Alex, in particular, did a phenomenal job of demystifying SEO and offering practical tips that people can get started with immediately. If you have a chance to hear her speak—do. She was telling us how even her 11-year-old son is getting a handle on SEO—if he can do it, no doubt we all can. Keep an eye on Subscription Site Insider in August for loads of practical information on how to implement a successful SEO strategy.

You can also take a look at the presentation I gave on the “Marketing Tactics” page at www.subscriptionsiteinsider.com.

The right candidate has some past office experience, is ready to jump in and “own” a project, and is mature, responsible, and dogged.

If you’re interested, or know a college student who might be, please send a resume and quick cover note to Kinley Levack, editor of Subscription Site Insider, at kinleyl@annehollandventures.com.

The attendance was great and it was interesting to hear what sorts of experiences other people are having charging for content. On the newspaper front, Gallaty seems to be having success, even following a fairly substantial rate hike—showing that often we estimate incorrectly what our content is worth to people.

My presentation focused on research data we have collected, as well as details on what types of local content people currently pay (a lot) for and how newspapers might explore those topics. You can check out the presentation on the Sub Site Niches page at www.subscriptionsiteinsider.com.

I’m one of them. And I know several more who’ve reached out to me personally, as well as several who complained on other private industry email discussion groups. The flurry of handraising makes me wonder if this was all a clever tactic on RBI’s part to raise awareness and competitiveness among buyers for the titles they’re shuttering. Intended or not, it’s sure working.

Happily all of this attention has helped in one key way — officials at RBI are at last communicating with the outside world about selling the titles. I’ve received two emails in the past 24 hours from folks there. They both said “If we enter into 3rd party sales and the requested titles are available, we will contact you by May 3.” So that must be their party line.

Worth noting, the title’s websites say they’ll be shuttered and the content will not longer be online as of April 30th. So what’s with the May 3rd deadline? Something’s happening behind the scenes next week for sure.

When we say “content”, we include text, video, audio, games, images… anything you might consider media and/or entertainment. Yes, user-generated content is included, if people buy subscriptions to it (consider most dating sites!) When we say “subscription” we mean an account that’s sold on a renewable or recurring (automated) billing basis. It might be a membership site with content or a subscription service to access content. (These are basically the same thing anyway.)

The timing made me laugh because I just got off a webinar where question #2 was “what niches do you think are best to launch new subscription sites in?” For some reason, when I was on the spot I didn’t say “health”, although actually it’s been a category that’s been bugging me for awhile.

Health advisory subscription content for consumers was a HUGE category in the offline subscription world in the 1980s and 1990s. But that boom hasn’t translated online yet, in part, I think, because pharma ad dollars are falling off trees. Frankly, though, most ad-based health sites are so focused on delivering pageviews and clicks to advertisers that the quality of health info sites has suffered greatly. Most, even the famous names, look and feel a bit spammy. Not useful. And, certainly not written in a language that people without medical degrees can appreciate.

So, yes. Along with a few other categories I named today, I would say branded health advisory products are well worth researching for possible launches. Name brand doctors and institutions tend to work the best (Dr Weil’s team was testing paid content back at the turn of this century you know.) Often you need an ancillary revenue stream to do the best with these… consumers may pay $9 month or $39-99 year for health advice. In the past, health advisory letters often supplemented revenues by selling their own branded lines of supplements and vitamins.

The email read in part, “Your site is a f*** farce filled with useless information that you throw in with the blatent intent to get users to click on a Google adsense link. Do you think we are idiots? I am sure there plenty out there, but don’t expect me to help you get paid for nothing!”

Thing is, although the web is almost overwhelmingly littered with AdSense spam sites, MyFederalRetirement.com’s content is not spammy. Not by a long shot.

Scott himself comes from a premium content background. In fact, we worked together at B2B premium content companies in the 1990s, publishing subscription newsletters that sold for hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars per year. So, he knows what truly worthwhile editorial is.

Unlike the majority of crap AdSense sites that exist on new visitors who quickly leave never to return – MyFederalRetirement has such high quality content that tens of thousands of Federal employees and retirees have joined its email list, which has less than a .001% unsub rate, and they return to the site again and again and again. Scott’s editorial team work hard, continually publishing new, expert articles to help their readers. It’s pretty good quality without the premium price-tag.

So why is Scott getting hate mail?

To me, this is a clear sign of an Internet user backlash against the nearly unavoidable TONS of dreadful AdSense-supported content out there. People are sick to death of it.

It’s gotten to the point that when I visit a new site, if I see an AdSense ad block, my immediate gut-reaction is “Oh no, this is probably crap.” It’s nearly the same emotion as when I open an email and discover it’s spam. Nearly any chance of impressing me with the value of your content just went out the window. In fact, having an AdSense ad block is almost like having a big giant “CRAP” stamp on your page.

Chances are for most new visitors, the AdSense block brand is way more famous than your own logo, so it gives more of a brand impression than anything else on the page. You can’t mitigate the branding problem by minimizing the ad block’s visibility. You won’t survive that way. AdSense publishers need to put ad blocks in multiple, prominent places on each page in order to generate income. Top, bottom, side, search box….

Due to its quality and loyal readership, MyFederalRetirement.com is doing fairly well financially. But, the time is coming when Scott may have to reconsider that site’s business model. He’s already begun testing paid content through some of his company’s other ventures. He’ll be ready when the time comes to make the jump.

Google’s made a lot of noise about eliminating AdSense spam sites from their network since the day it started. But, I haven’t seen much progress. Yeah it’s a tough job. In the end, though, there’s too much money on the table for them. Google is in the business of selling online ad clicks. That’s it. They’re not in the business of defending content’s virtue.

That’s the publishers’ job. Don’t wait for Google to “fix” things. If they do someday, fine, we can all go dancing in the streets. Until then, protect yourself. Start testing other business models, because I think AdSense ad blocks may soon be hurting your brand more than they’re sustaining it.

That said, voluntary contributions make sense in three areas:

#1. Goal is maximum public reach:
If the primary and overwhelming goal of your organization is to serve/reach as many members of the public as possible, then you can’t slam down a paid barrier. Be honest with yourself and your board of directors about this. You’ve, in effect, decided to become an ad-based or a charitable content publisher, not a paid content business. Your next step should be to hire an ad sales team or a grants officer, because the public’s voluntary contributions probably will not sustain you.

(That said, 3.3 million people subscribe to Consumerreports.org content online, which is a nice fat chunk of the public despite the paywall. It’s a testament to the usefulness of their content, and their marketing skills. The question might be asked of “public” sites that are afraid of losing audience to paywalls, are you actually scared your content isn’t must-view enough to be worth the public’s dime?)

#2. Your intended audience can’t possibly afford you:
In this case, you’d be acting more like a cross between a charity and a non-governmental organization. Your audience is the poor, the needy, the people without the means to pay. Advertisers probably don’t want to pay to reach them. You’re publishing content that helps them in some way, so you need to be supported.

#3. You have no other choice:
You don’t have enough eyeballs to get advertiser traction, and your content isn’t “must view” enough to attract a large enough paying audience that you can afford the (even moderate) marketing and tech work it would take to pop up a paywall. But, a few fans might pay, if you stick out the tip jar. So, what the heck.

If you fall into one of these three categories, I noticed two cute online voluntary payment campaigns today worth trying:

Wikipedia’s new “Quoting a payer” campaign: : Wikipedia’s been soliciting voluntary contributions, with modest success (considering its traffic) for a couple of years now. However today I noticed they’re trying a testimonial spin on it. They place a grey box at the top of an entry page that contains a quote from a previous named donator, saying why he or she gave, along with the amount they gave. For example, I saw a quote from a guy named Don who reportedly gave $200 and said “This is a magnificent service!”

Namaste Direct’s ecard campaign:: Namaste is a microlending non-profit mainly operating in Mexico (yeah, the name confused me too – I assumed it was Nepal.) Although they’re not a content company per se, they’re doing a great job of getting donations for ecard content. They run Google AdWords ads against search terms such as “birthday card”. Although it’s free to send an ecard, there’s such a prominent “donate” button next to the card that I bet many people wind up donating money just like I did. You’re in a giving mood, after all, and it seems appropriate because you just got a good content service – the ecard.

Seen any other examples of effective marketing campaigns for voluntary contributions in exchange for content online? Let me know.

And, now the next line of Net competition has stepped in to kick them while they’re down. Membership sites. These are paid content sites usually owned by entrepreneurs, laid-off journalists, and independent publishers who generally come from an Internet publishing and/or Web marketing background. Unlike formal associations, they are for-profit, but since their primary revenues are from members, their content and services are member-focused (vs sponsor focused.) Their services tend to include private online social networking, premium niche content, webinars, member classifieds, vendor directories, etc. It’s all the stuff you’d expect to find on an association member site.

Plus, the more progressive membership sites are moving into association’s offline territory as well now. For example, StomperNet runs live trade shows around the world and publishes a glossy print magazine.

This morning I asked Kevin for his take on the situation. He replied, “In our industry we have a subscription site that is an aggressive competitor. I like that, because I get to beat ‘em, but a lot of associations seem oblivious to what’s happening around them. They’re talking about ending membership while for-profit companies see membership as a goldmine!”

So how can associations differentiate themselves and provide true value without bumping heads with the membership site crowd? My immediate thought was that associations often have lobbyists in DC working on behalf of their members’ interests. Also, they often serve as a marketing agency/voice for their industry as a whole to its potential customers (albeit, usually fairly lamely.) I don’t know of any membership or subscription sites that do either of these things.

Kevin’s impassioned reply, “At its most basic, I think you are correct. Sub sites — all content and connection. Assns — vary widely. But basically some mix of advocacy on behalf of industry or profession (govt, public, other audiences), possibly certification or credentialing, possibly standards development, and plus — content and connection.

“Successful assns are what I call a perfect triangle of influence, value, and resources; need to focus on both influence and value equally (all influence, no value = nobody’s willing to pay; all value, no influence = you’re just another competitor, except one with a lot of nonprofit governance baggage). Assns have been getting cherry-picked for years: trade mags compete with assn mags, 4-profit tradeshow producers compete with assn expos, private buying groups compete with assn purchasing programs, etc. What usually happens is that assns put together a business that then draws private competitors (usually more agile, flexible, and much more focused). It’s been happening with membership, too.

He continues, “Assns need to smack themselves in the forehead and stop giving up market share, learn what the strengths of their competitors are and figure out how they can counteract or in some cases change the assn’s own culture/structure to build similar strengths. Assns focus too much on what other assns are doing and need to focus instead on their market and its own unique environment.”

Yeah baby!