A couple of questions for you marketing psychologists out there:
Given an Amazon oriented hub pushing items of various values, should they be "cheap" or "inexpensive", "economical" or some other more innocuous word? My impression from the keyword tool is that people search for "cheap", but other words sound so much better without implying poor quality (at least to me!).
If the widgets are organized as to price, which should come first, spendy or cheap? Either set could turn off potential buyers...
The only time I would use a phrase like "cheap" or "inexpensive" is if I was specifically targeting a value-conscious crowd and pushing low-end products. If you use those terms in a hub with products of varying prices, you might as well get rid of all the middle- and high-end products and just push the cheap ones, IMHO.
And you may very well be right, though I tend to think that many people like a choice of price ranges, perhaps with different options.
Some people won't care about price, but many will buy what the budget will allow and will look for the best bang for the buck. And maybe they can be talked into spending more for an additional option. Or at least I do.
Yes--I wasn't saying that they don't. All of my product hubs give a wide range of products with different brands at hugely different price points. If I'm selling widgets, I may offer 5 to 6 different widgets ranging in price from $25 to $300. But that wasn't my point.
If I were to write a hub exactly like that with a wide spread in price points, I wouldn't use the terms "cheap" or "economical" -- just as I wouldn't label to the more expensive brands "luxury" or "top of the line." It's all about objectivity, giving the consumers the facts and letting them choose the product that best suits their budgets.
In fact, in the scenario I laid out above, I actually sell more products in the hundreds of dollars than I do the "economical" $25 brand.
Now, if I was pushing ONE brand or ONE price point in the products, then I would start using "cheap," "value-priced" or "high-end."
And trust me -- I have well over 20 years of experience in marketing -- specifically brand marketing for a whole lot of brands that you probably have in your house.
That's about what I am doing right now, Irohner. Multiple brands and prices, pretty much grouped together by price range, but by manufacturer as well.
I sometimes point out quality, but mostly let the prices speak for themselves. I just wanted another keyword for the search engines.
Thanks for the advice; it sounds like I'm pretty much on the right track, at least most of the time.
Hey Wilderness, you could write 3 hubs using each in the title and see which gives you the best results.
I'm sorta on Irohner's point also- "cheap" will draw you a crowd that will only purchase if cheap enough. You dollar per sale will most likely be made up by volume, if the products is marketable.
Assorted low price items work for cheap, inexpensive would have a different level because it draws to a different mindset. And, economical is the intelligent word which deals with those who understand the word itself.
Many varied options to say the least. I'm not sure if I helped at all.
Hi Cagsil! I wasn't thinking of a title, but maybe H1,2 and 3. For instance, I might write a hub to sell cars, and offer a Rolls Royce, Lamborghini and Ferrari under H1. Ford, Chevy and Dodge under H2 and a Yugo under H3.
Now H1 might read "Best cars in the world", H2 might be "Family priced high quality cars", but what is H3? "Cheap" or "Inexpensive"?
I've never seen a search for "inexpensive", but there are plenty for "cheap". It just sounds so bad and undesirable to me I hesitate to use the word even to give a little kick to the SEO.
And which order should they come in? Should the good stuff be first or last? I understand just enough to know that these kind of things matter a great deal in getting sales, but not enough to know the answers!
Unless I misunderstand, H1 counts more for SEO than H2 and so forth, but it probably makes a difference psychologically to the reader on whether he continues to read, buys or leaves.
Marketing has become a real science, with a great deal of effort put into simple things such as stocking shelves, front or back of a store, height above floor etc. but I'm just way too ignorant of the subject!
As for trial and error, you'd have to do it a thousand times to get any kind of firm answers and I don't think I'll live that long!
Okay, I just thought I would try to help. I wasn't sure if it would matter. I have a little experience in Marketing online and offline(manager type stuff).
I know it needs to be tested, regardless. And, that's one of the worst things about Marketing- the testing of approaches is the most difficult.
Understood, and I appreciate it. I have no marketing experience at all, but have discussed such things occasionally, out of curiosity, with those that do.
You sure have it right about testing, though - I just don't want to do it! Write 50 hubs (to give at least some statistical base) wait 6-12 months and analyze the results. Taking into account different products, time of year, current events and economy, etc.
Before I do that I'll just guess. Come to think of it, I already have! Just looking for additional opinions from someone more knowledgeable than I am.
I agree with Cags -- do a test. That's really the only way you can be positive of what is going to work for you. I truly believe that we can all talk about the "right" way to do things, but our writing styles are all so different, that what works for me might not work for you and vice versa.
I have just found that the whole "sales pitch" thing absolutely and totally does not work for me -- at all whatsoever. Complete objectivity in stating facts along with pros and cons seems to fit my writing style.
You know, Irohner, I'm sure with you on the "sales pitch". I'm not good at it (I flunked out of a couple of MLM gigs), but I can do objective reports and provide links.
I've been trying out sales hubs the last couple of months, and plan to expand them as I'm getting results, but knowing my limitations I figure I need to learn whatever I can. Impatient, I am. Want my million $$ [b]now[/i].
Thanks for the help, you two.
Wilderness it sounds like you've mistaken the meaning of the H1, H2, H3, H4 heading designations. H1 does not refer to the first subheading in your hub, and H2 the second.
H1 is generally the title header, the top level heading. H2 are sort of like main sub-headers, and H3 are sub-sub-headers, and H4 are sub-sub-sub-headers. Like numbered bullet point lists. So you may have multiples of each in a hub or on a webpage.
The importance of H1/H2/H3/H4 designations is in identifying for the spiders what your webpage is mostly about, not in what comes first in the content.
H1's are generally main titles. That's what your page is mostly about sees the spider. H2's are main subheadings or subtopics. Luxury Performance Vehicles might be an H2, with Mercedes, Ferrari and Porsche as H3 sub-sub-headings. The spider sees that your webpage discusses Ferraris, but only somewhat. More emphasis is given to the spider on the H2 Luxury Performance Vehicles than the more specific H3 Ferraris header.
Regarding your OP question. If you're focusing on cheap, start with the cheapest options first I think. If you're not then you might want to start based on a different criteria other than price, such as best to worst, in similar groups by color, size or types, or stated as being in no particular order but then placed by you according to what you think is most attractive to your targeted market.
I have sometimes said in the opening few paragraphs that the reader can expect to find options in a wide price range type of thing. Then even if they don't like your first presented option they might still scroll down a bit to check out what else you got.
I bet it'd be interesting to do two hubs published on the same day and elsewise all done very similarly to each other but one focused on a cheap market and the other not. Add a third hub focused on high-end and see what you come up with. Then again I also bet results would vary as to which was the best performing depending on the topic or product marketed.
Anyway, good luck!
You are absolutely correct; I misunderstood the terms. Thanks for the education.
I like the idea of stating there is a range of pricing; that sounds like a good way to go.
The test you propose would indeed be interesting, but nearly impossible to conduct except as a statistical model, with dozens or hundreds of hubs. There are simply too many variables. Two hubs to compare results would need to be very nearly duplicates, with the same keywords and such and nearly the same text.
some department stores have different price levels according to quality.
good value (less quality, least expensive)
best value (highest quality, most expensive)
if you focus on 'value', it doesn't sound cheap even though a good value will be the least expensive item. people, rich, poor or in between are looking for bargains.
You're right - value sounds better to me, even though it means "cheap" more and more.
And yes, I think more and more people are looking for bargains. If nothing else it becomes a game to get the best price on a particular item. My wife and mother both will go to a yard sale, pick up a 25 cent item and bargain hard to get it for 20 cents. It's a game. Save that nickel!
From what I've seen reading hubs, there are some people making hubs that clearly are focusing on "cheap" while others are going after high-price items.
by ShailaSheshadri9 days ago
I am writing articles for this website since past 3 months. At present, I have 38 featured and published hubs. I have joined for Amazon and google Adsense program. Past two months I earned like very less amount, less...
by Gemini Fox24 months ago
Published a hub on Oklahoma (please don’t get started on how it might be too generic – I had fun doing it). It became the template for my following hubs on Arizona and New Mexico. The Oklahoma...
by Nelle Hoxie6 years ago
I've spent the last few months experimenting with different hub lengths and layouts on sales hubs and trying to be rigorous about it. It's impossible to do this in a completely statistically valid model with this...
by Paul Maplesden21 months ago
Prompted by a comment in another thread, I thought it would be useful to perhaps slightly change the way that we commonly think about changes to hub scores, hubber scores and the like. Rather than see them as a...
by Glen6 years ago
I'll be posting a brief of each of the team members of the HubChallenge sub-forum. If you need help, get pointed in the right direction, some helpful tips and advice, you can ask these guys.First up, Ryan!1. Ryan Hupfer...
by Melanie Shebel5 years ago
hub:/hub/Non-Destructive-TestingJust wondering like if there's anything I can do as a user to "hop" older hubs or something. I often come across hubbers with extremely low hub scores (like 1 or 5) and I was...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.