Most converting promo tools

[Useless]

Banners catch the eye and brand the item being promoted, but don't necessarily sell it. I've read a couple of articles on that subject. Hence, I'm an expert. Text performs the sale.

[Mr Spock]

I have my LL's domain tattooed across my ass and find the click through to be simply amazing.

I take it your ass gets a fair amount of traffic then

Banners catch the eye and brand the item being promoted, but don't necessarily sell it. I've read a couple of articles on that subject. Hence, I'm an expert. Text performs the sale.

That makes sense, I find it strange that more freesites aren't text heavy - from what I've see a few lines of linked text and that's it.

Surely much more text is required (unlinked) with the punchline linked? What are your thoughts?

[virgohippy]

Originally Posted by Mr Spock

Surely much more text is required (unlinked) with the punchline linked? What are your thoughts?

My favorite recipe for both sales and SE attention.

[Maj. Stress]

Originally Posted by Mr Spock

Surely much more text is required (unlinked) with the punchline linked? What are your thoughts?

If you look at your server stats you will see a majority of your potential customers are there 30 seconds or less. I would guess text that grabs them works the best.

For the rest of them that actually do read your sales pitch, I think a fair amount 150-200 words might help get the sale (and the bots might find something they like). So it's really a matter of who you want to target.

[Useless]

I'm declaring the thread's topic dead. I shall leave it forgotten, covered with maggots on the roadside. |shocking|

Originally Posted by Mr Spock

Surely much more text is required (unlinked) with the punchline linked? What are your thoughts?

At the risk of sounding like a rebel, I'm going to give you my thoughts. You'll have wished that you hadn't asked and, by the time you're doing reading this, you'll wonder why you asked.

I've been thinking about free sites a lot lately. OK, not a LOT,but more than I should.

The free sites which are being submitted to link lists are not designed for sales or search engines. They're designed for a quick and easy review.
There are three kinds of people who make a living off of these free sites today:
Those who build and submit every day.
Those who are on the top of their sales text writing game.
Those who are a combination of the first two.

Anyone can earn a few bucks off of free sites - even me (I have the $25 checks to prove it), but few make their living from them.

I wonder why people fret over the idea of link lists using rel="nofollow". Do they actually believe that their free sites are anything special? Do they think that a free site is a SE powerhouse waiting to take the SERPS by storm? Peshaa! They're shit. They're pretty, but they're shit. They're pretty shit.

Fuck. I forgot what my point was. Ummm...

Oh yeah - free sites should have more pages, though not more content than what we use now. Spread it out a bit. Keep the warning page since it makes the most sales (probably because link list surfers are idiots and have given up looking for content and are now willing to pay, not knowing that the pics are another page away). I'd drop the main page and any other sort of consolidated navigation system. The free site should be linear; one page after the other. Each gallery page would have 5-8 nice thumbs. Nice, as in quality and size. Each page would have much more text. Not just keyword stuffed BS, but a common man's review of the site being promoted. Every page would be of a similar theme, but each would have a slightly different keyword phrase being pushed. The page would be named for that phrase and the anchor text used in the link to that page, found on the preceding gallery page, would use that phrase. And of course, the pics would named according to the page they're on, using minor variations of the page's set of keywords. For 24 pics, you could easily have four SEO'd gallery pages, plus a warning page.

I also think that the links out on a page should be determined by the flow and design of the page, not by a set limit. (ducking to avoid flying tomatoes) Why 3? Why not 2, or 7? It's an arbitrary number, isn't it?

So, what I'm trying to say is, yes - more text.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

At the risk of sounding like a rebel, I'm going to give you my thoughts. You'll have wished that you hadn't asked and, by the time you're doing reading this, you'll wonder why you asked.

UW ... there ya go, spillin' the beans again.

>>looking in can<<
Wow, not many beans left! Wait, here's one stuck to the side: The links to the pics can point to html pages containing the full-size pics, imstead of to the pics themselves.

Using html pic pages is something which isn't allowed on most link lists, but which has always worked very well for us. Especially if there's text on the pic pages talking about the specific pics.

Pic pages can either have their own navigation or not. You can make the surfer use their browser's back button to return to the gallery page, or you can give them a link back on the page. You can also give them a link to the next picture page. BUT don't name that link "next" anything. Instead name the link based on what you've named that next pic page (as UW mentioned).

More beans anyone?

[virgohippy]

Originally Posted by Simon

More beans anyone?

Not more beans, no. But I can agree with you on the benefits of using HTML pic pages with little more then a unique title and a single sentence describing the image.

Maybe it's time I figure out which lists allow pic pages and group recips different. I already use pic pages for my personal sites anyway.

Wait, I think I have a bean: What ever happened to putting recips on the "main" page!? |goodidea