Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Markham
The examples you showed were who?
This isn't just me reading this it's others.
If a company relies on stats first, they are losing money. Because to see what works best you have to test different things. This is fine if your "tests" are based on knowledge of the product. Not fine if you have to rely on the returns of the stats to tell you what works best.
If you're right a lot of people are testing to see what works without prior knowledge, rather than testing good to see what works best.
Affiliates with very little invested can go this route, by giving away loads of free porn to see which free porn works best. Companies spending money to test, can't afford to get it wrong to often.
Maybe that's why your your previous examples didn't convince me. Giving the wrong explanation doesn't mean it has to be excepted.
|
sorry, like i said, i am not wasting my time on this (and yet i am doing it again). you lost me already when you started again about top shooters, Steven Hicks and so on...
there will be some day when you realize that the number of people who get off to that stuff is about the same as people who have a foot fetish - it's a small niche - it's not relevant
i spoke to a friend this week - his site had one million members before he even realized how he did it. Manwin owns that site now.
you sound like someone who tries to describe a 5 by 5 meter painting with your nose pressed on the canvas.
and then you started about marketing and affiliates and traffic...