely.

 

I have a just such a site. "Useless fodder" as one reader described it. It was around before adsense. It's in the DMOZ and my articles show up on various hunor feeds so getting traffic or links is not a problem and I list well in searches for lots of keywords and phrases. It's really a no brainer I stumbled upon that works well.

 

Try to rank high or PPC

 

I think you can only get traffic for such crap sites with PPC (=adwords, overture, msn, mirago, miva, etc.). But the thing is that adwords and overture also dont like these kinds of low quality websites, which give not a good user experience. so their algo designates higher CPCs for such websites. But it is still possible to get traffic if you are wise and good enough in PPC.

The main question is if AdSense is going to ban such websites in future, I hope not.

 

Sorry couldnt finish my message.

AdSense must love these kind of websites, becuase I believe they redirect the traffic to real sellers or real businesses. They dont make the user busy with reading detailed stuff and make him forget about buying, like many very quality websites do.

To me, there is a short time for an internet user's transition to be an internet customer; and once user spends more and more time reading quality, lots of content websites, his buying instincts get more and more vague, seeing all these different aspects of buying smt and getting more confused. So, a more confused internet user is less likely to buy smt.

But, what a little content or crap website with full of adsense ads does is it promptly sends the internet user to the direct seller/marketer, where it is more likely the user might turn out to be a buyer.

Therefore, I strongly believe, AdSense must even support such websites!

 

Unfortunately whenever a way to make money appears there will always be those that wish to do it in the easiest way possible..

 

when we say crappy sites makes more money what it really means is that crappy sites have higher CTR, in other words visitors go blind and start clicking on all kind sh*t without distinguishing ads from contents(which is crap).

Well I am not saying thats true but thats the general theory. Now to make more money you need to have visitors in first place. Thats the different story

Shoemoney talks about plentyoffish, go read his blog. Hey there are atleast TWO post about this site on his blog, on first one he says that plentoffish's claim is big lie (correct me if i am wrong).

jack

 

I have to agree I have a real crap site I put together in 5 mins and today alone its had the following stats: Hits 95 Clicks 34 CTR 35.79%

I have another one that I spend all my time making look nice, writing lots of original informative content and promoting it and its had: Hits 509 Clicks 14 CTR 2.75% and thats for the past 7 days today its not even had one click

I was a bit lucky though the crap one has a PR2 and its basically a music artists name with a hyphen between them and I think a site in Germany with a hi PR put my site in there links about the artist lol

 

If you run an Adword campaign for a so called "crappy" MFA site, then google does not like those crappy sites.
If you had the exact "crappy" page, it would probably be ok as long as you didn't run an adwords campaign for it.

One blends ads with content.
The other is self promoting with the intent of users clicking ads.

 

It's a catch-22 really.
If your a publisher and you don't have quality or decent content, you won't get any search traffic and no clicks.
If you're an adsense advertisor and you throw up a crappy landing page, the quality factor from google goes into play increasing your minimum bid price.

Who wins in either case... why G of course.

 

Now I know why all "getting rich quick" sites are all the same and look like shit...

 

the only problem with crap sites, google search detect them very fast, you position for 2-3 days for the keywords then all gone....

 

People create hundred of crappy sites, and with a few dollars in adsense each day, it really ads up well for them. It comes down to the type of person you are and what your motives are:

Make 1 sites and earn $100 or,
Make 100 sites and earn $100

Personally, I am not a fan of the latter.

 

The fact that Adsense may like crappy sites, while Google search engine would prefer to have a clean index, seems to suggest a conflict of interest. Similar to how Sony sells mp3 players, while at the same time fighting to curb the music sharing.