|
|
Posted by Jerry Stuckle on 10/13/07 02:35
Wings wrote:
> "SpaceGirl" <nothespacegirlspam@subhuman.net> wrote in message
> news:5mvk76FfjpchU1@mid.individual.net...
>> Mark Goodge wrote:
>>> On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 09:26:21 -0700, Travis Newbury put finger to
>>> keyboard and typed:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 8, 10:56 am, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4...@centralva.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes the deziner does not have ultimate control of the styling as with
>>>>> flash, but then a potential customer doesn't have to be driving away
>>>>> because of some poor design decisions made by the said deziner!
>>>> And as time goes on, if that seems to be a problem with this site,
>>>> and they start losing money because of the designer, they will either
>>>> have to change or go out of business. I seriously doubt either will
>>>> happen.
>>> "This site" being http://www.mortgagenews2.com, for the benefit of
>>> anyone jumping into the thread at this point.
>>>
>>> Anyway, let's see how popular it is using some common freely-available
>>> metrics:
>>>
>>> Google Pagerank: 0
>>> Compete Rank: no data
>>> Alexa Rank: 1,697,203
>>> Netcraft ranking: 5,098,230
>>>
>>> Those figures are crap. A personal website might be that low; any
>>> commercial site getting that little traffic is virtually dead.
>>> However, that may not matter much if the income stream is good.
>>>
>>> To see what they're charging for advertising, I registered with the
>>> site. That was a bit of a problem in itself: despite the fact that I
>>> have a UK keyboard their interface is mapping the keypresses directly
>>> to a US key map and hence when I typed certain characters on my
>>> keyboard something different showed up on the screen.
>> That's kinda weird... Flash doesn't contain any language stuff. I think
>> your machine is buggered, or they really have done something funky inside
>> that SWF (it's not default behavior).
>>
>>
>> I agree with the rest of your comments though, but it's not the way
>> ranking works. It's a combination of inbound links + content. Get enough
>> inbound links, make sure the content is published as an alternative stream
>> (RSS, or an alternative metatag), or provide a text version of the content
>> on the side. Remember earlier I was talking about Flash just being one UI
>> of many applicable to site - well these guys got that wrong in this case.
>>
>>> Incidentally, if you click on any of the news stories on the front
>>> page of that site, what happens is that it opens another website
>>> framed within its own Flash framework. That's usually prohibited by
>>> most website Ts&Cs, and has been held to be a breach of copyright in
>>> previous lawsuits. I wonder if the site's operators have considered
>>> that? Maybe that's why they're happy with an inaccessible design and
>>> low visitor numbers - trying to sneak below the radar of the sites
>>> they're ripping off.
>> Grey area, but I do sort of agree. It's pretty bad practice -- and
>> wouldn't work in any of MY sites... I have breakout code in all my sites
>> to prevent anything we work on being re-framed by a 3rd party.
>>
> I'm not advocating anything here - just want to alleviate my ignorance...
> What's bad about your site being framed in someone else's site? Wouldn't
> that increase your site's exposure? I understand that the other site could
> be making some financial gain from using your site that way, but how does
> that hurt you instead of help you?
>
>
>
You mean using YOUR bandwidth to give someone else credit for YOUR
content is good?
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|