I just had an idea to maximize traffic for myself and my articles. One I reach anywhere between 50 and 100 hubs, I would remove all of my less successful hubs, transfer them to another website, and either publish all of them at once or publish a bunch and add the remaining ones over a period of time. That way, I will have a good amount of articles on both sites and I will be able to get different traffic sources. It would also give those underperforming hubs a second chance.
I am nowhere near this stage yet, but do you think it would be a good plan at some point in the future?
Only if what you post on your blog is in the same niche. Blogs that are all over the place and have no cohesion have no hope of ever finding success. The number of articles you have on one site make no difference in the sites ability to maintain traffic. It is all about the content and the search queries that bring people to those sites.
I didn't mean blog, I meant another article site similar to Hubpages, but your ideas are valid nonetheless.
Are you saying 100 articles on Hubpages is the same as 70 on Hubpages vs 30 on another site?
No, what I am saying is that the number of articles you have mean nothing if they are not getting any traffic. Take a look at this guys traffic accolade and then look how many hubs he has.
Don't look to just post a lot of content. Make sure you are posting stuff that people are searching for and make it better than what is already out there, then promote it, promote it, promote it.
Don't get mislead with the stats on Misha's Hubs. He removed a lot of Hubs and republished elsewhere during the initial Hub Challenge 'fiasco' some years ago! He did not get his 1 million plus views from 10 hubs!
Maybe not, but he never had more than about 25.
Misha always said making money was 10% writing and 90% promotion. That was his model.
Nobody is trying to mislead anyone. You're missing the whole point. The point is you do not need a ton of content, you need quality content that people are searching for.
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/45556 Misha put proof of his $100 per day effort. SunSeven claimed she had hit the mark too but not with Adsense, and Maddie Rudd made a claim of a $200 day hub, no proof provided, but no reason to doubt either of them as they are both respected community members.
Yes, but this guy has been at HP for five years and his hubber score has dropped to 68, which means none of his links will be active. A million views seems like it would generate a lot of money, but in reality, unless his CPMs are very high and continue to be so, If he made $5 per 1000 after the 40% that goes to HP, over five years he only made $5,000 or $1,000 a year. That is still a good return for 10 hubs, but it certainly is not enough to live on!
So many things have changed here since I started and since Misha started here. He was one of the first hubbers to successfully hit the $100 a day mark for a single hub. I don't remember him having more than 15 hubs in total but he targeted a very profitable niche around traffic tickets and driving.
You are assuming that the only way to earn here was through Adsense, eBay, and Amazon. This was prior to the HP Ad program and at a time when we were allowed to place affiliate links through other sources, such as Clickbank. CPM's had very little to do with how he earned.
He was a huge proponent of building backlinks at any means and this was the norm a few years back so his content had hundreds of thousands of backlinks which then propelled his content to the top of the SERP's and earned him a very good return... Nobody here has ever reported sustained $100 days, he did with proof. His backlinking methods probably led to his panda problems along with the switch over to subdomains. We use to get a good boost in traffic directly through the root domain of this site but now our subdomains have to stand on their own. This means that all those backlinks he built were 301 redirected to his subdomain which was a clear indication to Google that the links were probably artificial.
Besides all of that, the only reason I linked to his profile was to show that vast numbers of content mean very little if your content is not being searched for. He only has 6 of his 10 hubs featured but he has not touched them in quite a while.
What a lovely reminder of Misha He was such an inspiration to me and I learned LOADS from him. Though I never went down the massive backlinking route, I did learn that earning success is really NOT ABOUT QUANTITY of content, as you've so rightly pointed out Richard.
His $100 a day hub was actually monetised through adsense only. Not sure that would be possible now on this site, but it's still certainly possible to earn decent amounts here. Last month I made over $750 through HP alone, which to me is not that amazing, but that's because I still remember how much could be made in the old days!
Here's a bit more inspiration for others (maybe?) - The Misha Challenge thread.
Misha made a lot more than $5 per 1000 on that $100 per day hub. His click though rate was 10 - 20% and value per click over a dollar. He really knew how to get the maximum return from adsense, which in essence is:
high traffic keyphrase + a long and informative article + a topic people will want more info on (produces high CTR) + high click value
Also, I'd estimate that Misha's traffic would be far closer to the 10 million mark (the next traffic accolade) and nearly all of that was gained in 2-3 years.
P.S. Richard was not talking about outgoing links (which are affected by hubberscore), but INCOMING links which are not ie: backlinks.
Thanks for the input everybody. The main purpose of this plan is to take good hubs that for whatever reason don't receive as much traffic and put them on other sites to freshen them up. Since they would be on other sites, they would receive different audiences and search engine attention. Then, I would have my profiles on each site link to each other.
This would be a means of promoting my content on each other's websites as well as giving myself access to the traffic from different sites as well as tools, search engine attention, etc.
I think it is worth a try. I would add some new content to the articles though or change the keywords to see if that worked better.
I think you're misunderstanding how revenue-sharing sites work.
If you transfer a Hub to a different site, it won't get a different audience. All revenue-sharing sites target exactly the same audience - Google visitors. Most sites have a small community of writers who take an interest in each other's articles, but their number is a drop in the bucket.
Your plan has another flaw. HubPages is more vulnerable to theft than most other sites, due to its high profile. If you publish articles here then try to move them, you may get a rude shock - the new site will reject them as "not original", due to the number of copies on plagiarist sites. So, part of your process will have to be to check thoroughly for copies before you attempt to unpublish and move.
I do think it's worth moving some Hubs to other sites but only if they're unFeatured - because an unFeatured Hub is, effectively, invisible so it's absolutely pointless to leave it here.
livingwithrichard: I took a look over a million views, but that hubber joined HP 5 years ago.
I move my articles around if they seem to die on HP, Squidoo, Wizzley and others. It seems that some topics do better on one site like HP than they do another. It also seems traffic dies during the summer months and picks up again around October until after the holidays as well. All one can do is experiment and see what happens. I have had other writers tell me that they may have published articles that did nothing, and a year later took off in both traffic and sales without moving them,
Keep in mind that sites like Squidoo, HP, Wizzley, Seekyt and others do not allow articles that have been published elsewhere, even after you delete them.
HubPages will allow you to publish an article that previously appeared elsewhere, so long as the prior article has been removed.
That hubber had that before he left 3 years ago, I think.
I've published articles on Wizzley and my blog that were previously published here. As long as they've been deindexed and there are no copies out there, it's not a problem.
That may be true in theory but in practice it's not so.
Provided the article can't be found anywhere in a Google search, Squidoo, HP, Wizzley, Seekyt and others will accept it as "original". Their duplicate filters do not check the wayback machine.
Writer Fox: Since when, since their rule has always been "original content."
The content, of course, must be original - meaning that you wrote it and didn't copy someone else's work. But it's OK if you had it on another site for a while and then removed it. I published one last week that was previously on another site and HubPages is aware of that fact.
WryLilt: I remember reading something about the million views a 2-3 years ago.
Why would he remove a Hub that was doing so well? (He used to have a lot more than 10!)
He got slapped by Panda and like many top writers back then, chose to move to his own websites instead of keep changing to meet the avalanche of new rules HP introduced.
I wonder how that mega-traffic Hub is doing now.
It's not doing anything now.
We are in a very different world now post Panda and Penguin. (A much better one I think.)
His practice of "building backlinks at any means and this was the norm a few years back so his content had hundreds of thousands of backlinks which then propelled his content to the top of the SERP's" definitely won't work today. The Google Penguin algorithm came down hard and heavy on spam links!
Yep, Penguin did come down hard and l do think that's a good thing.
Still, I did learn a great deal from him that IS applicable and relevant even in the new paradigm.
Me too and I apply a lot of what I have learned on my own sites where nobody can tell me if I am being ethical or not. I don't rely on Google on my own sites. At least not to be found in the SERP's. I do use PPC advertising and Google is just one of many of the programs that I use. Conversions and CTR are the things I analyze more than traffic demographics.
Nelle was a big influence here as well and I did very well with my product hubs until the atmosphere for them changed on HP. That's not to say that product sales articles do badly now... they still produce but not with the same authority HP once gave them... prior to the subdomains.
By the way... I still think backlinks are very important today but not in the same way we use to build them to individual hubs. I build them to my subdomain now because it does have to stand on its own merit and since I don't contain my content to one main niche it is very important to spread them around all of the areas of my interest. This makes it so much easier to build them.
Like I stated, building artificial backlinks is not going to help much anymore. But building relevant backlinks and encouraging natural links is still very important in the SEO landscape. SE's (at least Google) can measure the relevance of an inbound link to a site and any inbound link that has no relevance to the content it is linking to will be discounted. For example, if a blog on gardening linked to my 'fruit fly' hub, Google would see there is relevance. If a blog on racing bicycles linked to my 'fruit fly' hub, Google would not see any relevance and then discount or ignore that link. However, if the inbound link were to my subdomain instead of the 'fruit fly' hub, Google would see that the link is relevant to my profile as a freelance writer.
They would not penalize the hub for having irrelevant inbound links. If that were the case then all the competition would need to do is build link bombs to their competitors. Natural contextual links in the body of the content hold more weight than links in comments, profiles, signatures, link pages, etc... and those are the types of links I seek and encourage.
I moved a lot of low performing hubs following Panda 11 and regret it.
You lose all the age. And since HP still ranks higher than most other sites, you'll be going from low traffic to no traffic in my experience.
Best advice? Throw an MFP on low traffic articles then IGNORE THEM. Concentrate on making high traffic articles and making them better or copying them into another angle. Low traffic ones may suddenly get traffic in a year or two, then you can work on them.
Throw mud at a wall and see what sticks. Don't bother cleaning the floor.
Linda - Original content is content that does not appear on another site when you post it. At some time in past it could have been somewhere else.
My experience, after deleting, after using google URL tool removal, and leaving article sit in my computer for months, republishing it, FLAGGED FOR DUPLICATE CONTENT.
I removed the old URL from another site, and removed the content from Google and Bing cache results. After 24 hours, I published it on HubPages. I, too, got the "Duplicate Content" notice. I sent an email to HP explaining that it was published before and was removed. Within an hour HP sent me an email saying it was OK and they published it. On the top of my Hub, only viewable by me, is this message:
"CERTIFIED ORIGINAL: This Hub has been granted an exception and is no longer considered by HubPages to be duplicated.
Despite being identified by our system as having content that is duplicated elsewhere on the web, this Hub has been reviewed and granted an exception.
No action is necessary on your part."
And, it doesn't appear anywhere else on the Web.
Linda Smith: It is possible that somebody copied your hub, and when you removed it, theirs remained online!
But it might be that your hub was copied, and after you removed it, the copy appears as the original. Even though it isn't.
Okay. I know of writers who are moving from one site to HP. Now I know how they are doing it if they get flagged.
i use several duplicate content checker as well as CopyScape which does a good job, but does not catch everything.
If a hub is not performing on HP then it is unlikely to perform elsewhere as it is. That being said some sites draw better traffic for different subjects than others, some people say for instance that wizzley is better now for sales type pages than HP. However I have not seen any real evidence for this.
I have always found that it is easier to get something to rank through HP than any other sites, if it does not gain traffic here I have never had better success anywhere else for a similar article chasing the same keywords. If it does not have traffic here then you should look at it critically and ask yourself why, is it competition, is it quality, or is there just no searches for that subject? You will never get traffic for a hub on "The life cycle of the lesser spotted green and yellow spotted Bolivian tree frog" as no one would ever search for it on the search engines, however your hub would likely be top of the search engines if you search for it. However a hub on "birthday present for wife" will get lots of searches but would be unlikely to rank due to competition.
That being said I have found that if I have a successful article here I can get better rankings and more traffic through my own sites - but I still keep my articles here also! For some search terms I can occupy multiple places on the first page of the search engines using different sites.
I've learned a couple of new things this summer. One is that you can have a poorly preforming hub that once it is aged can become #1. I had this happen to one of my hubs.
The other is that if you write a hub and use the same keywords as someone else at Hubpages, if their hub is older they will beat yours out. I wrote a hub not realizing someone else here used the same keywords and hers is on page one of Google and mine is no where to be found. Mine is much better quality (in my opinion) and has a lot more content. I need to change my keywords.
I moved all of my idle hubs earlier. Now I am sorry that I moved some of them. I'm not sure it was a good idea. My traffic is down and it maybe because the hubs with 10 views a month added up. I had a lot that I moved.
I'd have to disagree with your second point. If your hub is higher quality, you can still beat out another hub.
My ways to induce labour hub is consistently in the top 5 on Google, but there are dozens of other hubs on the same topic - took about a year to really get there though. It can just take time and traffic statistics.
I agree with Wrylilt here too. I have several hubs that have beat out existing hubs using the same or similar keywords and some of them from day one. We have to remember that our subdomains stand on their own merits and it does not matter if something is already published here. Before the subdomain switch it was pretty difficult to beat out existing/aged hubs since the SE's only returned a couple urls from the same root domain.
It is possible to move content to another site and have it perform better on search engine results. This can be a result of the new site having more authority and quality in the eyes of the Google algorithm, better internal linking structure to feature your content on the new site, less competition for the same theme on the new site, etc. If you really believe your article content is valuable but it is not receiving search engine traffic, a change of venue is worth a try. You would have nothing to lose, it seems.
If your hubs aren't doing well here they probably wouldn't fair any better elsewhere. Plus you'd lose any momentum they may have gained with search engines. Better to edit your hubs to draw more traffic. However writing new articles to post on another site is advisable as it is wise not to keep all your eggs in one basket.
I agree with Jennifer Suchey - edit your hubs and draw more traffic. I recently edited some of my hubs, and my traffic increased. Another idea is to take a look at the subject of your hub, and come at from a slightly different angle, and post it to another site. You can always add a link back to the original article. Also post links to Google Plus - that really works. I wrote a short hub about Google plus mainly for my fellow hubbers ( so many people work soooooo hard here) but if you don't have a Google plus account I think you should get one.
How many of your own hubs should you post at Google+? I've been worried about it being considered spam. Can you post a lot or not without Google frowning. I'd like to post more.
Google doesn't care how many Hubs you post to your Google+ account, but your audience there might care. The people who read your Google+ posts are your followers.
Google is using Google+ as your personal connection to all Google products now, so remember that you are creating an image about yourself for Google as well.
I have a rough idea as to what my Google friends are interested in, so I try and limit G+s to those topics.
Sorry Barbara - meant to reply earlier but I am still in Egypt and things are totally crazy. We are out of here on Friday before war breaks out and I will be able to be more active then. I have not had a problem with posting a lot. What I do is to introduce my subject in about 25 - 40 words - about like a summary on hub, then I add the link. This seems to war really well.
As several people have pointed out, before removing an article from its original host, check VERY CAREFULLY to make sure it hasn't been copied anywhere, because the copy might outrank the article on its new site in search results or trip the duplicate content / plagiarized / not original filter on the new site (Squidoo, Wizzley, etc) where you publish it.
As Marisa says, if the content is not drawing visitors, there's the possibility that moving the content won't make a lick of difference. Same content, so Google won't rank it any better.
-- Every site's traffic potential is different because of the Panda algorithm boosting or depressing traffic for each site.
-- Different sites really do gain a search engine reputation for different kinds of content. They may rank it a little better or worse.
-- Different sites' "related content" hierarchy may put your page in a better or worse position. On Hubpages, these are the links at the bottom of the page pointing to other hubs. Some sites have both "related articles" and "tags" providing cross-linkage between related content. This may partly explain why the same content can get a different search ranking on a different site -- more or less relevant links pointing to it (and leading off of it).
-- Different sites monetize differently. On Hubpages, a page that gets a steady low trickle of traffic has earning power, as it's pulling in pennies from Adsense. (Pages that get occasional rare traffic spikes from social media also do splendidly as hubs.) On Squidoo, that same content might fall below the paying tiers because it's not getting enough visitors and visitor interaction. Yet Squidoo allows more visible Amazon and eBay links and widgets, and lets you place your own afilliate links (Zazzle, Allposters, etc), so you may find better commissions makes up for lost ad revenue. (And of course, on your own sites, you can do what you want, but then the challenge is building up enough relevant content for your site to rank. Whereas building on Hubpages or other third party sites gives you a leg up as far as domain authority and traffic).
Misha, the guy you are talking about was one of the first top Hubbers to leave HubPages about a year ago and move most of his articles elsewhere because we were no longer allowed to post affiliate links and various other changes on this site that p***ed him off. That is why it seems he has over a million views from only 10 hubs. But he got the views from many more hubs that are no longer published on this site.
I still agree with you though that exceptionally useful and original content + promotion gets the views. Follow the motto quality not quantity, what ever site you publish on.
by Midasfx 9 years ago
I would like to join other sites like hubpages to post similar articles or stories to generate more traffic/ money and also be able to create back links.So far I have only found a few sites. They act the same as hubpages and i found 1 that gets you listed on google much faster then hubpages. Two of...
by thomasczech 6 years ago
Why does my hub keep saying it is a duplicate? It is my work. I even made many changes many times.I deleted it, rewrote it and tried to publish it again, after having made many changes. Still it says duplicate. It should not say this. It is my work.
by zebtron 3 years ago
Curious what forums, sites, podcasts and other content you really like and frequent.What is your favorite writing site?What is your favorite writing forum other than HubPages (includes forums, Yahoo groups, Facebook groups. etc.)?What are you favorite writing podcasts or YouTube channels?Look...
by Victoria Van Ness 5 months ago
What's the point in keeping us from linking to our own work in our articles? That's how we increase traffic to our articles!
by Missy 3 years ago
I posted this hub about MOPS a few days ago: http://thatmommyblogger.hubpages.com/hu … S-Meeting. It took me hours to write, and I wrote it about a very personal topic. There is no chance that I plagiarized it, and I did not post it on any other site.I'm getting a duplicate...
by youssefdoukkali 5 years ago
First reason:Any article is handicapped by moderators if it doesn't please them. Your article won't appear in search engines purely because it is not featured.Second reason:You cannot publish your articles elsewhere! Your articles are not even visible in search engines and yet HubPages use...
Copyright © 2019 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.|