I just compared the 3-month, Quantcast charts for HP and Squidoo. Based on trends, HP is now your better bet! I kid you not. Although Google is probably still not thrilled with all writing sites in general, I believe that HP is no longer in any special doghouse.
Squid chart, click the 3-months: http://www.quantcast.com/squidoo.com
HP chart, click the 3-months: http://www.quantcast.com/hubpages.com
Reading trends on charts is sometimes subjective. So have at it folks. I'm fine with it.
At last some positive news! That's what I was beginning to think and you've just supplied the proof. Yesterday, I read a lens that was actually an article (as opposed to a lens with a short introductory paragraph followed by a lot of Amazon products). It was well written and it had links to other lenses built around the same topic. But I couldn't find it anywhere on Google. It was pretty specific and it should have appeared. Various HP articles will show up, often on page 1.
I did this exercise because I don't know quite what to make of Squidoo. A lot of people love writing for that platform. But many of the lenses don't have much meat.
I've published there, but never really threw my soul into it. I don't like their "behind the scenes" payout system. The giant squids divvy up most of the money, and then throw a few shekels out into the street for the rest of us. Leastwise, that's always been my feeling. They come up with a better payment system, I'll throw a few articles their way.
Nah... Giant squids don't have control of the payouts -- they are subject to fluctuating lensrank in exactly the same way as Hubs are. There's no 'behind the scenes' stuff going on. 'Giants' are merely lensmasters who have published a certain number of quality lenses. There's hardly any difference between Squidoo and HP, apart from the article creation process. Squidoo's payment system is actually much more transparent as it is based on lensrank, which is clearly visible on all lenses (apart from the ones featured in 'magazines'). Payments for lenses are shown in the payout stats so you can see the rates for each tier.
Okay...maybe I need to take a grid reading course or something.
I'm seeing Squidoo at 2% down and 1322119 page views
I'm seeing HP at 7% down and 1061382 page views.
Squidoo has 260,000 more page views and is only 2% down.
What am I not seeing here?
Mathom essentially agrees with you. However, when I look at his charts, the immediate feeling I have is that if the last 3 months has any potential to foretell the next 3 months, then those lines could cross. Will they? Or won't they? Time will tell.
Edit: Comes to think of it. His 6-month chart is even better than his 3-month chart for my purposes. He is dead bang right about the holiday surge. If I do decide to get tangled up with S, S is where I'll be throwing all my efforts this November/December.
I have no reason to be unhappy with Hubpages getting better traffic than the Squid. I don't have any articles on squidoo. But I wonder how accurate these traffic comparisons are. Do they account for Hubpages having a greater number of total pages?
What I mean is if one site has a million pages and the other two million, the site with two million pages will usually get more overall traffic, but the visitors per page, or more importantly per hubber may be much lower resulting in lower revenue.
Squidoo sticks a no-index tag on all lenses that have a lens rank of more than 400k, so it features only its "best" 400k pages (as determined by its secret and possibly quite mad algorithm).
I don't think anybody really knows how many pages HP has indexed, it used to be over 4 million, but some hubs have been idled.
But HP also the forums on its main domain. I don't know how much forum activitiy can contribute to the traffic.
I started out at Squidoo, but changed to HubPages. At the time they both ranked well and quickly. I just liked HubPages tools better. Squidoo does still have a slightly better page ranking than HubPages, but then Hubpages offers been monetizing options (in my opinion). I have also seen others state how there is a clique that plays favorites on Squidoo. That makes me especially thankful such things do not happen here on HubPages. LOL
I know what you mean. The payment schedule does seem a little lopsided. I also don't know what to think of the lenses. Some are very good, but many are totally product oriented. I haven't ruled out writing a little there, in order to diversify, but I find the format and large type makes the lenses hard to wade through.
I totally agree! I especially liked the expression "wade through", which describes the experience very well. I still haven't got the hang of the structure, it seems to have no structure! I've been registered there for a long time, but still haven't decided how to start. Now with this info, maybe I won't. I have recently been thinking of buidling up Wizzley instead. At least I can understand what I have to do! And the rules seem clearer, too
Even when taking into account scale, HP seems to have much wider weekly traffic swings that S. I wonder why. Anybody got any speculations?
Sorry, but it depends on the time frame - HP has declined less than the Squids in the last 3 months, but that was probably due to the Squids better performance at Xmas?? But Squids are descending.
These graphs summarise longer term trends. HP predicts a surge when the CRqAP is eliminated.
Yep, multi-year, S wins; 3-month, HP wins. I submit that the last 3-month will more accurately predict the next 3-month, than the multi-year will.
HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL or is that HOPS?
Projected traffic hop in March/April 2013 after the CRqAP is eliminated by QAP
You may note that graph assumes the QAP will have got rid of all bad quality Hubs by March/April.
JAnderson is basing that assumption on a statement by Derek that you expect to have "caught up with the backlog" by then, which he takes to mean that every Hub will have been put through the QAP.
That sounds unrealistic to me - has JAnderson misunderstood the statement?
I understood that the 'backlog' referred to was the previously flagged hubs, but could be wrong. Definitely didn't think it meant the entire quota of all HP hubs currently published.
I am seeing a lot of bad rap about Squidoo especially for new writers and the pay out system. Every lens I have seen there is simply a paragraph with a ton of products. People who use it claim they do well with Amazon sales there, and they also use it for backlinks.
It is my understanding that the writers get 100% of the revenue of Amazon sales over there? If a good BS product article comes to mind, I will give it a shot; especially since they apparently love BS product hubs. Now just what would be a good BS product idea...?
It depends how you set up your Amazon sales, if you use the Amazon modules S provides you get 50% of the revenue, but you get it every time you make a sale (unlike HP where 40% of the time, it is their affiliate ID in your Amazon modules). But, because of the volume of their sales, S gets the 8% associate rate, so you basically make 4% (except for electronics where the rate is 4% no matter how much you sell).
But, Squidoo allows you to post HTML in their text modules, so you can add Amazon products with your own affiliate ID, and then you do get 100% of the revenue. In that case the rate depends on how many items you sell in a month.
I've started writing Squidoo Amazon-oriented lenses, and have made a lot more money from them then from all the virtuous and informational pages I've squeezed out of my brain in the almost one year since I've started. You can't really blame people for writing that type of thing, if it gets rewarded with $$$$.
The big mystery to me is why Google seems to like S so much. But even though their pages don't conform to the "stellar hub" rules, it is possible that they are providing searchers exactly what they need. If you want to dress up as a vampire for Halloween, then you basically want to find a page that lists the vampire costumes you can easily buy online. You're not looking for a page about the history and philosophy behind halloween and vampirism.
I had a lens sit unpublished because it would not publish for 2 years. For 2 years I have never gotten a response from Squid support and that is a common complaint.
The payout from what I have found on reviews of Squid is a favortism, popularity contest sort of thing. There is apparently a group that supports each other to keep their rankings up there, and let the other writers sink. Their platform is horrible. If you have issues, forget it. No Support. I tried to delete some profile info and could not even get to it to delete it. Did support help me, Nope!
I helped myself though; I was able to delete my account which is exactly what I did.
At least it's not my imagination. I haven't ruled out writing for Squidoo, but, at the moment, the HP format is much easier to navigate.
That's interesting data. I started briefly over there, but moved here pretty quickly. It seems so much easier to create a hub than a lense.
It is a very product oriented site. I didn't realize the writers/lensmasters received 100 percent commission on Amazon sales. No wonder we see so many Amazon products being written about and promoted.
I just read a lens that says you get a percentage not 100 percent of Amazon sales. Another specified writer gets just a fraction over 4 percent. This is when using Squidoo platform.
Now if you use your own affiliate link, then you get your whole commission.
The same deal on Zujava except using their platform writers get 50 percent and 100 percent if we use our personal account.
The Amazon cookie when you use their platform is only good for 24 hours.
I created several lenses and didn't make a penny off of them. I had one recipe over the holidays for a gluten free pumpkin pie that ranked around the number 200 range in all recipes. Still nothing. You see the same lenses over and over featured on the front page. I'm not sure how all of that works, but it seems a bit off to me. I think I have a total of 80-something cents gathered over there at Squidoo. I took most of my lenses down as a result. I like it over here much better, but that's just me. I do enjoy making lenses though, they're kinda fun!
@LindaSmith1 and Radcliff
Thanks for posting that Amazon info! Not knowing any better, I'd have used the module.
Help! Paradigmsearch, I'm confused! You say that "HP is now your better bet!" based on the past three months of Quantcast data. Yet when I look at Quantcast's 3 month traffic traffic comparison for both sites, I see:
Sooo...Squidoo has more traffic, right?
Or, if you check the six months, you see:
Squidoo had a huuuuuge traffic spike during the holiday season. Hubpages...didn't? So yeah, I guess Squidoo's massive traffic fell back to normal after holiday shopping was over. But does "reversion to mean" count as a loss?
As a matter of fact, unlike most lensmasters, I have had a rough three months. I lost 30% of my Squidoo traffic on November 16. Most lensmasters didn't. I'm still sorting out what happened.
So my Squidoo traffic has dropped to the point that I'm now averaging only 41 visitors a page -- just like on Hubpages.
With numbers like that, you'd think I'd consider the two sites a toss-up. But here's the rub. For the past 3 months, even after my Squidoo traffic disaster:
Ad Revenue per month
Squidoo = average of $2.29 / article
Hubpages = average of $0.60 / article (both Hubads and Adsense)
Commissions per month
Squidoo = average of $0.46 / article (Amazon, Zazzle, Cafepress)
Hubpages = average of $0.03 / article (Amazon)
That doesn't look like much, but with over a hundred pages, it adds up.
Google analytics adds an interesting datum:
Bounce rate on my lenses: 70%
Bounce rate on my hubs: 89%.
Yes, I know: Squidoo has butt-ugly garish colors and aggressive banners, while Hubpages looks clean and readable. I don't understand it. I just report it.
Bottom line: while I prefer Hubpages' clean interface, I'm afraid that if I'd stuck with Hubpages alone, my online writing would still be a hobby, not a means for earning a living.
(And, for what it's worth, I'm coming up on six years on both Squidoo and Hubpages, although I was inactive here for several years.)
I agree that as Squidoo has more traffic than HP it is hard to say it is a worse site, I guess Paradigmsearch was pointing to trends, but Squidoo's fall was probably just the result of the huge increase over Halloween and Christmas being over.
I'm a bit confused about bounce rates, and what exactly is measured. To me a "bounce" is somebody comes to my page in Google, takes a quick look and hits the "back" button in horror. That is obviously bad.
But I think bounce rates might be officially defined as somebody seeing only one page on a domain (or subdomain?) and then going somewhere else, including clicking on a link on that page, that is not necessarily bad. I've been wondering if somebody finds my Squidoo lens, and clicks on a "related lens" which is not mine in the sidebar, whether that is considered a bounce or not?
Similarly if somebody reads my hub, and then clicks on the hubs at the bottom (which are often other people's), is that considered a bounce. Because with HP they would often go to another subdomain, whereas with Squidoo all lenses are on another domain, maybe this is why HP seems to have a higher bounce rate?
Not sure if the above makes any sense.
http://support.google.com/analytics/bin … er=1006257
As I read that, a bounce is counted anytime some visits your subdomain and leaves that subdomain from the same page the landed on. If they move on to another of your hubs it is not a bounce regardless of what they do after that.
So yes, a bounce is not necessarily a bad thing. I'd love to see every single visitor bounce right over to Amazon, for instance.
Lol, or to an Adsense ad. My point is that the reason HubPages might have such a high bounce rate is that a visitor might read a hub, then go to another hub on a different subdomain. Visitors probably don't pay much attention to who the writers are, they read a hub (hopefully), see some related hubs at the bottom and go there. So there is a bounce.
In Squidoo, if they go to a "related lens" written by somebody else, that might not count as a bounce, because it's all on the Squidoo site. I'm not sure about that, but it seems possible. Also many people (me included) try to fill up the related lenses with their other pages, to squeeze maximum earning from any visitor.
Just saying there might be a "mechanical" explanation to Greekgeek's different bounce rates.
I believe that is correct, although google could be counting HP as the "site" rather than your subdomain.
Bounce rate is something I don't pay too much attention to as it seems inevitable that I'll always have a high bounce rate. Searchers come looking for a specific answer to a specific question and aren't really interested in anything else.
That's partially due to the type of stuff I write: "how to" hubs would seem particularly susceptible to that problem. I manage to shuffle visitors around some, with around 100 visits per day coming from my subdomain, but it still results in a high bounce rate.
Nope. It will count as a bounce because the lens written by someone else will not have your analytics code on it, but theirs.
I think you might be misinterpreting that.
A "bounce" is when someone leaves by back arrow to where they came from, or closes the tab.
If they leave via a link - any kind of link - ads, related topics, or internal linking, etc. it is an "exit"
Google analytics provides both stats
A high bounce rate IS BAD because it means most visitors did not find what they were looking for, and just clicked off. Bounce means they left the way they came.
A high bounce rate is "bad" but for sites like HubPages it is really the only type of traffic you can expect. People don't come here to engage with the material. Even if they wanted to, the organization doesn't really lend itself to casual browsing.
Most visitors will search for something like "How do I install a new CPU", come to a Hub that explains it and be on there way. Nothing you can do about it. So, don't worry too much about your bounce rate. What matters most is A) How many people are visiting and B) How long they stay. The amount of time a page is viewed is a much more important statistic for HubPage users as it will accurately represent how useful or interesting the user found your article.
See that's what's confusing me, the actual definition of a bounce.
Incidentally wikipedia disagrees with you according to good old wiki:
Bounce rate (sometimes confused with exit rate) is an Internet marketing term used in web traffic analysis. It represents the percentage of visitors who enter the site and "bounce" (leave the site) rather than continue viewing other pages within the same site.
Exit rate as a term used in web site traffic analysis (sometimes confused with bounce rate) essentially represents the percentage of visitors to a site who actively click away to a different site from a specific page, after possibly having visited any other pages on the site. The visitors just exited on that specific page.
Possibly wikipedia has it wrong, the google link that wilderness provided does not completely satisfactorily answer my question. It doesn't explicitly have the scenario where somebody leaves a page via an external link on that page. But I don't think anything it says anything that suggests that is not a bounce.
But it seems clear to me that the exit rate of a page is a measure of how often that page is the last page on a site a visitor looks at, even in a multi-page visit.
A high bounce rate isn't *necessarily* bad - It can simply mean that the person found what they were looking for in your hub / article; in other words, they searched for something, came to one page, read it, got their question answered and left. They may have stayed on your page for 15 minutes reading it, but if afterwards they close the tab, it counts as a bounce.
Unfortunately, GA isn't able to track how long someone spent on a site *unless* they visit more than one page. BR has to be read with other things in mind - Overall organic search traffic, page views, revenue etc. Although there are some things you can do to reduce bounce rate, mainly keep focus on writing high quality content.
There's an excellent article on bounce rate here, which I would highly recommend:
That is a very good article Paul, thanks. I think what I found to be most interesting how inaccurate the "dwell" time measurement by GA is on pages with a high bounce rate. This is something that's been bothering me a lot because it seemed to me that my dwell time was short.
Incidentally I've always thought that having the "see all images" feature on hubs was a stroke of genius. People are prone to clicking on a nice image, and I get a nice amount of slideshow views on my hubs, which must extend the time on page.
(That longwinded reply was me, of course, forgetting I'd logged into ye niche account to gather every scrap o' data.)
People save some money after the holiday season. They want more info perhaps. I think Squidoo is more sales oriented. Let us see what will happen during the second quarter of the year.
I started on Squidoo in late October 2012 and so far have 8 lenses. I have been on HP for over 3 years and have 22 lenses.
Since I started on Squidoo, my 8 lenses have earned just over $28
Over the same period, my 22 hubs have earned somewhat under $18
It is clear which site has the greater ROI for my type of writing!
I also find I am having more fun on Squidoo and feel more motivated to produce lenses than I do to produce hubs at the moment.
I am enjoying learning in the RocketSquid program, which gives me useful tips and information, suggests a different type of lens to create each week, but does not impose any minimum requirements re number of lenses created over any specified period.
I agree there are many product-oriented lenses, but I have also found some fabulous ones with really interesting information.
My goal this week is to throw one amazon-infested, product-oriented lens on that site this week. Just to see what happens.
I joined hubpages and squidoo at the same time, almost a year ago. But finding it a lot easier and more friendly here on hubpages I decided to dedicate all my time here instead. I had 2 lenses on squidoo for about 2 months which earned nothing whilst in that time my hubs had earned me a few dollars. So i deleted the lenses and focused here, I'm finally starting to get somewhere with hub pages having had my first payout in Jan and now another due in March.
Before Christmas I decided I shoudl try again at Squidoo, but after reading lots realised the Squidoo only seems to work with Sales lenses sadly, its not what I like to write but if sales are what will make me money I am willing to try my hand at it! So I have 5 lenses up at the moment and have only made $0.31 from a single amazon sale. I am waiting for the tier ad system thing this month or next month to see if I made any money from that, but either way logically it'll only be a few cents. I really dislike the tier system, and the fact you have no way of tracking any earnings properly like you can on HP. Most of my lenses have dipped in and out of the tier bands ranking figures so I am assuming a will make a little, but with the whole 2-3 month wait it is very uncouraging and offputting. I do see the same people or the same lenses ranking high all the time, even if the lens, in all hoensty, is rubbish! I find HP's system far more fair. I don't really want to waste too much time on Squidoo if it doesn't end up paying out. Although HP is a little quieter and the potential to earn isn't quite as high as if I got a lens in the top 2000 or whatever, I feel the likely hood of a stable income here is better.
On the other hand, on Squidoo you can set the payment threshold to as low as $1, so once the initial wait is over, payments can be regular. On HP, some people are waiting a very long time to hit the $50 threshold required.
I'm fumbling around with that right now. Damned if I can find where to set the threshold amount. It's not when I click payment settings. It's not when I click my profile settings. wtf... And btw, is paypal with S zero fee or cut, like with HP?
Dashboard, top right hand. Next to your avatar: Profile Settings
Go into Settings: Click on Payouts on left side
Paypal charges a % up to a maximum of $1 per payment. My very first payout, the only one gone through so far, was tiny as I had only just started. I earned $1.18 and received $1.16 through Paypal. That works out at 1.7% fee.
I did as instructed. This is some of what I see. Am I on the right page? If so, the word "payouts" is nowhere on that page for me. If this is the right page, then I guess Chrome is messing with me again... :-(
Not shown publicly
Yes, Link to Facebook No What does this mean?
Yes, Link to Twitter No What does this mean?
Yes, allow readers to email me No
Lens of the Day Newsletter
A fun daily email announcing which lens won the LotD award!
Yes, I want the e-mail No
G-rated content only G- and R-rated
Optional. For advanced users. Set up Analytics
You have to go farther down the list. You're on the Account tab. That's the first tab in the list. Go down to the fourth, which is Payouts.
The good news:
Sounds like I'm on the right page, "Manage Your Squidoo Settings"
The bad news:
I have no tab 3 or 4. I only have "Account" and "Profile"!!!
Perhaps you need to write something to access "payout". Since you won't be paid until 2 months after earning something, there is plenty of time to deal with setting.
Ok. That's weird. I think you said that you did write a few lenses before, right? Maybe it's a glitch. I would sign out and sign back in again to see what happens.
Failure again, re: shutdown, reboot, 2 different browsers, and signing in again. But I think you are on to something. I'd published before, but I'd deleted the critters, so am at zero lenses. We'll see what happens when I publish my new lens.
A wasted hour out of my life gone forever because of this. Am contemplating becoming a Luddite again...
Today according to the monsters I've just sold a laptop worth $800 from my Squidoo lens, yesterday I sold some computer stuff worth $500 and a few books. Just those two days will get earn me more money than I get on HubPages from my 70+ hubs.
I agree with you, the tier system sucks, and really needs to be reformed, it is especially unfair for pages that are on the border of different tiers. I have also seen lenses with very high (or rather low) rank which I wasn't very impressed with. But then there are some interesting hubs here in the "sexy videos and pictures" category that I bet you get masses of traffic. In some ways Squidoo is a lot less permissive about certain topics.
At the moment for making money online purposes, S still seems like a much better bet than HP. Actually the point is not to have one site outrank another, the point is for Google to like HP better, I am very happy writing on this site, I just wish my stuff wasn't outranked by pages that (to me at least) seem so much weaker.
I'm sure Squidoo is just fine, but I have no interest in running a popularity contest to try and make money off my ads. I ended up getting Squidoo as a search result the other day and followed the link, and I was honestly shocked. It was an entire page with nothing but comments and dozens of Amazon affiliates. I don't know if that's considered good or not but I think I'll skip.
S and HP seem to be two very different types of writing platforms. Personally, I like the style and the depth of articles and topics on HP much better. I'm happy some people are making money with Amazon sales on Squidoo. I think if I start viewing Squidoo as more of a sales site than I won't be so surprised that a lot of the lenses don't have more copy.
No, not there.
Go to dashboard. http://www.squidoo.com/lensmaster/dashboard
Look at top right of screen where your avatar sits, just above your trophies.
Hey there, [your name]! Welcome to your dashboard.
Profile | Settings
You'll see on the left:
Points & Trophies
Go into Payouts
Yep, that's where I went. See my previous post. Only the first 2 tabs are visible and available to me. Leastwise, I think we've established I'm not a moron, I think.
I'm going to shutdown, reboot, and use another browser. See what happens then. Why does life always pick on me?
Paradigmsearch: I tried to get rid of nonworking blog, website links in my profile. Great if you can do it. I got so fed up, I deleted my account, Forget support, there is none, or they drink coffee and play video games all day bc they sure don't respond.
I tried Squiddo, but I found that I couldn't even tell when I was reading the article or reading products being pushed-- or even when an article was finished. The advertising is totally out of control, in my opinion. And their payout system could use some sunshine. To me the difference between HubPages and Squidoo is like... going to the mailbox and finding letters (hubs) or catalogs (squids).
I have about the same number of Squidoo lenses and Hubs and started on both at about the same time. I don't get very much on either site but I get marginally more on Hub pages and I do get to see the cents I am making over the month. On Squidoo, I have earned a total of $1.05 since I started and what really cheeses me off over there, is that no matter how hard I try to get my lenses to move up in rank, as soon as it comes to about this time of the month, when the money is sorted out on rank, my lenses sink down the ratings, to below the threshold for payout, only to rise up again, once the payout date has passed!
It does seem very "odd" to me that the ranking drops at a particular time only to rise again once payout has taken place.
It is reports like this that have kept me off of Squidoo. I'm not interested in playing games to increase earnings any more than I'm interested in black hat strategies to do so via Google or Adsense. If my lens or hub is earning, then let me share in that earning without the need to game the system. I far prefer to put my time into writing.
It isn't black hat... it's people thinking that they need to edit their lenses in time for payout, when in truth, they should be editing/updating them in the last week of the month. You'll see surges and drops in lensrank around these times.
Speaking generally, and not at you, Wilderness, there is a great deal of assumption and misunderstanding in this thread. I'll try and clear up a few things that have been commented on.
1. You won't make any money with one or two lenses. I had to write well over 50 before any decent money started flowing. Currently my lenses earn me around $400 per month, incl Amazon -- and I've not made a lens or done much updating in months and months. My top lens has earned $2k in its lifetime (3.5 years). Squidoo is a long-term time investment.
2. There's as much gaming the system there as there is here. Squidoo got rid of the 'followers' system, probably because it was too clique-y.
3. It takes two months before a lens starts to earn.
4. It's hard to break into the top tier, but it's do-able with determination.
5. All the help you need is there. Use the forums, join Rocketsquids, use the search.
6. There is a lot to learn.
7. There are junky lenses, just like there are junky hubs. Ignore them, move on.
8. You get 50% of Squidoo's Amazon commission (8% / 2 = 4%). You get 100% of your own affiliate links. You can't do that on HP. The advantage of using Squidoo's module is that you get the money in your pay. For us outside of the US, we can't get direct Amazon payments.
9. Yes, there are many product lenses. The thinking behind them is that if someone is doing a search for let's say, books about art journaling, they can find reviews and links all gathered together in one place. They aren't for general reading, but for the person looking for that product.
10 There are many, many good quality lenses. I hope some of mine fall into that category -- I worked hard enough on them! Your lens is as good as you want to make it. In that area, HP and Squidoo are exactly the same. Please don't judge the whole site by a few scabby lenses.
Can't think of anything else...
I didn't mean to insinuate it was black hat, but it is definitely playing a game to produce income. If it is valuable to update a lens to gain traffic, then it's valuable. When it's done to coincide with rules giving income regardless of overall traffic, then it's a game. Or so I see it.
I much prefer the HP model, where my traffic produces my income. I can't write a hub that produces income in general I don't get paid. If my hub does result in income then I get it, not someone that edits a lens to raise it's internal squidoo rank.
Have you noticed how much better your hubs do if you edit and tweak them now and then? It's pretty clear from hubscores that the HP algorithm is not just about traffic. I have hubs with quite a bit of traffic that languish down around the 75 mark, and ones with less traffic up in the 90s. However, if I go through and edit them, they all rise.
Actually no. I think that subject and topic matter a great deal; there are subjects that Google doesn't put nearly the emphasis on "newness" on. I do have a few that shows better traffic on editing and fully understand that in some cases it helps, but for most of my own it does not.
Mostly though, the HP score and algorithm have absolutely nothing to do with either traffic or income. Apparently squidoo pays based on the standing a lens receives from their internal algorithms instead of what the lens has earned and that is what I dislike. I have to live with Google's algorithms that produce income; I don't have to live with a second rating that will determine pay with little regard to actual earnings. If I'm understanding how squidoo works, anyway.
I see little difference in the system that removes hubs from search results here. In fact, the Squidoo system is more transparent and honest because lenses are removed from searches when they fall below a certain lens rank. Lens rank is clearly visible for each lens. On Hubpages, lenses are unfeatured on a whim by anonymous rankers or by an algorithm with secret criteria. It is clear from people's reports on the matter than different criteria are applied to different hubbers.
In both cases, a simple edit of the lens or hub brings it back into circulation. However, on Squidoo, it is easy to see when a lens is going to be affected and deal with the matter before that happens.
I find the Squidoo approach a lot more honest.
Have you ever had a hub "unfeatured" that was earning more than a nickel or dime per month? I certainly haven't, and I certainly have seen no indication that different algorithms are used for different hubbers. Google absolutely treats us differently but there is no indication that HP does.
I do understand that many hubbers are very unhappy with squidoo, just as I'm sure that there are many lensmasters at the bottom of the pile that are unhappy with squidoo.
If they are unhappy, it's because they don't understand that it takes a lot of hard work to make some money. It takes good writing, good searchable subjects and a great deal of time. If they are at the bottom of the pile, then they are there for good reason. There is no conspiracy to keep people down and I imagine that you could apply your statement to HP just as easily. There are gamers, just as there are here... lenses get stolen and copied, as do hubs
There seems to be this weird 'us and them' thing going on, but really, the two sites are very similar. Yes, Squidoo is more transparent, yes Hubs look better and tend to be more writer-oriented. However, it is possible to work both to generate an income. They can be complementary, plus it's always good to spread yourself around a little. It is difficult to adapt to a different system, but I found the same when I came here. It's merely another learning experience.
One other point... I can add links to my lenses to point to my hubs, but not in reverse. I see quite a bit of traffic coming via Squidoo to a couple of hubs. Squidoo's algorithm takes click-outs into account in lensrank, meaning that if a lens leads a reader on a journey, then it's a good thing. HP doesn't like it.
What I don't like is people condemning a platform, when they don't understand it. Or saying it doesn't work when they have only two lenses. I've been at Squidoo since 2009. Once I got a goodly number of lenses going, I turned to HP, intending to do the same thing. Gotta say, it's easier to earn on Squidoo than HP at the moment Hopefully, that will change in due course. Patience is everything.
I pretty much agree with everything that you say, and I too find the "us versus them" mentality puzzling. One thing that I haven't found is that HubPages doesn't let you link out, I don't think that is true.
HP did become a bit paranoid about links after the Panda slap, I guess as a reaction to spammers who used it just to add a back link to their sites. However they do allow you to add up to 2 links to another domain (as long as it is not a "spammy" domain. I'm pretty sure you can link to lenses from your hubs.
I do find the lensrank payment system a bit weird. At the moment I have 2 lenses which might end up in tier1 in February, but they might just not make it. This could be a difference of over $80 in the payout, so it is driving me a bit crazy. However, even if they end up in tier 2, I will earn about 10x more from Squidoo than from HP. That kind of makes the "unfairness" less important.
It's probably an Apprentice thing then, as I had 13 (single) links to lenses (with similar topics) across approx 50 hubs and was told they were 'overly promotional'. Obviously 13 in 50 is not overly promotional but no point arguing.
You get paid on 'average lensrank,' so a lens which slips out of a tier for a few days can attain a lower tier payment and vice-versa.
Definitely an Apprentice thing. What you mention would not be overly promotional according to HubPages' current rules.
The overly promotional rule has two aspects. One, you can't have more than two links to any one domain in a Hub. Two, you can't write a Hub with the sole purpose of promoting another site. That's it.
The fact that the Apprenticeship Program is being so strict worries me a little. If they decide the stricter interpretation across the board, I'd have a heck of a lot of revising to do, and so would many other people.
I don't think the apprenticeship program is more strict in terms of links. I've published hubs where I've provided 2 external links to pixabay and other sites in the image credits (it wouldn't let me do more than 2 though which was annoying). Unless they distinguish between sites like that and domains like squidoo, of course, I haven't tried to link to my own lenses. Still I wouldn't worry about it too much right now.
From what I've seen of the apprenticeship program, there are no stricter in any way from the 'normal' hp rules, except in requring that all images are correctly attributed.
I am completely puzzled about what happened to theraggededge's hubs.
I had a problem once with attributing more than two images in a hub to Morguefile. As soon as I emailed the HP team and explained the problem they sorted it out and removed the flag on my hub that related to more than two links to the same domain. You could no doubt do the same if you get this problem again.
Just a small point, on HP you can use up to two Amazon 'in text' affiliate links per hub and get 100% of the income from those, it is only the Amazon capsule income that is shared with HP. Also I am outside of the US and live in the British Channel Islands (basically a crown dependency of the UK) and I do receive my Amazon payments directly, although they are in the form of a cheque that I get when I reach the $100 threshold.
Yes, cheques but not direct bank credits. There's always a charge to process a foreign currency cheque. I let mine roll up to about $700 before requesting a cheque.
I tried adding in-text Amazon links in the Apprentice program (just one one in one hub) but was told to remove them.
I found that when I banked a dollar cheque through HSBC they charged me about £7 to process it because it was in dollars. However, when I banked a dollar cheque through my Lloyds TSB account they didn't charge me anything for processing it. I now only bank cheques in dollars through Lloyds for obvious reasons.
Weird about the problem you had with the 'in text' amazon links. Sounds like HP were trying to discourage apprentices from using them because it isn't in HP's interests to encourage apprentices in any activity that is not beneficial to HP's coffers. I have certainly not heard or read anything that says the rules have changed with regards to being allowed up to two 'in text' Amazon affiliate links in any one hub. Perhaps someone else can step in with more info.
It is curious that you get this drop in rank in the middle of the month. But payout depends on the average rank during the whole month, rather than on the rank on "payout day", so it shouldn't really matter when your rank is high or low.
If you go to your dashboard, and look at the stats for any particular lens, you will see how its rank changed over time, if you look at "per month" rather than "per day" you should see what the average rank was during December, so you can tell in which tier your lens will earn.
What really gets me is that I have lenses on the borderline of various tiers, it is so annoying to know that if they only did a bit better they would earn so much more. The other thing that is annoying is that sometimes a lens will rise in traffic and click outs but fall in rank. That is because the payout is competitive, it depends on how well your lens does relative to other pages rather than how well it does in absolute terms.
Before reading the last half-dozen posts, I'd already written off S as a standard traffic/revenue source. The last half-dozen posts have certainly confirmed that belief.
About the amazon modules... If, for some demented reason, I decided to use them instead of the html route...
I ass/u/me'd that they were exempt from the whole mickey mouse ranking/tier payment system. It would simply be a case of whatever amazon pays (at what would automatically always be amazon's highest level) would be split 50:50 between S and me. The ranking/tier system stays out of the amazon capsule scenario.
Is that true???
Yes, whatever earnings you get from Amazon are independent of the tier system.
Squidoo is on the highest commission level with Amazon, which is 8%. They split the commission 50:50 with you, which means you are getting 4% for each sale off one of your lenses. 4% is equivalent to the lowest commission rate on Amazon.
Thus, if you do not make enough Amazon sales on your personal account to move up to the second level of commission, you will get the same whether you use the Squidoo module or your own code.
I believe that electronics are an exception to this, because the commission for those sales is capped at 4%. For electronics, you will earn more using your own code.
I'm going to toss one lens in there. If it shows potential, I'll start plowing through S's documentation, lurking the forums, etc. I already even know what my second sales pitch lens would be about. But if it just lays there..., then that is that.
Why not let Google explain it: http://support.google.com/analytics/bin … er=1006257
I think that's an excellent description of bounce rate.
also, responding to another poster's clarification - a high bounce rate is "normal" for a Hub - for the reasons they cited. And yes, time-on-page is a more valuable metric for hubs.
But for a site - a high bounce rate is bad.
But, I am speaking from a web site perspective - not a HP article perspective. Bounce rate tells me how engaging my page was to a visitor. And engaging doesn't just mean "Did I have what they were looking for," it also means did I provide them with more to interest them.
Speaking from what I understand, (not an expert edict), from perusing Google's resources, and analysis of my pages - I still think my explanation is valid for most instances. A bounce means they left from the page they entered, without visiting any other pages.
Even if they came looking for a single answer - and found it, I still try to structure the page to entice them to read or explore more, or best yet, click off on an ad or commission link. If I see a page with a high bounce rate (70+/-%) - I know I need to work on that page.
Google says the average for most sites is a 70% bounce rate (but they are not saying that is good - just what is typical), my HP bounce rate is 80-90%, my primary site bounce rate is 36% - so for me, a high bounce rate is bad.
Oops... just realized I am logged in under Appletreedeals - just for the record, this is GA Anderson, my usual forum ID
aa lite, Paul: what you say about Bounce Rate makes sense.
I've been chewing on this, and just had a FACEPALM moment. Of course my bounce rate on my hubs is much higher than my lenses! On Hubpages, I got banned several years back for linking too much to the same domain, so since then I've put on a hair shirt and am very wary of linking out to any site more controversial than NASA or Wikipedia! Whereas on Squidoo, I know that lensrank is partly based on clickouts, so part of my article-writing process is to scour the web looking for great resources, articles, and content related to my topic and fold it in where it would make sense for my readers. So of course the bounce rate is lower.
To everyone who's dissing the bad Squidoo lenses they've seen: Guys, I know, but try the Hub Hopper. Do it now. I'll wait. Hop twenty hubs and see how many of them make you think, "Holy cow, there's godawful garbage on this site!"
Now here's five sample Squidoo lenses. None of them are mine. All of them rank well enough to earn under Squidoo's system. Are these godawful garbage? (Well, okay, the first one is, in the literal sense, but I still think it's a good article):
Gross Science: Let's Make Poop!
Louis XIV, the Sun King
Longitude: John Harrison's Chronometers
Keukenhof Gardens in Holland
Nursery Rhymes: History & Origins
And this one doesn't make Squidoo ad earnings, but it DOES provide backlinks to the artist's own blog -- which wouldn't be allowed on Hubpages, since it's "overly promotional," but I think it's a beautiful lens:
A Russian Dragon Fairytale, Dobrynja and Gorynytch, illustrated with the author's own paintings
So the question becomes not, "Is there garbage on the site?" but "Am I going to write garbage?" and, "Can my non-garbage writing earn money on Squidoo?"
I say yes. Also, I can say from experience that non-garbage content does better, even if it gets fewer comments from the Squidoo community, because just as on Hubpages, you want external traffic, not internal. Which brings us back to Paradigmsearch's orignal post: on which site can you get traffic?
Those are very exceptional lenses, and the one on King Louis XIV is incredibly well researched. It's definitely not a paragraph followed by advertisements. Perhaps it's the way Squidoo is structured that lends itself to this type of ad copy writing. If the "lens masters" aren't going to get paid unless their lens falls into a high enough ranking, then the only option is to get Amazon sales. So that might be why we see the aggressive marketing-style copy.
Sorry, just couldn't pass this one up...
"Neon flying squid is both real and a real winner in the evolution game"
http://now.msn.com/neon-flying-squid-ca … hoto-shows
Well, I published my BS-overly-promotional-sales-pitch squid hub. I also prowled the documentation and forums; I am 99.9% certain that I will not be publishing another one...
And, btw. Sure enough, those missing tabs showed right up after I published.
Jeez, that squidoo website is more buggy than HP ever was. And that wide-screen lens format is murder on the eyes; there is a reason that virtually every other website has a standard word-span line of 10 words or so...
And as for their payment system... What is this crap where the giant squids get 100% of my earnings from now until the end of the month? I kid you not. If you are going to publish on squidoo, don't do it until the end of the month. Otherwise, if you are lucky enough to have your article immediately go viral, you will get none of the resulting proceeds!!! Amazon and eBay are an exception to this fortunately...
I've just become a giant squid! Where does it say that I get your earnings till the end of the month?
What are you waiting for? Go forth and publish many lenses so I can earn from them!
It's in the documentation. Lenses aren't eligible for earnings unless they were published on the first of that month. Thus my newly published lens wont be eligible to start collecting earnings until March 1st. As for the giant squids getting it all, that was a rant; according to the tier structure, I imagine they'll get only 80% or so, the rest going to tier's 2 and 3...
And another thing... When I published my lens, it was good enough to get immediately featured. But then apparently some angel (that is what they are called according to the documentation) came along and voted it down, removing it from the featured category. Yep, it is set up over there where the old-timers can go around and knock the newbies' competing lenses off the search engine indexing. No joke. Not kidding. It's all there in the documentation. As far as I am concerned, squidoo is dead to me.
And thus starts my day today...
Oh, well. On to the next experiment...
I am an angel. As far as I know all I can do is to "bless" lenses, which helps them along.
What happens with lenses is that when they are first published they don't get ranked, and they have to wait till the next day to become "featured", but apparently they don't have a "no-index" tag on them so it doesn't matter to Google. I think this is all that's happened to you, not the mysterious angel activity. Is your Squid username also paradigmsearch? I'll go and give you support if I can find you.
According to the documentation, you can also put curses on them. However, because of your 2 posts, I went back and edited my rant to be a little less inflammatory...
As for your offer to bless me, a sincere thanks! I need all the help I can get. However, we might as well wait til March for that.
Sorry, I believe you are dead wrong on this.
I just went and checked the source code. There it is; a big, fat noindex tag.
"<meta name="robots" content="noindex, nofollow">"
And, again. When I first published, it went to the pretty, green, featured status within 10 minutes or less. I sign on this morning, it's now red and showing a record of a visitor...
We'll see what tomorrow brings...
That's interesting, I must admit that I never checked the "no-index" thing myself, but I remember Greekgeek saying she didn't see the 'no-index' tag. Anyway I strongly suspect you will be green again tomorrow.
I just checked. I'm green again now. But my rank is 2,553,231,555,794,666.
No biggie. The critter will make money for me or it won't. If it does, I'll grace them with another lens; I already even know the topic.
That's just cause it hasn't managed to calculate rank, it might go red again before next rank update but then things should stabilise.
Well, well... I've been blessed!
Also, just how many lenses are out there? I haven't stumbled across that number yet. I'm not sure, but I think mine is rated in the top 10%
And it's been indexed by Google. If I actually start getting traffic, I might have to start saying nice things about Squidoo.
And then I wouldn't be so tempted to hop in and debunk instead of keeping my trap shut.
Read and weep.
http://skefflingsmakemoneyonline.com/sk … ing-wierd/
In Nov 2010, with my first $300 or so paycheck under my belt from my "I'll just write an article on ancient Greek snot instead of working on my graduate research" hobby, I had a brainwave. "Hey, if that's how much I'm making futzing around online for a hobby, couldn't I support myself online and skip the whole misery of trying to get a teaching job when teachers are getting laid off left right and sideways in my area?"
So in 2011 I decided to turn this online gig into a fulltime job. My goal was to make $1200/month by the end of the year, the equivalent of minimum wage with a 40-hours-a-week job.
It took me until November 2012 to hit that goal.
Compared to this Skeffling person, I feel pretty pathetic.
On the other hand, I'm still writing the occasional article about Ancient Greek snot and gamma ray bursts and other nerddity topics, while she is very sensibly writing about power drills and rotary blade lawnmowers.
There are different paths to success. Some are slower than others.
Anyway, one of my paths is to use my rather late lunch break to read all the new posts on searchengineland, seomoz blog and searchenginewatch, then branch out to the "how I'm doing it" articles by various hubbers and lensmasters who are more successful than I. Then, having garnered a few nuggets of strategy, I go back to work.
It would be time to do the latter.
Come on, Google! Send me some squid traffic so I can justify putting another lens there!
I just ventured over to the squid to check it out and maybe publish something over there, it makes no sense! How does anything ever get published over there?
Dazed and confused
Sounds like a good name for a rock band.
It's actually very easy, and the lens building tool allows for many more monetisation opportunities than here.
If you are stuck, apply to join Rocket Squids. It is like the apprentice stuff here, but you get automatic access to each week's lessons with no commitments. You get sent a Rocket Squid challenge each week, but you are not thrown off the programme if you do not do it. Squidoo realises that life can interfere.
Much of the point system on Squidoo is a competition against oneself. I am finding it great fun. In over three years, I was motivated to produce 22 hubs. Since late October, I have been motivated to produce 8 lenses.
Thank you for adding this. I joined Squidoo but never really 'got' how to make it work for me. Your post has encouraged me to take another look at the site.
I am on Wizzley because I like the way you can use the page layouts and the way you make the articles there is a similar method capsules/modules for making a HubPage.
HubPages is different to some other sites, in that if you can get traffic to your pages you earn and are not dependent on the 'whimsical click/buy factor' of earning by payment per click or per purchase.
Not sure how Squidoo works money wise. I signed over the couple of lenses I had made to charity when I became distracted by something. It is interesting to read other people's experience of different sites.
Well, folks. I have started my next article. When it's done, I intend to do the following...
First, I will check the traffic on my latest published hub.
Then I will check the traffic on my one and only squidoo lens.
Whichever one is getting the most traffic, that's the site that gets my latest endeavor.
If it turns out that both sites suck, then it goes to Wizzley. Everybody and their sister has been poking me with a stick to do that anyway.
I am watching this experiment with interest and taking notes. My faithful assistant, Beaker is making squeaking noises in anticipation.
Will "Beaker" be along in a moment? Do you let him (her) keep PST or have you moved her to GMT?
I think we should be told.
These are the normal results that we get.
I've already experimented on Squidoo. My lenses have a higher rank number than Hubpages, but my hubs still get closer to the top of the page. Earnings are figured so differently though. If you can keep a low lens rating at Squidoo, you can earn some nice cash for each article. It's hard though to get traffic over there to keep your number down.
Thank you for keeping us updated and for posting that link. I like how the author pointed out that you can still write the articles you want, and then separate out your more business-oriented work, which is what's going to pay the bills.
paradigmsearch: I have done a lot of researching on Squid due to the claims of people doing good with Amazon over there. I found essentially, what you had posted here. There is a lot of competition there and the older ones can knock the new writers down so that they never move up, in order to keep themselves on top, their cohorts on top where the money is.
I see very little informative content there, It is all sales copy.
None of my stuff over there is sales copy. But 2 of my lenses there have just been moved into "Work in progress" status, basically the same here as a sleeping hub. Unless you keep getting people to check out your hubs they slide down the ratings very quickly. It's a lot of work to keep trying to get people to look at your lenses and keeps you from writing more. It's a hobby for me, not a business (yet).Think I will move them all from both S and HP and put them on my own website. I don't put them into storage on there.
Been at the Squidoo forums. It's payday today over there. Lot of unhappy campers. Food for thought...
Well I thought this month would be my first Squidoo payout, but I was obviously wrong as nothing appeared. Posted a few lense at the end of Decemeber, must have to wait until March, which is just rediculous!
Yes, I only just got my first payout after starting on Squidoo at the end of October. Once the initial delay is over, it makes no difference, since payouts are calculated monthly.
Moreover, since my first month's earnings for 7 lenses earned me more than I earn in 4 months with 22 hubs, and since the money has been paid into my Paypal account despite being less than $50, I'm happy!
paradigmsearch, I broke down and joined Squidoo, despite my complaints about it being overly promotional. I'll need to eat some calamari very soon.
by Lisa Vollrath 3 years ago
Fellow Squid refugees, as many of us come to the end of our first full month on HubPages, I'm wondering how those edits are coming. What's been your process for slogging through the old lenses, to turn them into shiny new hubs?
by Don Bobbitt 3 years ago
After over a month of careful watching, here is what I have observed as an HP writer;1- My "reads" on HP are steady at 400+ daily.2- Google (US, AU, NE, UK, CA, etc) have all but abandoned my articles with a dramatic decrease in Google Traffic. 3- All of my other sources of traffic are...
by Tanya Jones 3 years ago
It's been only six weeks since that fateful morning when I learned, before my morning coffee no less, that I'd be moving my lenses to HP. I seem none the worse for the event and am glad I made the move. You, fellow former-Squids and Hubbers? How have your thoughts changed or not since that...
by Person of Interest 5 years ago
Yep. The lines crossed. I said it would. And it did. I truly am a legend in my own mind. http://www.quantcast.com/hubpages.comhttp://www.quantcast.com/squidoo.comQuite bluntly... You don't like HP? Then leave.
by Bill Manning 7 years ago
I have a few hubs with Amazon links, plus some store pages on my own sites all with Amazon products. They are very targeted, all about Harry Potter merchandise.Yet I see with 2 new sales today my conversion is only 0.96% Now, I only have maybe 3 hubs with Amazon links, plus two pages of products in...
by Projectlazy 6 months ago
Hello, about 3 years ago I along with many others were forced to leave Squidoo.com and come here. I'll say it really killed my love for the hobby. I saw articles that on peak days were getting over a thousand views drop down to less then 100. Now those same articles have become stale and get...
Copyright © 2018 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.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|