I have a point of contention with the way many people approach online marketing.

There appears to be an arms race to the number of likes, follows and blog page views with little regard to what they mean.

Let me explain, there are many services out there that will email a crazy large database or pay convince people to connect with your social profiles so that you can admire how popular you are.

Even if these new likes, followers and page views are REAL (let’s not even get into the world of bot traffic) there is still a HUGE problem. All of these visitors and new social connections don’t mean ANYTHING unless they are targeted and filtered down to be qualified buyers.

Now I’m not talking about constantly pitching your audience, or needing to generate revenue out of them immediately as if they were just some cog in your wheelhouse. What I’m talking about though is getting the attention of the RIGHT people instead of just ANY people – a notable difference that seems to be overlooked too often.

Getting the right people

I’d rather have 1,000 decision makers and buyers engage with my content than 100 million non-buying traffic.

Unless you are simply in the business of selling ad space on an impression basis (which wouldn’t sustain for long with non-buyers), then you should want the exact same thing for anything you do.

A great example of people approaching their business backwards is the deep seated desire for tech startups to get on TechCrunch. If you privately ask any of them, they will tell you two things.

1. It’s not nearly as much traffic as you think you’re going to get
2. The conversion rate of sign-ups (even to a free product, but even worse with a paid product) are typically garbage

“How could this be?” you might ask yourself. After all, isn’t the demographic of such a site laser targeted with decision makers who can make or break your business?

A few of them, sure. But most of the people who spend a ton of time on TechCrunch are there because they want to be just another scrappy (read: broke) entrepreneur and likely aren’t in your target demographic anyway.

How’s that for a gotcha?

Sure they get a TON of traffic, but there are much more effective ways of building a business filled with qualified customers.

The code of qualification

So now you are probably on board with the idea that a smaller audience who is highly engaged and ready for you to solve their problems is more useful and effective non-targeted/non-qualified users.

Now your problem isn’t just “how do I increase the number of visitors I get”, but rather “how do I qualify my traffic and make it profitable”.

Here is the general forumla/code I use when trying to decipher what kind of value my traffic has and turning them into loyal customers.

1. Remove all the distractions and have a clear call to action.

Many blogs and company websites have the same problem: too much going on.

Simplicity is golden when you have just a few seconds to earn a prospects attention. Don’t waste it with your Twitter feed.

Decide (with confidence) what the primary and secondary things you want someone to do when first engaging with your content and stick to it in that priority.

(Example: Priority 1, Opt-in to a newsletter. Priority 2, Get them to read a particularly popular piece of content)

2. Capture the lead with a compelling offer your ideal customer would go crazy for.

It’s like beating a dead horse but some people still don’t get it. A targeted email list is key to building an asset online.

There are many services out there, I personally love what Aweber has to offer in terms of features & price.

Give your audience a reason to give your their email. Perhaps it’s for more great content, or in exchange for an eBook you wrote or free download you have to offer.

3. Write amazingly useful content that solves most of the problems your customer has.

Do you have any idea why “warm” traffic that already knows you converts infinitely better than “cold” traffic from somewhere else?

Because “warm” traffic trusts you and has learned a thing or two from you before.

It’s really that simple folks, create something unique that speaks to your audience and they will thank you for it in the form of joining your email list, attending webinars and more importantly buying what you have to offer when it solves their problems.

If you give people what they want and solve their problems, marketing is actually pretty easy.

4. Offer a speedier solution for a specific problem that costs at least $7.

After you’ve lured the right audience by creating the right content and the right offer the hardest work has been done.

You’ve gone the extra mile to get a users attention, congratulations. Now how do convert that brief moment of attention into an actual customer?

There is an interesting little threshold I’ve found with the way humans behave and I’m going to let you in on the little secret.

If you can convince a lead to spend at least $7, you can very likely earn their business for just about anything you offer as long as it’s a quality offering.

Make sure that in-between offers and launches that you continue to give them awesome value but that’s the basis of success.

Summary

Qualify a lead by leading them down a very targeted path and get them to open their wallets for at least a $7 purchase and the rest simply doesn’t matter. Don’t worry about the opt-outs of your non-buyers, you don’t want them holding you back anyway.

You should only care about earning the continued support of your customers not the reader only web traffic.

So what are you waiting for? Go clean up your call to action and build a list with Aweber.

Do you have a Twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn account? The answer is likely yes as these social platforms are dominating the internet and collecting users faster than my glass table collects dust. However, have you thought about the different ways people are monetizing this “stream” of information? There is a pretty divided debate going on across the internet right now about whether or not Twitter, Facebook etc. should allow their users to interject advertisements into their streams because they are afraid it will damage the overall experience that users have with the services. What the pundits don’t realize about these ads is that all other forms of content publication have been generating revenues for their efforts on blogs, newspapers etc. for decades and there is no reason that someone with a large following should not be allowed to create money from this new age audience as well.

In fact some streams are actually made more interesting with the addition of an advertisement as pointed out by 1938media’s Loren Feldman (a largely anti-social media member). These ads may actually enhance the stream because they offer direct value to the audience (a product, service, event etc.) as opposed to simply being the daily ins and outs of a celebrity. As a follower you may actually be more interested in a marketing platform than if your favorite online marketer has gotten his 3rd cup of coffee today.

The current media and social platform love child for monetization is Ad.ly which has paired “top publishers” with “top brands” for extremely successful payouts, and huge returns for the advertisers. These sponsored streams have garnished a high number of click throughs and a high level of follower trust regardless of their transparent and clearly marked “#ad” or “#spon” denomination. Some of the highest profile users include Internet celebrity “Shoemoney” or Jeremy Schoemaker who has been preaching the benefits of in-stream advertising since day one, including an endorsement for SponsoredTweets.com (an Izea company) even with their low payouts. In fact he has even mentioned that he would be entering the segment had he not signed a non-compete following the sale of his largely successful AuctionAds platform.

What are they doing right?

Ad.ly got it right immediately upon launch, they realized that in order to be successful they needed a volume of publishers (who were willing) and a high payout to keep these publishers motivated to push through the advertisers message. By going with higher profile publishers and advertisers they were able to get a large sample size, prove the model and take only a small cut in the process. This small cut has led to increased payouts to publishers who then wrote up rave reviews and even bragged about how they were absolutely killing it on Twitter by “Making 15k from 6 tweets in a month” etc. If Ad.ly can keep up this momentum (which is likely with their current 12% referral program) they should be able to confidently corner the market and either reap the benefits off of the advertising revenues or sell to a giant such as Google much like Ad Mob did just last month for $750 Million.

What can they do better?

They are extremely sensitive to the fact that in order to become the defacto standard, they must also cater to the smaller scale publishers. Much like AdSense was able to do for small scale publishers in the traditional web content Ad.ly hopes to bring revenues into the long tail by using self service advertisements that allow any advertiser (most potentially affiliate marketers) and infuse their advertisements into a variety of publishers (or publishers based on keywords). These additional dollars will not only allow the small publishers a piece of the action but will allow for relationship control that is not managed by Ad.ly itself.

Arguably these self service platform could diminish the gigantic returns that advertisers and publishers have been seeing through the service, however it should bring enough new faces and dollars into the system that everyone should come out on top. If you are interested in checking out the Ad.ly program we have included a link below, as well as to SponsoredTweets.

For full disclosure, both links below are affiliate links; therefore any sign ups will benefit this blog.

Ad.ly – InStream Advertising

SponsoredTweets – Izea

With the launch of MyBigGive I have been asked quite frequently about why I decided to go with a for profit organizational structure with such an altruistic ideology. The problem with most consumers is that we have all been trained to think that only registered non-profits can create value for good causes without some hidden advantage. That being said however, it should be clarified that even if an organization is labeled as a true “non-profit” this does not exempt these organizations from having ridiculously high salaries for their executive that deduct from the total value the organization can offer their intended cause.

So back to the primary question, why choose a for profit business model when your ultimate goal is create impact for well known charities and causes? Can a business actually thrive under these circumstances? I believe that the answer yes it can thrive, however there is some work to be done in the area of consumer interpretation for your business model. If the business is able to convey that they profit based on performance and percentages, thus only when the causes earn more money does the firm earn more money. This model of performance puts the core functionality of the business first in line, and in this case that core functionality and desire is to create profits and impact for the charities/causes in order to develop a small profit for the firm itself.

Another item to note with a for profit business is that when it’s primary goal is to drive additional revenues so that it can execute on generating funds for causes it is allowed to build up a cash reserve to strategically grow the business and help float the firm through down times when it would otherwise have to let employees go. This built up cash reserve would not be possible with a non-profit leaving it more vulnerable to volatile markets as well diminishing the promotional leverage that the entity would have when opportunities present themselves. With a for profit business model, the firm is able to truly maximize it’s returns when specialized opportunities arise and holistically drive more dollars and value long run into a cause than a simple non-profit would be able to on its own.

My belief that for profit businesses can drive the next wave of socially responsible consumerism, and allow for value without inflated cost is why we chose not to be a non-profit with MyBigGive. We still feel that we have a streamlined process that will allow for a huge portion (70% of all commissions) to be drive back to causes that the users/community vote on and create a profit. We want to strategically make the biggest impact possible, and we don’t see any other way to accomplish such an ambitious task without building ourselves in this fashion.

If you have any feedback or questions please leave them in the comments section, or reply on our facebook fan page and/or a public reply with our twitter feed. All links will be provided below on ways you can interact, engage and enable social change.

http://www.facebook.com/mybiggive

http://www.twitter.com/mybiggive

http://www.mybiggive.com

It has been noted a few times that Digg wants to change the way they monetize their advertising inventory by engaging their visitors to judge the quality of the advertisement (as well as relevancy to the audience). Digg’s methodology for completing this is to charge an advertiser less for the higher amount of “Digg’s” the advertisement receives. Thus rewarding the advertiser for creating high quality ad copy and finding suitable content that actually resonates with Digg’s installation base.
Today I caught a glimpse of Digg Ads in action and I have to admit that I like this integration much more than the standard banner ads that most websites run as a revenue model. The content is suitable, interesting and unobtrusive. An advertisement that actually provides value? Google thinks their AdSense program adds value by offering “additional content to users”, but this is the first system that I have seen that might truly add value to the user experience of any given website.