Anyone here used to write for Suite101? They've gone through a number of permutations and seem now to have disappeared altogether.
It's not just casual interest; I'm trying to track down why the income has stopped (that'll always make a writer pay attention!) I'm a former writer for Suite101 and was receiving royalty payments through February of this year. They stopped abruptly without notice.
Search as I might, I can't seem to pick up Suite101's contact trail, including its head guy, Michael Kedda. A new site was supposed to be in the works as of last November, so I didn't really expect everything to vanish. Anybody have a clue as to what the status is or how to contact them?
Here's their new website: https:// suite.io/
Here's an email address: help @suite.io
I used to write for suite 101. In fact, that's where I started online media writing. A while back they shut down (although you could still access articles that were previously published) and did a major reorganization. When they came back on recently, they had changed hands, and became a no-profit writing community. You no longer get paid for anything you write. You would have to check to see if old articles from before the reorganization still get paid. I am not sure.
It stinks they quit paying, but it is exposure and they are very informal and loose. Before the reorg, they had some pretty rigid rules. But it was a good challenge and certainly helped me learn to write better and more professionally. I personally liked it better before. I thought it was a lot more professional.
Well I just read some of your other comments, with people saying you can still get paid. That is not what I read a few months back but perhaps people put up a fuss. I hope you find out what you need to know.
It do indeed look like they packed their bags and got out of Dodge.
They are still paying but seem to have probs with stats at the moment, readership numbers went haywire last week of May and they are updating the stats page, so revenue not showing for past week to ten days either.
They seem to have stopped counting page views on new works but are still committed to paying ex writers for work submitted prior to Oct 2013. That is situation as explained in everything up until ten days or so ago but cannot access stats page any longer to see if anything changed.
Also if you don't meet the payment threshold it gets rolled over to following month. You should expect to see it come in by about second Tues/Weds of month generally. think it is usually paid by 10th at latest......
Suite.io is still paying writers, in fact to the tune of 70% of all revenue based on your share of the pot, which is also based on views and/or reads. Michael is having some issues again due to another "reboot" he chose to do. Writers are getting frustrated. They pay on or around the 20th of each month.
The big question is, what is traffic like? 60% is generous, but 60% of not much is still not much!
It's 70% and I'm not sure what traffic is like actually. I show reads and views in two places on the site, yet they are not lining up with each other. MK is supposed to be working out a new solution (again) and from what I have gathered there are people not real happy about it. Views and reads are going way down and the money is coming in pennies. I had one account, had problems with changing my email, so I attempted to deactivate the account and create another. The system sent me an email with a link, yet there was no link. I had to get on another computer to avoid the detection of the same IP address before I could get back on the site. Once on and with the creation of a new account, I applied once again for the payment program. It's been about three weeks and I've still not heard a thing. Frustrating to say the least.
Thanks, Dawn. I feel idiotic asking, but how do I check my stuff? I heard nothing from anyone since M. Kedda emailed us in November. I'm not active on the new site.
If you remember your password you should still be able to access the site and amend old works etc etc...
If you try to access Suite using the old address, you will see a page come up that says it has changed to ..... boldened something different boldened... click on that link and it takes you to the Suite.io site. If you click there to say you want to write or something like that you should be taken to an option where you can open an account or access your old account. I use my email addy and my password at this point and can get into site that way. When you get in if you click on the Suite logo at top left you should get various options to do things like write new stuff, edit etc and check stats.... but we cannot do that at present!!
(As said used to be able to see page views for works but they seem to be changing to a new algo which measures readers only.... payments have gone down a bit for me since they changed the site address although page views were very encouraging for first few weeks, not sure if advertisers not paying so much on new site.....)
Thanks again, Dawn. I tried it and it didn't work - I can't log in, and it's not recognizing my email address at all when I try to reset the password.
Am I the only one having this problem, I wonder?
I would guess it may be because you have not logged into the system for a while if at all then since they changed over. An email to help desk will get support through eventually but they not got so many staff nowadays so expect to wait a while. I can get in so there is no problem with the site for active members and so would guess it is just the system not recognizing you at present.
They did highlight a few weeks back that all links will probably be inactive in six months or so - outbound. So it is worth getting in to edit work anyway plus try to drive traffic to the old stuff where poss to get more views, my opinion. But am bit lazy at moment
The last I heard, payment was supposed to be based on a set percentage of the site's revenue, not on our specific articles' views. Did that change?
It is 50 percent of income received for article. Not changed as far as am aware but obviously is dependent upon income from advertisers which I can see from writing on HP here does fluctuate throughout the year anyway.
But unless scenario has changed since I started online writing then income is sort of only ever available on page views. The more views then the more likely you are to get an ad click. So if pv goes up you would assume ad income would correlate unless views come from sites like Stumble.
I am sorry to see Suite seem to have stopped showing page views as it always seemed relative to income to me. Readership is per their own algo and something they have been working on since the first attempt to change the site in 2012 from what can gather. Readership figures seem to be going up at present which may be a good sign......
I'm referring to the payment system set up when the points/scoring model was terminated (sometime in 2013, I think). If I recall correctly, a writer's recent average scores calculated at the time the site changed was to be his or her earnings rate from that point on, and for the first time, it wasn't going to be contingent on article performance. It was to be used to determine a set percentage of revenue.
But it's all kind of hazy - the whole experience for the last couple of years with Suite has been kind of surreal, to be honest - and I'm having trouble putting my hands on the relevant documents. Beginning to think I dreamed up the entire website...
Suite101 never recovered from Google's first Panda release in February, 2011. At that time, it was getting between 25 and 30 million unique views per month. Traffic fell by 94% one week later. You can see the actual traffic graph for the site from 2011 on my Hub 'Google Panda', the second one on my Profile photo slider.
Traffic for the past year took another nosedive, bottoming out at about 32,000 views per month: https://www.quantcast.com/suite101.com?qcLocale=en_US
yeh it does seem all a little bit hazy nowadays doesn't it?
I did wonder after I put that 50 percent of article income thingy down whether it was quite correct.
From what can recall of what it said on the stats page that is linked to revenue for "old" Suite writers it is something like we get 50 percent of income generated by our articles so I am unsure we are points based or percentage based regards old articles. It seems to me we may just get straight percent of our article revenue generation but may of course be wrong and they worked out something along the lines of total income split divided across all writers that have left old stuff to site and depending on numbers of articles posted. I do seem to recall that the original mail about the revenue generation did say something along those lines....
I did look quickly at the site help page an hour ago but there is no mention of the earnings for former Suite writers on there
From their Terms page:
7. Previous agreements
7.1 With respect to Content published on the Service prior to November 1, 2013, Suite will continue to honour previous agreements governing the accrual and payment of advertising revenue.
What a peculiar decision, to change the name of the site completely and not even redirect the old one!
I can only assume they thought the old site was so much "on the nose" with Google, the only way out was to scrap it and start again.
Which means it's now starting out as if it's a brand new site, with no page rank and no backlinks. I know some people have done that to recover from Panda, but I can't see how it will work for Suite.
The thing is, they're still a site with mixed articles on no particular subject, which Google still doesn't like - if the old sites are struggling in spite of their rank and backlinks, how does Suite expect to succeed from scratch? Especially as there's no content on the front page and you can't even browse the site, so the user experience isn't exactly stunning.
Oh doesn't it redirect now? It was doing so at first. This is the message I get when I google Suite101.com
"That page is gone.
Actually, it's all gone. The best parts have evolved into something different, but Suite101.com is now retired.
Thanks for stopping by!"
I am not sure Marisa but I believe every time Suite changed its format it may have been starting out like a brand new site again. They moved from all the old coding and computer language they used to use - not sure of real terminology should put here - to some other language a few months back which impacted on views. They changed to a new style, format, payments system from last Sept. and tried it out for a few months, they also did the same in Sept/October year before. All of these changes impacted searches and page views. I am sure the move to the new name and relaunched site will be the final step along the way of rebranding the business and creating something different.
They do show content to browsers that arrive on the site by way of images of their most popular suites and a click takes the reader through to the content.
It still is a work in progress and I guess one of the major problems for them has been incorporating all the old content into their new format - every single time they change formats
That's not a redirect. Humans can read that message but Google's robots can't. That means Google regards the new Suite as having no history and no reputation, it's just a new upstart!
oh. I assume if I click on the "something different" thingy then it is a redirect but I am not technical so bow to your knowledge
Perhaps best thing for Suite to do given all the history over the past four years or so. I expect they took advice from professionals before doing it. A new upstart with a nice body of work to start moving up search engines with I guess.... unlike most new sites. They have purged a lot of the old stuff out over past few months again though so I guess the content is getting bit more streamlined in some ways
When people say "redirect" they mean automatic redirect. You're not being automatically redirected, you're having to follow a new link.
A redirect is important because of the way Google ranks websites. When deciding whether to include a website in the search results, Google looks at a number of different criteria. It's certainly not all about the relevance of the content, though we'd all like it to be! One of the major criteria is, how many people have liked or shared or linked to this site? Over time, an old-established site like Suite101 would collect many such accolades, which would help it move up the rankings and be featured more prominently in the search results. So if it decides to move to a new address, most sites would choose to direct Google to the new site so it can transfer the accolades to the new site. Google can't understand the kind of manual redirection Suite101 has done, so that means all the accolades are lost.
Helium did something similar recently. They did try to set up automatic redirects from their old site to the new one but they made a botch of it. Consequently, traffic to the new sites never picked up, and they are now closing for good.
Only other thing to add is that ads are only displaying on the old content - or that is the situation as I understand it. Even then ads are not displaying to the writers
That is interesting Marisa, is that why the new 360 site didn't do well? It's strange you say traffic didn't pick up as when I google my name Helium articles seem to be the main ones that come up in first page or so. I will be glad when I have put them in a new home!
From a rebranding point of view I suppose the last thing a site that wanted to start fresh would want is the old links and redirects and all that kind of stuff that keeps its old incarnation alive and well in Googles "mind". Suite are supporting all old links from articles for a few more months and then pulling the plug so I suppose any of the former writers who have not been active on the site for a few years may want to consider editing old articles or moving them elsewhere at that point? I guess the inbound links will all go too.
When you said other day that Suite don't put content on front page, I remember noticing a few weeks back they seemed to be putting their top 100 contributors (by total views) in ranked order which gave a bit of indication of levels of pvs to me. A lot of these were former writers who may have been inactive for quite a long while.
...but are they getting traffic?? It doesn't mean much anyway - your readers aren't typing in your name. An article can rank on page 1 for one search term, and on page 500 for another. For instance, if I type in your name, your article on immigration comes up on page 2. If I search for "how has migratoin affected the UK", I got to page 15 and your article still hadn't appeared.
You may find it will appear sooner, because Google personalises search results so it will give your article some extra preference in your results, because it's yours. Of course if you type in the exact title, you'll also see it appearing early - but as readers don't know the title and are therefore unlikely to type it in, that doesn't mean much either.
Yes that's true and it is a dilemma that has faced all sites who were affected by Panda. Most sites have taken the view that if they fix their structure so Google can see they've improved quality, then the old likes and recommendations are worth keeping. After all, it has taken years to build those up, so it's going to take them a very long time to recoupt the loss. It looks like Suite101 has taken the opposite view.
Where? As a non-member, I can't see anything on the front page at all. If you have to log in to see that list of top 100 contributors, then Google isn't seeing that because it's robots don't have the ability to log in.
No they are in the middle of more updates at moment. I think I said the top 100 were appearing a few weeks back. They didn't highlight this as fact but I recognized a lot of the old writer names. I think Suite said these are some of our most popular articles or suites to site and I reckoned it was about 100 or so and it seemed to tally with page views I am getting for my personal article base...
No I google my own name just to get an idea of what is coming up top at present and what stuff is moving up in searches. Not sure it is a scientific way of going about it.
I'm not interested in where content appears in search engines at present. Just a case of writing, posting and forgetting I am afraid. Just like it has been for past several years. Of course if a cheesecake article happens to go viral I will happily accept $$$
It's very unscientific, actually. All it tells you is that Google is aware the articles exist, and that you have quite an unusual name (so there aren't many results from other people). An article can be ranked No. 1 for one search term, and No. 500 for another.
Well, a month later, I still have not received a reply from Suite101. I emailed firstname.lastname@example.org. Does anyone have a clue what's up?
I Googled it and a site came up that said they are gone they are retired.
Oh, the page I saw did not say there was a new site.
That's what I find weird and why I can't see the new site working. That IS the front page of the new site! It's not at all easy to browse the site, it's almost like they're trying to discourage readers. How do they think that's going to work ???
Whoa.. That's the first time I've been to that one (after Suite101 was inviting people to write for free in their last-ditch efforts before this new thing...)
I'd agree about that first page. Just now, I got there and thought, "What on Earth is this mess!" and couldn't even be bothered clicking beyond it. I don't know... Maybe it's just the heat and humidity we've had today (or otherwise just me), but the whole look, the weird pictures that make you wonder what-on-Earth kind of site it is, that don't even make you want to find out - etc.... Again, maybe it's me; but what on Earth are they thinking!! What's with essentially having as few words as possible on the first page and suffocating the visitor (and page) with giant, crammed-together, pictures???? (Again, maybe it's just me, my mood, or whatever (or else my monitor is making those pictures look darker and heavier than they really are - but I don't think so.. ).
OMG. I just went back and clicked on to see what the rest of it looks like. It's the height of all my "horrors" when it comes to reading: giant text, "four" things (or however) per page, and (unless I clicked on the wrong few) what doesn't look like much substance unless one clicks whatever links there may be.
It's the same challenge as always... Some subjects are fine with big, glossy, pictures (or otherwise not a whole lot of info in the form of big, giant, text and links), and others just don't work - "written for the Internet" or "aimed at smart phones" or not. That site, to me, looks like pretty much the worst of all worlds (and you have to work hard to even see anything on the same page).
In 2011 Suite101 was affected 60% (or more) by Google's Panda, in March 2013 it ceased publishing. The only new page I can find says, "Oops, page cannot be found."
Yes, I was a writer for them when they launched and for several years, then they started firing people, more writers after another and ultimately they were "revamping" for like a year, but I think they fizzled
Yea, they have gotten seriously desperate. Its a shame cause they were one of the first reputable revenue share sites that writers could rely on.
I wrote for them for years and in fact was getting paid almost every month via the "legacy articles' but they don't pay for new ones. But still there are people posting there although the articles are more or less blog posts and not formal as before. I transferred my stuff here because everyone seemed to be taking down their content. Kedda ought to respond.
I wrote for them a long time ago. I left and grabbed my content. Suite 101 was pretty cool about too. I didn't know they were still going since then.
by Lisa Vollrath 3 years ago
Since I migrated here from Squidoo two months ago, I've seen a steady stream of threads in this forum, complaining about lost page views. There are a lot of theories about why it's happening, and how much it's happening, and what can be done to get into Google's good graces.Google is not my #1...
by CCahill 2 years ago
How many page views does it take to create $1 ?Now; I realist that page views and hub revenue is not 100% directly proportionate, however I wondered what people found is generally the average revenue generated from a certain amount of page views, I have a rough idea it might be around;400 pages...
by David 470 7 years ago
I looked into my Analytics and it said I had an XXX amount of unique visitors(for this day). I am not sure if I am allowed to say how many(tell me if I am wrong), but I am extremely surprised how big the number was.(for me anyway)Why are my google adsense page impressions about 50% lower than my...
by Jonas Renfold 5 years ago
Does anyone know the magic formula to increasing page views. Here is what I am looking at for averages over all of my accounts and hubs. Monthly Views: 17 Per HubAd Program Earnings Per Page view: .005 (half a penny)Adsense and Amazon Revenue: Negligible, not calculated. So, this means...
by Marye Audet 7 years ago
Just wondering.. my traffic has dropped 38% again from April to May, 18% from March to April, and 29% from Feb to March. Is this just me or is it site wide? Anyone?
by Cowboy Tom 2 years ago
The data collecting is so far off it's a joke. I've looked at may page views daily on this particular profile, and they have been consistently above a specific level every day. Without any apparent reason they have been so adjusted and/or revised, it appears it is a technical glitch. They've been...
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.|