These are two sites whose creators hoped they could hire an “enthusiast-in-chief” to attract readers, let users contribute the rest, and build a niche community and, ergo, a business. Steve Outing, one of the founders, says they’re throwing in the towel because user-generated content has a bad habit of not generating much readership.
What happened with us is that we did attract a core group of regulars. Folks who we categorized as “super-enthusiasts” did join in the spirit of our sites and participated frequently. I saw them recommend our sites to their friends, and some of them showed up. While a few of those people stuck around, many more participated a little bit, then faded away. Our growth in traffic was slow and steady, but unremarkable, and not enough to sustain a business.
In hindsight, I think we tried to rely too heavily on user submitted content. Even though a lot of it was really great, the overall experience was weak when compared to, say, reading a climbing or a mountain biking magazine filled with quality professional content throughout.
We believed that having a core level of professional content –- from our site editors -– would be enough to attract a loyal following even if the user-submitted content wasn’t enough on its own. But I think we didn’t have nearly enough of that. If I had any money left to throw at the business, I’d hire more well-known athletes and adventurers, so that the core was a larger pool of professional content — and I’d mix that in with the best user content.
Steve says his mountain biking site got about 75,000 page views a month. If you sell ads it works out to about 10 bucks a day per ad. Now if you were living in rural Zimbabwe you might be able to live on that, though finding a high-speed connection might be a bit of a challenge.
I wrote about these sites in September 2006 and had a conversation with Steve in which he argued that mountain biking and climbing had better business prospects than, say, hiking, because climbers and mountain bikers are more passionate about their sports.
Maybe they’re nuts about ’em, but they’re not nuts enough, it turns out. I feel sorta vindicated that after being told, in essence, “well, we just don’t think there’s enough audience to justify a ‘Your Hiking’ site.” Turns out there weren’t enough eyeballs for their ideas, either.
The challenge with making a go of “user generated” content is that any user good enough to create stuff people want to see will already have a day job doing the same work, and giving it away online without a paycheck attached just reduces the market value of their work.
I can rationalize having a hiking blog because there’s no market demand for this content anyway. I’m taking time away from chasing down free-lance writing and editing gigs, but paid gigs require much more effort (and thought, but you knew that).
That’s a shame. But I think anyone trying to make a living off a website is facing an uphill battle, unless they are selling products on the site. We have all gotten used to the notion that the internet is “free”, so content becomes worthless.
I’ve tried to get paid work writing content for the internet, and the value of that content is set so low that it’s not worth the time and effort in most cases. I maintain a blog for two reasons – because I enjoy doing it, and to raise awareness of the book I wrote.
I haven’t bothered putting ads on the blog because I think the annoyance to readers is greater than the (tiny) profit they might generate.
When it comes to writing, it seems paper and ink are still worth more than pixels. Hopefully that will change soon!
http://loveinatent.blogspot.com
That’s too bad. I think anybody starting a user gen. site with the idea of making money off it from the content of others, is in for a real battle. It seems that getting quality user generated content is all about attracting the top portion of Pareto’s (80/20%) rule, and if they think a webmaster is just trying to make a buck off them – they’ll take their column/blog/content elsewhere.
That said, decent money can be made with internet advertising, provided you have 1.) a large target audience, 2.) useful & insightful content/ or applications, and 3.) high CPC keywords. In other words, it works for “commercial real estate,” but not for “Georgia hiking,” so listen up all you “Alaskan fishing” writers.
Tom, great post, look forward to some more web wisdom & have a happy holiday.
-Wade