Biz question

**Rob** · 09-17-2004, 05:20 PM

Put my main concentration on my money makers and push them. Spend some time trying to model the "Ok" sites after the ones that are doing extrememly well. Scrap the ones that are doing poorly.

At least that's what I'd do. Go with what's working.

**MikeHawk** · 09-17-2004, 05:21 PM

Hey Steve, great hanging and talking with you in Mexico..

I dont know cause we dont have 10 sites yet, we keep pushing out top sites, and it seems to bring the small group we have up with them.

**BigWebRev** · 09-17-2004, 05:21 PM

i always say, go with what works.

**Sly** · 09-17-2004, 05:22 PM

Before answering that I would need to know whether additional time/money invested in the top sites could actually improve results or not. Eventually you hit a ceiling. Why invest more?

**Rob** · 09-17-2004, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by Sly
Before answering that I would need to know whether additional time/money invested in the top sites could actually improve results or not. Eventually you hit a ceiling. Why invest more?

I don't agree. I don't think there is a "ceiling". Even if your sites are kicking ass, they could always kick more ass and make you more money. No such thing as a ceiling when money is involved.

**dennisthemenace** · 09-17-2004, 05:24 PM

Decide what a reasonable amount of time, money and effort would be justified in improving the lesser sites.

Anything can be improved, so it's worth trying - but ya can't polish a turd... so know when to call it day for the stinkers.

**Doctor Dre** · 09-17-2004, 05:25 PM

If something works fine I'd push it harder then the ones that don't work . When they are at the top I'd start developping other ones to think about future

**FreeOnes** · 09-17-2004, 05:30 PM

This is a hypothetical question which can never occur to me. I always create excellent work and all my sites would do great!

Uhh no. I would push the 3 best ones. Not everything can be a success. Therefore you better can invest all your time and money into a product which has already proven its success. And make bank of it.

**<IMX>** · 09-17-2004, 05:33 PM

promote what works, if the ROI is higher --promote the top ones until the performance drops off...

Then re-evaluate the cost of trying to work on the poorly preforming sites.

**SteveLightspeed** · 09-17-2004, 05:36 PM

I guess my own answer to the question is "strike when the iron's hot" -- hit the winners hard, and cut your losses early on the losers.

**Sly** · 09-17-2004, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by HighOnAcid
I don't agree. I don't think there is a "ceiling". Even if your sites are kicking ass, they could always kick more ass and make you more money. No such thing as a ceiling when money is involved.

You can only improve conversions so much. You can only improve retention so much. It gets to a point where all you can do is continue doing what you're doing and spend money on advertising.

I would assume Tawnee's site has a huge members section and updates regularly. Adding more, and more, and more, and more content will only help make money for so long. It isn't linear. But sure, you can always invest more money on advertising. Though the profit margin will eventually get less and less.

Personally, I would scrap the bottom 3 sites and focus on getting the middle 4 sites to top 3 sites quality. Having 7 products to push gives you more options than just 3.

**johndoebob** · 09-17-2004, 05:48 PM

Depends on what you think the actual potential of the ok and poor site could be.If I think something could do better I'll push it hard until it gets to the point where I think it should be.

**GagOnMyCock** · 09-17-2004, 07:07 PM

have your employees work on analyzing the excellent sites to improve the poor sites, while you concentrate on the excellent sites

task away....

**Rich** · 09-17-2004, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by Lightspeed
I guess my own answer to the question is "strike when the iron's hot" -- hit the winners hard, and cut your losses early on the losers.

Seems to have worked for you so far.

**Tom_PMs** · 09-17-2004, 07:37 PM

Pinpoint what makes the best ones work. Apply to poor ones.

**james_clickmemedia** · 09-17-2004, 07:43 PM

Replicate the ones that worked and scrap the rest.
That is why their is so many milf & deep throat websites being released.

**SteveLightspeed** · 09-17-2004, 07:46 PM

Originally posted by james_clickmemedia
Replicate the ones that worked and scrap the rest.
That is why their is so many milf & deep throat websites being released.

Seen any new solo teen amateur sites lately?

**Giorgio_Xo** · 09-17-2004, 07:47 PM

Ride your winners, price reduce your low performers.

Just like Wal-mart...

**the Shemp** · 09-17-2004, 07:59 PM

Originally posted by Lightspeed
Say you open 10 sites:

3 do great
4 do ok
3 do poorly

Which would you spend more of your time working on? Would you push the ones that are working a little harder, or work to improve the ones that aren't?

Interested to hear some different perspectives

Steve Lightspeed

i wouldnt dump the bottom 3, until i did some analysis on the low results.

**baddog** · 09-17-2004, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by the Shemp
i wouldnt dump the bottom 3, until i did some analysis on the low results.

exactly, I would want to know what I was doing differently with those 3, and modify them to more closely follow the business model of the top sites

**FlyingIguana** · 09-17-2004, 08:13 PM

first off figure out why you're making poor sites to begin with. the last thing you wanna do is pump out more poor sites, complete waste of time and money.

**venus** · 09-17-2004, 10:52 PM

out of the 10 sites, one was opened first and is your "main site"
I would (and do) push/maintain/update my main site over the others.

**railz** · 09-17-2004, 10:56 PM

I guess you could call it a kind of natural selection. Improve the good ones to do great, shut down the poor ones and use the resources from those to start new ones.

Wash, rinse, repeat as required.

**AMADude** · 09-17-2004, 10:57 PM

Work hard marketing the successful ones....
Work hard trying to find out why the "o.k" ones are not working and tweak some stuff.

Keep the others as fillers and don't update them.

**Easton** · 09-17-2004, 10:57 PM

Originally posted by Lightspeed
I guess my own answer to the question is "strike when the iron's hot" -- hit the winners hard, and cut your losses early on the losers.

yep, just like with stocks... let winners ride and bail fast on losers

Biz question

Biz question

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment