Go to Potpourri
- Add a comment
- Go to Just out of curiosity
Another thought to add to the party
Much of what I wrote earlier is relevant only in the sense that we are dealing with what the reader perceives. I could do an objectively better job of serving the public than, say, Joe Shmoe (I'm using a fake member name so I don't step on toes), but if the readers feel Joe Shmoe does a better job, that's what counts - their feelings, not the facts. Readers' tastes change over time. Additionally, as members come and go, the rankings will change - and I submit that seeing how the rankings change (the money rankings as well as the "most popular blog" rankings) over time will give an astute BN member the ammunition he or she needs to adjust his or her own writing style and marketing approach to best meet the needs of the readers.
That's what I'm doing with my abuse blog right now, in fact; I'm taking time off from it to regroup and figure out how to best meet the needs of readers interested in this topic.
posted by
kidnykid
on April 24, 2003 at 7:41 AM
| link to this | reply
Hi Guys: I couldn' t stay away
I think I ended last month with $0.22 but am doing much better this month. I had some of those single message blogs that screamed to #1 and I know my rankings still benefit from them because the ranking system is cumulative.
But I don't want to be at the top because I am writing to touch someone's purient interest, at some point people move away. I have changed descriptions and titles of blogs that just aren't touching people any more. I pay attention to what I think people are interested in, even if I take the counter argument. Finally I watch, somedays I have to protect my ranking by writing a second or third post, somedays not. Basically I recognize the ranking system is really a model of the market place and try to stay sensitive to the market.
I' m most comfortable with consistent posting and performance. My limited experience has shown You do not make much money on single topic blogs. I deleted all of mine. I have also started encouraging my friends to sign up again-- I took a break during the war. However, I am not seeking a referral fee. Probably should.
I joined on March 5. So I have slightly more than a month and a half. Remember the earnings that are listed are to date, so people probably did not make thrity+ dollars in one month.
Keep blogging.
M
posted by
maralite
on April 23, 2003 at 8:18 PM
| link to this | reply
Kidnykid, I Don't Agree
I don't think anyone is doing any worse because they are slipping in the ratings. There are a couple of dynamics going on. First, there are more bloggers here who are marketing to reach the top. For example, Dreah mentioned that ever since she had done something a little different to one of her blogs, it has climbed in ratings. Not taking anything away from Dreah. Her blogs are good, and there is nothing unethical about good business sense. As long as she can back up her new heading style with content, the readers will continue to come back for more. Our Sensationlist friend also is tops in marketing and he tends to back it up with an interesting blog. Both are rising in the rankings quickly. Second, it may be time for a changing of the guard. As with all goods and services, if you don't give the customer something new or improved from time to time, they get bored and go elsewhere. A lot of new talent has joined us this past month. I seriously suspect within the next few weeks, we will see several of the old-timers fall from the top in deference for the something new that fresh writers will bring to the table. It happened when Jemmie and I moved up in the rankings, it will happen again. Nothing lasts forever. There's my speech. Gotta run.
posted by
Whim
on April 23, 2003 at 7:15 PM
| link to this | reply
There are some of us that might be that competitive
Whim is right, too - the top earners probably had a ton of referrals to their credit. I think we are selling ourselves short, though, when we talk about the pittance we earn here; although I don't buy into the whole New Age package, I think there's something to be said for the effect that so much negative self-talk might have on us. Although we are currently earning mere pennies, cream does rise to the top, and I feel that somehow including a "who earned the most money" ranking will get some of the more competitive types to improve themselves (and learn marketing) so that they can crawl up to the top of that heap.
One of the things I remember from my personal coaching is that the amount of money you earn is often in direct proportion to the amount of service that (in our case) your readership feels you have given them. The more you make, therefore, the more service others feel you have given them. Nowhere is that more true than in a media or entertainment service such as ours. The blogs that consistently rank up there - like Opinionated Bitch or The Opinionated Critic - are blogs that earn their authors their money precisely because the readers of those blogs feel the authors are worth the money. If I see my earnings slack off, that means I haven't offered you - the readers - enough value for the money you pay me. If I see myself slipping in the earnings ranking, that means others are starting to offer their readers more value in the readers' minds. That is the value of such a ranking for me.
posted by
kidnykid
on April 23, 2003 at 6:58 PM
| link to this | reply
Earnings Does Not Equate to Popularity
Again, if you have referrals, you earn $5 each for those. Those are added into your earnings. Technically, you could be #1140 and earn $100 a month. And, if you are really in it for the money, that is the route to go. It is a whole lot easier to recruit friends and family to join than it is to write the 100 blogs it might take to make the same $5. Not to mention friends and family would also ready your blogs and you would gain in rankings and earnings that way too.
posted by
Whim
on April 23, 2003 at 1:35 PM
| link to this | reply
So, then, you want a comprehensive list page ranking people by earnings-to-date?
I guess that would be easier than checking out individual profiles but isn't that getting a bit competitive? I mean -- really -- no one here is earning enough to shake a bone at. Most here would earn in an hour or two what they've accumulated in months of blogging. Long as I can earn my "entry fee" I guess that'll be good. But I can't get all the talk about money money money -- this squabling over pennies.
Top blogs are posted by the most number of "unique" reader hits each day and I guess that says enough, eh? Each time you read a blog you vote. If you've found it empty or annoying in the past, stop opening them up to see what' they've said today to piss you off is what I figure. I've stopped reading two for that reason.
posted by
garrie
on April 23, 2003 at 12:59 PM
| link to this | reply
Well...
What I'm looking for is a ranking. In other words, you can click onto my BN name and find out how much I earn, and I can do the same for you, but there is no place at BN to find out who the top dog really is. No list exists saying that Joe Shmoe is #1 and that Jane Doe is in last place (speaking of earnings).
posted by
kidnykid
on April 23, 2003 at 12:52 PM
| link to this | reply
Editormum -- y'don't have t'guess. There aren't secrets here. Earnings are right on our profiles along with when we joined and what blogs we run (plus their rank),
posted by
garrie
on April 23, 2003 at 12:40 PM
| link to this | reply
Earnings
As a big chunk of mine came in while I was gone, I am guessing I had at least a couple of referrals hit from a link and editorial from my website. Joanne is one of the old-timers around here. I am guessing more of her's is reader related. There are a few others not in the top rankings who have totals near ours also.
Garrie, give it time. And, if it is any consolation, with two blogs in the top 6 and the other two in the top 100, I didn't break $.21 last night. Give it time. People have to get to know you. Once they do, they will add you to their favorites, then you will start moving up the rankings.
No one read me in the beginning either.
posted by
Whim
on April 23, 2003 at 12:35 PM
| link to this | reply
Without divulging too much...
Neither Whim nor Joanne Jacobs have hit the "jackpot." They're both close - at the rate they're going, they'll eclipse the top dog within a month. But both of them (Whim, I hope you're reading this!) are good enough where I wish they
were top dogs. I hope they tie at first place! (With me nipping at their heels in third place, of course! LOL)
posted by
kidnykid
on April 23, 2003 at 12:26 PM
| link to this | reply
I think that you have to...
divide that $5K by $2.99 to figure out how much the network earns in a month. Then you could divide by the number of members to get an idea of what the average bloke earns each month. As far as who has earned the most $$$$$$....my guess is that it's either Joanne Jacobs or Whim.
posted by
editormum
on April 23, 2003 at 11:58 AM
| link to this | reply
Good Question. I've racked up a whopin' $.21. Woo-hoo!
posted by
garrie
on April 23, 2003 at 11:51 AM
| link to this | reply