Traffic is millions of people, not sheep.

[Paul Markham]

For years I've watched many here delude themselves with traffic is king, people or sites control traffic and the obvious cons and scams we've all seen. Finally the truth is starting to dawn on people.

Traffic is millions of people with a free will. They go where they want, do what they like and leave when they like. After all the scams we've seen they like us have become wiser and the scammers lass effective. Still a few of them will succeed.

In porn if you can give it away for free and easy to get. They will go to it and no matter how much others try, people will go where they want to go and that's to the best. If your product is better, the people once told will come and stay. They came the The Hun, because Patrick worked at making his site the best. They now go the Pornhub and Youtube, because they're the best. The day they stop being the best,the people will go elsewhere.

This carries through to sites that sell memberships. The people who go there will look at the offers and decide for themselves if they join. Once they joined, they will decide if they want to stay and rebill. They will decide if they come back in 6 months to get the updates.

So any anyone with thoughts of little companies competing in the major niches in the future. Needs to take this into consideration.

CAN I COMPETE WITH THE MEGA SITES.

Because if you can't the majority of people including affiliates, will see what you're offering and walk away. This is happening every day in high streets. Few go to the local stores in the high street. They go to the Malls. Few buy goods from little Ma & Pa operations, they buy from Fords, Coca Cola, GE, etc.

Who get's the most traffic online Youtube or Vimeo? I don't even know a smaller one, which shows you who will get the people coming to their sites in the future.

Now you can all start denying the obvious.

don't tell me it always was obvious, if it had of been you would of been working on making your offerings better than the rest. You just worked on getting more people and didn't bother enough on what you were offering the people.

[Paul Markham]

https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1085450

"On our website we have about 300 million monthly users," said Thylmann. This produced the 16 billion page views. By comparison, Facebook comes to around 1000 billion, Wikipedia to six billion. "About one thousandth visitor draws on paid content. Which is not much, but it's what around here. People still give out money, you have to show them just what they really want to have."

Same as it always was.

See how he says 1/1000 draws on paid content. Is that the conversion ratio of the people who click on ads?

It's never the ratio of free surfers to the people who buy something.

[Nathan]

It's the ratio of people online surfing porn and how many of those pay for porn.

[The Ghost]

The only thing that matter is real traffic. Before talking ratios that's the only thing that matters. To this day there's PLENTY of people who think their trades or bought traffic are legit, when they're certainly not.

[Nickatilynx]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Traffic is millions of people with a free will. They go where they want, do what they like and leave when they like.

And you believing that , means , again , you have no clue in regards to marketing.

Plus you are now well over the "boring old git" line.

Same shit.Different day.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Nathan

It's the ratio of people online surfing porn and how many of those pay for porn.

Absolute genius at work.

It's this thinking that has bought this industry down to a shadow of what it was. Because even though it's fundamentally right, giving the buyers the product FUBARs the whole thing.

Giving access to an industry to people who couldn't think beyond that and couldn't fund anything bigger than a cheap Ma & Pa operation lets in the worse kind who are unable to think of the big picture.

So we ended up in the free content race and even though ratios dropped every week. No one thought the flow of new people would stop. When the flow of new people who could or would pay for online porn. The shit hit the fan. And a company like Mansef with money from somewhere, were able to rebrand or sell out to Manwin for them to continue grabbing all the people surfing for porn and turning 1000 people surfing online porn into 1 buying into maybe as many as 5,000 people surfing online porn into 1 buying. Yo can argue with the figures, you know the method is right.

Now did the 2008/2009 Tubes create new traffic? No they took existing traffic and offered more free and less incentive to buy. And that continues today. And nothing Manwin can do will stop it. Nobody can turn off the tap of free porn without some major laws being passed. If Manwin turn off the free porn.



The people on Pornhub will go to Redtube or XnXX or any Tube they want to go to. So "Traffic IS NOT king." King is monetising traffic to the maximum profit. Adding another 10% of people is great and should always be worked on. Adding another 10% of sales profit on those people is better. It's also tougher, which makes it even better still.

[Paul Markham]

And that's why I'm so critical of the product. Because the only way to get more money out of the people you have, without cheating them, is to offer them something better.

"On our website we have about 300 million monthly users," means nothing if they don't buy anything. If only 1-5,000 buy a $50 product a year. It's $3,000,000 a year.

If they spend $100 a year it's $6 mill.

If it's 1-1,000 it's $30 mill.

And because there a finite number of surfers willing or able to spend. Monetising traffic is the most important thin anyone can do in sales.

So for Brazzers or Mofos to offer members the bad product they did is costing them money. Simply the Irish Jig and Golf course scene on Brazzers were bad. As was the days work I critiqued from Mofos of the girl with the gold club. The shooters were not good enough, the content guy not good enough and the editor awful.

If Fabian says I'm wrong, he's welcome to prove me wrong and put up the scenes on a free tube. And et everyone judge for themselves as well as surfers.

Manwin are just one of 1,000s of sites and companies that concentrated on the wrong end to the cost of the product. Most simply could not compete with offline paying better. Those who could, chose to go for more money on getting more people to come to a site that was converting badly and retaining poorly. A few exceptions we know of, so don't tell me about them.

Fortunately I made enough to sit back and watch you all.

[Nathan]

Paul, you really need to learn how to calculate.

Also, regarding traffic did not grow:
All traffic tracked online, which was pretty much everyone since they all wanted to brag, was SexTracker's Top List in 2002-2004 or so with a peak of 25 million uniques a day.

Today, Manwin alone has 65 million uniques a day.

In total, there probably are around 200 million or more today.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Paul, you really need to learn how to calculate.

Also, regarding traffic did not grow:
All traffic tracked online, which was pretty much everyone since they all wanted to brag, was SexTracker's Top List in 2002-2004 or so with a peak of 25 million uniques a day.

Today, Manwin alone has 65 million uniques a day.

In total, there probably are around 200 million or more today.

Yes my maths suck. On the rest you're wrong again.

Traffic from new emerging nations is worth nothing more than what you can get to sell the click. Most of it is on a wage level that will never be able to spend a lot on porn, much of it hasn't got a CC we can process. Then there's the moving market to consider, in the prime billing countries. This is people whose circumstances change, die, just go off the boil, etc.

In plain language, they lost a job or earning less.
Older people die, younger people are less likely to buy.
People who realise that paying for porn is a mugs game now. They can get all they need for free. Recorded porn, cams and dating. Then the guys who realise penis pills don't work.

Now unless Manwin by some miracle have turned round the trend every person working in online porn knows. The more people who surf leads to worse ratios. Unless you can sell more to the same people the spiral is downward unless you can replace lost buyers with new ones. Which in the case of online porn is US/Canada, EU and few other places.

Babes.com is the route forward. I told you that over a year age and glad you listened. Also told you to snap up some of the offline companies because of their libraries. That needs to be stepped up simply because Manwin needs to fill gaps in their portfolio of content they offer. Picking up more of what you have, isn't filling gaps.

[TheSquealer]

This fucking idiot builds a childs wagon, then spends his final days on this planet talking non-stop about how amazing his little wagon was while yelling at Mercedes, Ferrari, Lamborghini and BMW, explaining that they know nothing about cars, the market or consumers.

[itto]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Traffic is millions of people with a free will. They go where they want, do what they like and leave when they like.

Add an irresistible offer, herd-mentality and a nifty countdown-timer and away goes your free will..


.

[Paul Markham]

A site like Pornhub is similar to a giant store or supermarket. It has as Fabian states millions of people going through it every day. All looking at different products. For instance Teen, Lesbian, Amateur, Ebony, Gonzo.

Now does Manwin own a kick ass site in those niches?

They have the German amateur site, would Home Grown do well in the Manwin Stable?

To my knowledge they have Twistys, Playboy, Wicked, Babes which is strange when Fabian told us surfers didn't want this content. Only joking Fabian. So that niche is covered.

RK is Also in the stable. Which brought a lot of sites. Any of them top drawer like Twistys? Because what they did with Twistys is the right way. Can they take one of those sites and elevate it to the top of it's field? Or take a failing site we all know and breath new life into it. Or a site that's doing well and make it do better?

This is what acquisition is all about. Either the model of ripping it apart and selling off the parts or breathing new life into it. They have the traffic. Now the emphasis must be on monetising it better.

[Rochard]

Traffic is millions of people who are in fact sheep.

Case in point is Paul Markham. Once he was able to fix his fucking join pages, every now and then he found someone stupid enough to buy into sub standard crappy euro trash porn.

You can sell anything on the Internet.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Traffic is millions of people who are in fact sheep.

Case in point is Paul Markham. Once he was able to fix his fucking join pages, every now and then he found someone stupid enough to buy into sub standard crappy euro trash porn.

You can sell anything on the Internet.

If that were true. You're shit as a shepherd.

Make it harder to knock the ball back.

[Best-In-BC]

Your Point is Valid but Traffic is and always KING

[BAKO]

I treat my surfers like sheep :-)

[pinkz]

A mention of sheep and no Welsh men in sight, bahhhhh

[epitome]

Paul, you forgot to add the disclaimer that you have no sales or traffic and are just guessing the same as any newb would.

[Nickatilynx]

Originally Posted by epitome

Paul, you forgot to add the disclaimer that you have no sales or traffic and are just guessing the same as any newb would.

Basiclly thats it in a nutshell.

Paul , you are merely a pontificating newb LOL

[CyberHustler]

Without traffic, no sale.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Best-In-BC

Your Point is Valid but Traffic is and always KING

How do you get it?
How do you keep it?
How do you send it to where you want it to go?
How do you get it to buy something.
How do you keep it buying?
Where do you send it and why?

CH no content, no traffic and no sale.

[CaptainHowdy]

[CyberHustler]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

How do you get it?
How do you keep it?
How do you send it to where you want it to go?
How do you get it to buy something.
How do you keep it buying?
Where do you send it and why?

CH no content, no traffic and no sale.

But you can have content, with no traffic no sale.

[Va2k]

I read everything you said Paul! Can I ask you a few personal questions? If you don't want to answer them on here can you email me the answers? Or if you don't want to answer I can understand.. but I am really interested in these thoughts. Not trolling you hope you know this.

#1 How many members do you have now in your pay sites?
#2 what is the profit margin for you?
#3 Are you still learning how to do new things IE do you test your methods and if so do you test and prove that what you write about really works?

Thanks Paul you know I have never ever said 1 bad thing about you sir, and I'm not about too. At least you're trying to help people minus the trolls. LOL

[BAKO]

Talking to Paul is like talking to a monkey

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by CyberHustler

But you can have content, with no traffic no sale.

Tell me how you do that. you charge people to surf on a blank page.

[CyberHustler]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Tell me how you do that. you charge people to surf on a blank page.

No, that's dumb. But everything you build/do is for...?

[itto]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

So "Traffic IS NOT king." King is monetising traffic to the maximum profit.

Wrong. You can't monetise something you do not have.
Let me illustrate it for you:





.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Fungus

I read everything you said Paul! Can I ask you a few personal questions? If you don't want to answer them on here can you email me the answers? Or if you don't want to answer I can understand.. but I am really interested in these thoughts. Not trolling you hope you know this.

#1 How many members do you have now in your pay sites?
#2 what is the profit margin for you?
#3 Are you still learning how to do new things IE do you test your methods and if so do you test and prove that what you write about really works?

Thanks Paul you know I have never ever said 1 bad thing about you sir, and I'm not about too. At least you're trying to help people minus the trolls. LOL

The paysites were the least of my incomes. Just a side earner. Content stores probably still out perform most here's earnings.

You and I have content, without we would have nothing to offer anyone at all and no income. Even an Adword is a cost until a surfers sees content he wants to buy. People walking down a street don't stop if you don't give them a reason to stop.

[BAKO]

Is this dumb ass still babbling ?

[CyberHustler]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Content stores probably still out perform most here's earnings...

But without people (your traffic) buying that content, it stays on shelves...

True or False?

[Pyewacket]

Some valid points, true but you will always have the group of visitors that want nothing but the best and don't want to spend hours and hours on sites like redtube looking through poorly focused amateur content. There was a time in this industry where we did not put hardcore images on freesites. Now it is all over the web and not necessarily behind warning pages. The idea was that the freesites (and all promotional material) was to be the teaser and that the visitor would only get the best goods by joining the paysite. Still, without traffic of some kind, there is no room for profit. I think it is learning to appeal to the audience you want to attract meaning if I want the more discerning visitor with the money to spend on paysites, I will build or showcase the sites they want. Does the average guy really care about the difference about the lighting or background or beauty of the woman in the pictures (thinking Twisty's or MetArt here) or does he just see boobs? That guy that just sees boobs is not very likely to spend money for a paysite.

[DamianJ]

Originally Posted by epitome

Paul, you forgot to add the disclaimer that you have no sales or traffic and are just guessing the same as any newb would.

No way dude, he has about 10 traffics a day on just ONE of his sites. He gets how it works alright!

[BAKO]

Put a sock in it :-)

[signupdamnit]

Originally Posted by Nathan

It's the ratio of people online surfing porn and how many of those pay for porn.

You have an island filled with people surrounded by an ocean. The ocean is constantly growing and removing more land from the island as it does so. As the ocean expands your island becomes smaller and the people formally on your island drown and become a part of the ocean.

The ocean represents the people who do not pay for porn (ever growing), the island represents the financial well being of your porn business and the people on your island represent those who will pay for porn (ever shrinking).

As long as the water keeps rising you'll either slowly lose it all or you'll have to learn how to profit from the rising water or otherwise neutralize it. I can be terrible at analogies sometimes but this sums up porn in 2012.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by itto

Wrong. You can't monetise something you do not have.
Let me illustrate it for you:



.

Exactly, you can't monetise without content. Thank you for that.

Why do Tubes have so much traffic?

If you have and can get traffic, why don't you open a site yourself and send it to yourself?
I've heard this so often from people who have traffic. Yet how many choose to do it?

*****************************

The best thing offered to a person, the best his response. For instance if he's offered stale bread, no matter how many times. It will not get less sales than offering a cream sponge to less people. EVEN if it's free.

And this is the cruncher. The number of people who can get and keep getting great traffic, is far more than those who can create great content. There are perhaps less than 100 great porn shooters, I defy anyone to name more, they are expensive, their product sells for top dollar even today. AND this is the important part THAT'S WHERE PEOPLE SEND THEIR TRAFFIC.

Paul Markham Teens has probably made 1,000 sales in the last 4 yeas. Astral Blue less. Not a lot of money. Yet it was money for nothing more than the hosting and affiliates share. We did nothing to get traffic. We let others get it and most of it just arrives only 1/3 was from affiliates.

The paysites are a lot less than the content stores. Those sales have been fantastic considering we don't do a lot. We keep selling the $3,000 offer. Maybe to people who have the traffic and only need content to make it worth more than sending it elsewhere.

My point is, I could retire and still make money while doing nothing. Because I have the content and the traffic keeps coming. If I only had traffic, would it still be coming if I wasn't working?

Look at Damian, a self proclaimed marketing expert. Lived in a rented flat, had to move in with his GF because he couldn't pay the rent. He's been flaming me for getting 166 hits a day with 10 minutes work. I think 10 minutes work for nearly 5,000 surfers is nice going.

[Penny24Seven]

Paul what is your point behind all this text you type? Yeah I know give them something better and you are talking about your content like always LOL,
Paul there is more then one way to make money and you talk like it all have to be done your way which makes no money. Why do you get up peoples asses who are doing different and doing fine? Is it a crime? Or does it bother you that much that others are making money and not doing it your way.
I am not saying what you said it right or wrong, Hell I didn't read it all but just get to what you are getting at, we all need to buy your content to be the best...

[itto]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Exactly, you can't monetise without content.

But you NEED traffic in order to monetise your content.

You NEED traffic in order to monetise good content.
You NEED traffic in order to monetise crap content.

The fact that a site with plenty of content attracts people (traffic), so "CONTENT > traffic" is not a valid argument to me, just because it doesn't have to be that way. You can also get traffic to a site *without* plenty of content. But as soon as you eliminate the traffic-part in every scenario, you cannot monetise your content. So, TRAFFIC > content.

You don't really NEED content in order to monetise traffic.

Heck, you could even sell bags of hot air, given you have enough traffic.
Peace.



.

[CyberHustler]

I wanna learn how I can monetize content with zero traffics like a boss

[itto]

Originally Posted by CyberHustler

I wanna learn how I can monetize content with zero traffics like a boss

Then, you'd have to enroll in the PMAMJL, the Paul Markham Academy of Magic Join Links.
It's like the Hogwarts of serious Internet Marketing.


.

[epitome]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

The paysites were the least of my incomes. Just a side earner. Content stores probably still out perform most here's earnings.

Until recently you swore your pay sites are doing well too and then you posted two days of stats that showed you make $60/day with no rebills and everyone laughed.

Now we are supposed to believe your content store makes money until you post a screen shot of online banking thinking you're a baller and you have $292 in there.

[papill0n]

guess the guy with no traffic

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by BAKO

Talking to Paul is like talking to a monkey

If you mean "talking to a monkey who is dead and gagged" then yes.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by itto

But you NEED traffic in order to monetise your content.

You NEED traffic in order to monetise good content.
You NEED traffic in order to monetise crap content.

The fact that a site with plenty of content attracts people (traffic), so "CONTENT > traffic" is not a valid argument to me, just because it doesn't have to be that way. You can also get traffic to a site *without* plenty of content. But as soon as you eliminate the traffic-part in every scenario, you cannot monetise your content. So, TRAFFIC > content.

You don't really NEED content in order to monetise traffic.

Heck, you could even sell bags of hot air, given you have enough traffic.
Peace.



.

It's really a simple concept - no traffic, no customers.

Paul doesn't seem to get this.

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

How do you get it?
How do you keep it?
How do you send it to where you want it to go?
How do you get it to buy something.
How do you keep it buying?
Where do you send it and why?

CH no content, no traffic and no sale.

These are questions newbies were asking back in 1998 Paul. Any webmaster worth his salt today should know the answers to those as easily as they know how to breath. Anyone that doesn't should pick up their spatch and apron and go hit up their local McD's for a job and quit with the whole "gonna build me a web empire" pipe dream.

[2012]

if you still call your customers "surfers" you're probably gone or on your way. tally hoe

[Barry-xlovecam]

Buy Velcro gloves and sort the sheep out at the traffic gate ... That is called traffic management. This could also lead to a new enjoyable past time.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Brian837

Paul what is your point behind all this text you type? Yeah I know give them something better and you are talking about your content like always LOL,
Paul there is more then one way to make money and you talk like it all have to be done your way which makes no money. Why do you get up peoples asses who are doing different and doing fine? Is it a crime? Or does it bother you that much that others are making money and not doing it your way.
I am not saying what you said it right or wrong, Hell I didn't read it all but just get to what you are getting at, we all need to buy your content to be the best...

Today if you don't give them something good, you're going to lose out. Because someone else will give them what they want.

All these people living in the past are thinking like it was 1998 when a surfer could be sent to anything. 2012 it's a totally different time.

Try make a Tube work with 100 3 minute scenes, try throwing tons of traffic at DVTimes sites. Respect to him, but his sites are bad because he can't shoot well and can't afford to get someone who can. You bring up me and my content. It's so simple I wonder why you keep going on about it. So here it is.

You couldn't sell to my market because you weren't good enough. I wasn't going to take your market away because I wasn't working for the money it paid.

The same goes for all the affiliates replying with their 1998 mantra. while they send traffic to the best paying sites. Why are they the best selling and they earn more? You know the answer.

CDSmith of course I know and so does everyone here. They need content. The people telling us they can get traffic without content and send it to a site without using content, are sending to the site with the best product that converts the best. They need their traffic they seem to have picked up without content, to go to a site with content to get paid.

No content, no people to send anywhere. It's always the same 1998 reply. No traffic no sales. Well no content no sales, surfers won't pay sponsors for a blank page and then they can't pay affiliates. So please stop with the 20th century mantra.


****************************************

The problems today are because of this stupid logic. Today there's more people looking at porn than ever before and never has there been less sales. Go argue that to the wall, because it's obvious.

To make it worse a handful of sites dominate the market of free porn. You have all the traffic you could dream of. Yet why are sales in the toilet? Simply because the content on sale can't compete with the content given away for free. Can it be solved by throwing more traffic at the problem? Yes just keep loading more free porn.

Yes a few can get Adwords gathered surfers going straight to a sponsors site. WITH content so the surfer buys something. Do these affiliate send traffic to crap sites with few scenes or great sites with loads of scenes?

Itto "You can also get traffic to a site *without* plenty of good content." Yes you can. so send your traffic to one of these sites and see how you do. Try sending it to crap site without a lot of content. Or a site with a lot of good content and see how much money from the sites.

Come up with a logical argument or show actual proof where you earn loads of money sending lots of traffic to badly converting sites.

You can also is a stupid argument. It's what you do is what counts and none of you send traffic to sites with crap conversions. Unless you want to prove I'm wrong can we accept that?

[epitome]

My blank pages convert at 1:1

[pbtina]

im not looking so good next to these numbers