250,000 pageviews since Squidoo transfer - how about you?

1. 70

   makingamarkposted 8 years ago

   I've been watching the numbers climb slowly and my dashboard has finally notched up 250,000 since my 150+ lenses were transferred in from Squidoo nearly 20 months ago.  Some 91 are still live on this site.  My stats tell me that vast majority of my visitors come from Google.
   
   Not sure if there are many people left from Squidoo but I was wondering how other people compare in terms of traffic....?
   
   TRAFFIC COMPARISONS: By way of comparison:
   * some 62,255 HP pageviews relate to 54 hubs which "need revision" but I expect will now go elsewhere
   * I moved content from 6 live and active hubs and created a new site a year ago yesterday - and that's had over 81,000 pageviews in the last 12 months. I've also got a much better understanding of what creates traffic due to content being spread across a larger number of pages.
   * another site I created from another half a dozen or so hubs has had over 45,000 pageviews in the last 12 months. Similarly it's very interesting to see much more precisely which topics interest people.
   
   Hence c.125,000 page views in 12 months from the content of c.12 former hubs compared to 187,000 from a current net total of 91 hubs over 20 months.
   
   PROS AND CONS:
   HubPages
   * The PROS of HubPages are that it is free and there is a fair degree of latitude about what you can write about.
   * The CONS are the way in which the QA system "dings" hubs which do well with Google outside HubPages.
   
   * The PROS of your own websites is you can organise and display content much better. It's also much easier to attract traffic and navigate the content because of being able to split it out on to separate pages and make it much more focused in terms of titles, descriptions and keywords. Plus I don't run adverts and can limit earnings to Amazon - and spread Amazon capsules around the site.
   * The CONS are that domain names and decent sites are not free!
   
   One overall conclusion would be that both are the same in that, as with any endeavour on the internet, you need to wait a while and keep working before you see a return on your investment.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      TIMETRAVELER2posted 8 years agoin reply to this

      But are you making more money on your other sites or is it about the same, more or less?

      replyreport
      1. 70

         makingamarkposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         The thing is when you are comparing now with then, you also have to factor in the fact that the entire context for income-earning has also changed. 
         
         We are not comparing like with like. Coupled with the fact it takes a long time to build the traffic for a new site. The major advantage the article sites had is that they could generate instant traffic just from internal hits - but of course that's artificial and not sustainable over time.

         replyreport
   2. 83

      Solarasposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Looking through a forum thread from 19 months ago, it looks as though many of those who transferred, and were active in the forums at that time, are still alive and kicking on HP.  Many of them have surpassed to 100K accolade with 50-85 hubs still listed on their profiles. Many have been active in the last 2-3 weeks, some within the last hour.
      
      I only saw three that had reduced their hubs to below 10 published and one that had vanished, but this was just one thread and not the most active of the many transfer threads back in the day.

      replyreport
      1. 70

         makingamarkposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         Do you "many" or "some or a "few"?
         
         I know lots who have deleted and moved all their content - or like me are still in that process. Others who have walked away - and left their hubs live but they do nothing to them.

         replyreport
   3. 91

      Kylyssaposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I'm just a bit under 600,000 views. It's sad to see traffic crawl along so slowly. I'm sorry to see your traffic on HP has been poor, too.

      replyreport
2. 66

   relacheposted 8 years ago

   How do you separate page views that are really bots and reloads from genuine page views that lead to meaningful interactions? 
   
   What is the actual goal metric you're tracking, and how do you evaluate it against your time and efforts?

   replyreport
   1. 70

      makingamarkposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      You mean for all the sites? That's because of course this happens to all sites doesn't it? (i.e. hubs on HubPages are the same as content on websites in this respect).
      
      Based on my own experience with my blog I look at
      1) what the overall trend is doing
      2) the extent to which fluctuations in stats relate to specific activity on the site
      and then for the new sites
      3) I look at the trend on Amazon as well - same sort of trend: started slow and slowly increasing
      
      I've got a steady upward climb on traffic stats - which is exactly what I had with my blog where I've got 10+ years worth of data to assess trends over time.  In my experience the long slow climb is VERY meaningful - people are telling friends and sharing content. Plus I also get to check that via the dedicated Facebook Page set up for one of the sites and the Amazon data. It's working pretty much as I expected.
      
      Basic principles of how I make sites:
      * I only set up sites for topics I continue to maintain an interest in.
      * I never set up the sites to make income - I set them up to share information - and then make it easy for others to share that information with their peers who are also interested in the same topic.
      
      The spin off from the topics I'm interested in is fee-based income from writing (for proper off the net publishers), workshops and lectures. I'm really not interested in income from adverts which make the site look tacky.

      replyreport