Our view on Traffic Exchange Deals
We at Bukisa are extremely driven to have high quality content and high quality users on our site, and with this we are able to reward our community of contributes with a higher revenue share than most other UGC websites.
But for us to be able to reward all contributors with what they deserve we also require high quality readers & viewers.
As such, participating in all types of traffic exchange sites such as suexchange, autohits and so on… the quality of traffic isn’t high from these sites and in most cases the “visitor” is not an interested reader/viewer, these types of sites hurt the overall performance of Bukisa, as people are just pumping their content with views to gain a few extra cents.
In the end this would lead to a lower rev-share for all our contributors.
We know its important for you to get your content out there, but we ask that “deals” and such practices be left out.
We don’t mind social sites, stumbling and such – but lets keep it natural.
If you have any questions or suggestions about this post, please leave us a comment.
Simon & The Bukisa Team
.
November 12th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
rightly said!!!!!!!!!!!!
November 12th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Totally agree although it seems on my articles (site link to name) that if traffic is up so are click through and therefore my revenue. That is usually the case although I have not bought traffic in the way you mentioned.
November 13th, 2008 at 11:41 am
I completely agree. I’d rather not see a few people trying to get extra pennies for their articles bring down the overall rev share.
One method I would prefer is performance-based revenue sharing, where contributors are paid not specifically for page views but for a portion of the income they generate. I’m sure this would be harder to track, and if so, maybe there could be different rev share levels. SO some users would be at 3.2, others at 4.2, others at 5.2 or higher depending on the quality traffic and ad revenue their articles generate.
I plan to use Stumble and Digg only for the very best Bukisa articles that are good enough to be submitted to these sites. Otherwise, it’s just self-promotional without being a help to anyone.
November 13th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Personally, I’d never heard of the sites you mention (I’m just a neophyte in the social networking arena), but I agree that Bukisa probably won’t benefit from ‘empty’ visits as much as readers who honestly come for the content.
On the flipside, however, if you want quality traffic, you have to offer quality content (and mine is no exception), and it would seem some more intense monitoring of articles is in order. Some are written by either persons who don’t have a clear understanding of the English language or simply are just typing in content without editing or proofing. Good titles and seo work are only part of the equation.
Just my humblest of opinions!
November 13th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Part of the job of Editorial team is to review the content and remove inappropriate ones, but we also need to rely on our community to help along with this process due to the amount of content that has started to come in – using the simplest tools we have that are the rating options and the report buttons on each content item.
November 13th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
I only stumble or digg articles that I think will bring readers instead of 0 second clickers. I have two blogs at today.com and I have stopped social bookmarking my own and only rely on readers, except for yahoo buzz. I will do that when I think I have a good read.
If you get hung up on social bookmarking your own, then it is only about you and not the content. I believe in keywords for making people come to read. If you write an article that has no keyword generation, it is not going to get much traffic even if you social bookmark.
You need to offer the keywords that will trip the serach engines to get readers.
My two cents.
November 13th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
If I had to choose an option, I’d choose the Report button, since you can’t get an accurate reading based on rating alone. However, with the report button, there’s no option for reporting based upon an article’s spelling, grammar or composition. Perhaps if you added “poorly written” to the choices on the Report dropdown menu, it would be easier, than stating that the article violates TOS.
I know, I’m just an opinionated beastie
I am, in no way, shape or form, any kind of expert, I only base my opinions on my own reading preferences, and comments read all over the webiverse. And this, in no way, is a problem exclusive to Bukisa.
Just some more thoughts offered up for consideration. Cheerios!
November 13th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Very good points. This site is only as valuable as the content so helping the owners keep everything at a high level of quality will only benefit us all.
While I do believe that social bookmarking is a good thing, paid to surf sites are definitely unethical and cost us all!
Cheers,
Dana
November 14th, 2008 at 3:51 am
Funny you mention Suexchange, because that is the site that lead me here to become a writter in the first place. One thing I NEVER do there is say “you stumble mine, and I will stumble yours” because YES this is totally wrong and selfish, as well as being down right pushy.
I equally never Stumble a site just because it will bring me points, I only want sites on my Blog that I actually do believe in, as such personlly I would not do “empty stumbles”.
Finally I have used it to submit sites I beleive are worth viewing, and not all are even my own.
True Empty visits are not worth anything.. but sometimes they generate interest that bring genuine visits as a result.
however your request is noted, and I shall not submit Bukisa links there further.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Any possibility of having revenue based on actual earnings generated by our articles (like with eHow) or at least different tiers based on quality and profitibility of individual users’ content?
November 14th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
I am liking this discussion… one thing though, traffic even if not generating a reader right now per visit attracts readers back later if the content is good.
I do agree I hate the idea of traffic exchanges, buying etc. However on teh fliop side I just read where people DO get rich from email spam even with the low percentage of response 1 out of 12 million or something like that statistically.
One site I write for will do the traffic driving for you. Another site I write on Ehow they generate great google results.
So I am kind of meandering here but long and short is that I like that you include pay per visit because you never know where that visitor will go within site. SOmeone may come for my great james bond article but not like it .. not drink, not click on smirnoff ad.. But they may decide to check another article or two, like what they see and click on several ads.
So to me there is a little value there for my efforts in bringing in traffic.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
I think your understanding of Traffic Exchanges in general is skewed, it is a well known fact that auto-hits related sites are not good targeted traffic sources.
There are effective Click Thru Marketing Portals however that can bring targeted traffic to your content related sites if you market them correctly. Try using a manual exchange such as GoneClicking.com, try using a splash page and remember that members only view your page for 7 to 20 seconds.
If the veiwer likes your content they will stop and read you site and that has been proven. The issue comes down to tracking and testing your traffic sources NOT in placing blame on Traffic Exchanges.
To Your Success,
Mark Edward Brown
“The Marketing Professional”
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:07 am
I have some problems with my browser Safari on your site. The monkeys are still in the page
.