The Next Big Thing In Web 2.0
This is my first reference to “Web 2.0″. When I first read about it, I thought it was a much easier name for the almost shameful downfall of the dot-com era. I guess we are in part 2 already of that phase, and thankfully things have been looking up since 2003. Advertising spending is up, users with broadband around the world is on the rise, technology connects us around the globe more than ever, and best of all as an internet marketer, commissions are finally balanced out and looking good for the long haul.
So what is the next big thing to look out for in this second phase of making money online? Two words. PPC Arbitrage.
If you’ve never heard of PPC arbitrage let me just give you the gist of what it’s about. Very simply put, it’s like the stock market. Your main objective is to buy low and sell high, for maximum profit. Same thing here. Internet marketers are buying cheap traffic, and sending it to their sites with contextual ads on it, from such places as AdSense or YPN, thus converting the $0.05 clicks into $0.25 clicks. Of course, not every cheap click that comes to your site will result in another clickthrough on your ads, thus turning a large profit. But for the most part, it’s very simple to do, and just about anyone with a brain and a bank account can do it.
Now why is this the next big thing? Well, it has been around for a while now, but it hasn’t gotten much attention like the other things that the quick cash guys are focusing on. Some examples of previous “big things” are ringtones, myspace resource sites, arcade sites, dating sites, etc. All of those examples have been big over the last two or three years at most. The reason why it’s the next big thing is because unlike the examples mentioned before, PPC arbitrage is not limited to one sector. In fact, you can literally make a living out of it, and still never be able to conquer every niche in the world with it. There are hundreds of sources to buy extremely cheap traffic at, and then convert it over to your site with ads from the big three. Using PPC arbitrage you can even increase your overall revenue not only with ppc ads on your site, but with CPM and CPA ads too, all working together and maximizing profits to your site’s fullest potential.
PPC arbitrage is still in Web 1.0 for the most part though. This is because most people practicing it are lazy bastards that make a 2:1 - 3:1 on their investment and are fine with it and move on. These webmasters also follow the lame rules of splashing some content here and there, sticking a few obvious ads around, crossing your fingers and hoping for clicks. Or even worse.. the absolute lazy route is to just stick a premade search interface on the site, and let the clicks register as a middleman where their site acts as a small portal or even obstacle for the user to continue searching for the information they were originally seeking at the engine that they clicked in from to your site at. These are definitely Web 1.0 ways to make money. Do they work? You bet they do. By all means, if you want, you can continue playing it safe and going this route. You will definitely make money.
But what about those people that are like me. That don’t like to follow the rules that everyone else goes by. That has a sense of creativity and isn’t afraid to be innovative with it. Well, for you guys and girls, welcome to Web 2.0 for PPC arbitrage. The best way to make money from buying low and selling high is to have as many of those cheap clicks converting into something, instead of just wishing for it, you can now take charge and do it! The secret is in the source of the traffic and the design of the pages. Who says you have to label your ads AS ads themselves. When using AdSense or YPN, it says “Ads by Gooooogle” or “Ads by Yahoo!”. Alright, those we can’t change, but who says we can’t hide them and make the colors different so that not only do the colors of the link look like text on the site, but the ads don’t look like ads at all. Both networks have some pretty good targets up to let you really take advantage of earning as much as possible from every clickthrough. If the person coming to your site wants to find some information about a lawyer in New York City, why would you should them blatant ads that scream out “Look at me, I’m an ad!”. No way, you want to convince them that this text here is where they can find more information on the topic that they are searching for.. and it just so happens that it also may be an ad. I know a lot of people won’t agree with my way of thinking or lack of ethics on the matter, but in all honesty, there are tens of millions of niches out there with quite possibly the cheapest traffic ever on the smaller engines like Searchfeed.com and 7search.com to send that traffic to any page with cleverly disguised ads on your page that are 100% relevant to your content, but don’t look like ads at all that can increase your overall CTR and make you a much nicer profit.
Just a simple example of some sites and how they compare with the 1.0 to 2.0 tactics.. The lazy ones with the portals on their pages, and no real content would get 1000 uniques, and maybe get about 50 clicks on their ads, whereas a 2.0 would get that same 1000 uniques, but generate a sweet 400-600 clicks. I promise if you try it out and position your ads from more of an out of the box approach you will see what I’m talking about.
I’d also like to mention that the more original and unique your actual layout is, and how the ads are positioned around SOME content (doesn’t have to be a real plentiful site of it), and toss in a few images near the ads, you will see much larger income bursts and CTR’s than compared to just a domain with a portal on it. Try it and see even, and come back here and report on it. Spend $200 total. $100 for each site, spread it out over 2 domains on the same engines.
That’s all for now, you will definitely see more posts on PPC arbitrage from me, because it’s fast becomming my new hobby and day job.
I did this a bit, wasting some “free” Adword and Overture advertising on it. Mostly because of the site and design.
The two keys are converting the visitors with the right site and getting cheap ads to send them there.
I’ll need to check the two engines you mentioned. BTW, Yahoo! seemed to work way better than Google.
Indeed, this has nothing to do with 2.0 which focuses more about the social aspects of the web, user generated content and real “applicationsâ€.
So, do you recommend to set up sites like “we found the best 4 sites about [fill in the blank]†which is MFA, or does this also work with actual (original) content on the landing pages?
I guess MFA gives better results, but … your argument about the new york lawyer is a bit off because that add would/may have shown up next to yours in the original search. Somehow you had better copy.
Looking forward to your response!
Well.. add advertising and marketing surges and changes to “Web 2.0″.
Unless you regared Wikipedia as an authoritative source people are still argueing over what Web 2.0 really is. Some think its sites which act as web apps with the cliched bright colors, gradients, round edges, and big fonts.
I think its just a word to describe a group of trends in how the web is evolving. It just so happens some money hemorrhaging start ups are taking advantage of this word to raise VC money.
Jon,
First, thanks for taking the time to freely share some of your experience with us through this blog and through WickedFire. I know you don’t have to…so, just know that I certainly appreciate it.
Second, I get the Web 2.0 analogy to help set up for discussion a newer online money making topic of PPC Arbitrage. Thanks for sharing your strategy to jump on the opportunity to help us potentially realize a nice net increase in income. Oh, and, thanks for the leads to Searchfeed and 7Search. I’m on them…
Please continue dropping the pearls of wisdom in our laps.
- VP
By the way, I heard recently that YPN is beginning to crack down on the publisher-supplied-image-next-to-the-YPN-ad-unit thing due to the apparent deception factor. Any intel on this?
YPN spells it out in a humorous post at:http://ypnblog.com/blog/2006/07/19/what-not-to-do/
“Don’t place images next to ads. It’s dishonest and we want to be in a long term relationship with publishers everyone can trust. People will think those images have to do with the ads, and when they find that the site they’ve been directed to has nothing to do with them, they’ll be pretty miffed.”
-nick
AdSense from JenSense forum:
http://www.jensense.com/archives/2005/08/images_above_ad.html
“Publishers are still welcome to place images above the ads. The only exception is if it’s in such a way that it looks like the images are part of the ads.”
-nick
Thanks Nick. Now that you mention it, I believe I heard Jennifer Slegg talking with someone from Yahoo! on this subject. I’ll read both docs above.
- YP
“- VP” that is…got carried away with the YPN thing.
VP,
you’re welcomed!
i use images only on a few pages just to try it out. i don’t believe they significantly increase the click-thru rates on my test pages though…
-nick
Nick-
Maybe you should be testing out a good niche instead of something that pays low. Also using Adwords as a form of buying traffic is expensive compared to the smaller engines out there. Think like a stock broker. Buy low, sell high. Buy the same niche traffic from a smaller engines for $0.03-$0.07 and put either Adsense or YPN ads on your content site. You should definitely be able to make a lot more than you would using Adwords to buy the traffic.
jon,
my apologies if this belongs to wickedfire blog.
i started a adsense/ypn project less than a year ago.
1. bought cashkeywords list. picked health keywords.
2. built a health web site using public domain info. took 3 months to get content legally (normally takes a week or two for most web sites i build). implement adsense/ypn using tips from joel comm’s ebook and more.
3. advertise on google, yahoo, and miva. hard to get cheap PPC traffic as these health terms are already expensive.
4, generated traffic with press release, TV station coverage, etc. still not sufficient traffic.
questions:
a. which PPC engines are still affordable for PPC arbitrage?
b. what is the quality of the traffic (generating high CTRs)?
your wisdom appreciated
-nick
Jon,
It’s always nice to read a blog where someone share their revenue sources in such an open way. Truly interesting reading, thanks!
Even if PPC-arbitrage works just fine (I’m making a second salary out of it) and it belong to the “second phase of making money online” just as you write, I think we are already there and will soon enter “the third phase”.
PPC arbitrage will always be a truly difficult balance between your revenue and “fooling” your visitors to click.
As of today, the PPC arbitrage community tends to lean more against the “fooling your visitor” part of the business. And as long as they keep doing that the third phase will be about Google, YPN et al creating much more strict rules on how their ads can be used in order to protect their own revenues. (with the implication that Google will strike against it’s own revenue in the short term when they do)
My own strategy is to create “true and real” websites. I create websites that will provide some real value to the visitor. It’s not just “some” content but actually a complete website. The goal however is just the same as your, to profit from PPC arbitrage. What I notice after a few months is that I don’t only profit from paid listings and PPC ads. Since the website is a “quality website” vistors also start coming from the organic listings and give me profit from CPA ads.
No, it’s not the best way to make the most money fast, but it seams to be a better way of keeping the income in the long haul.
Again, thanks for a great blog!
Found using “G” is a bit more difficult now for arbitrage since they upped the requirements for minimum bids based on quality scores for relevancy.
Forgive me if I’m missing something, but doesn’t this post just boil down to “build an MFA” with the slight added twist “blend the ads really well?”
I have plenty of respect for Jon’s writings in general. But I don’t see the point of this post…