Put another way, is Squidoo’s sales/impression anything like “normal” for similar content or is it mostly fake? There’s really no question that the numbers are distorted — the issue is just how much?

HubPages - a new venture that uses a similar business model and approach as Squidoo - went from private, closed beta testing to public beta August 5. I was a part of the private beta and I was setting up…

There certainly is demand for landing pages, etc. that don’t require you to “burn” your feed. I believe that the millions of users of tools like Blogger.com, MySpace, etc. that don’t even realize they have a feed are prime targets for simple RSS feed management tools. With limited readership, they are probably much less inclined to even care about stats, one of the areas where Feedburner is a clear leader today.

The eBay auction was meant to generate some discussions…and yes, I would sell it if the price was right. In fact, I even lowered the reserve price yesterday to stimulate some interest among current bidders. That being said, we’ll need some pretty big activity in the morning to see it sell. At a minimum, I considered the listing on eBay to be a publicity stunt that might help me gauge perception of value.

I’ve also made it very clear that the new owner, if there is one, will be required to protect all current Feedpass users IF the owner were to make any significant changes to the site, the business model, etc.

Anyway, we’ll see what happens. But can’t you at least be consistent? Why SLAM on Feedpass for monetizing content (other people’s content) and yet give HubPages a fairly positive spin? From the page I created, it seems like HubPages is blatantly allowing anyone to profit from your content…with nothing more than a link to your site. What’s the difference?

I can’t believe you gave a positive writeup on this site. After all, I used it to immediately create a site that rips content from both you and Dave Winer, then allows HubPages and me (Feedpass) to both make money from posting your content previews on my new page.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Feedpass_Mashup

Compare that to the harmless Feedpass page we created for TechCrunch that displays even less of your “valuable” content with links right back to your site. And yet, you chose to ridicule Feedpass and say it did “absolutely nothing?”:
http://www.feedpass.com/techcrunch

Sounds alot like Feedpass, but with no subscription angle and the ability to mash together any number of feeds. Feedpass was at least developed as a landing page to a specific feed. HubPages is plain and simple allowing anyone to rip off anyone’s content and make money from it. I don’t even see a way for content owners, like you, to get credit for your content being used on my hubpages site or any other.

If anything, perhaps this writeup shows that you simply choose to attack certain players in this business without really thinking it through, while you decide it’s okay for others to go ahead and make a living doing essentially the same thing.

Looks like Randy Charles Morin was right about both you and Dave Winer.
http://www.kbcafe.com/rss/?guid=20060521114813
http://www.kbcafe.com/rss/?guid=20060521081354

Are you actually the same person that wrote all the wonderful books, some of which I’ve pimped on my blog? http://www.techcrunch.com/2005.....eth-godin/

Any off the shelf solutions to this?

http://hubpages.com/ ha levantado 2 millones en menos de 6 meses con 100 usuarios… que le deparará el destino a meneame con miles?…

In my opinion, Hubpages’ tools don’t even come close in usefulness or number to those offered by Squidoo, and some have serious bugs. For example, Link modules truncate text without warning and and the descriptions don’t permit HTML formatting.

Compare the Squidoo lens at http://www.squidoo.com/TheBlackScholar, which uses most Squidoo modules, with the spartan Hubpage version at http://hubpages.com/hub/The_Black_Scholar. It seems to me that Hubpage is simply an (unsuccessful) attempt to clone Squidoo, which hasn’t been all that successful in delivering wealth to contributors (or gaining traffic).

–rj

Boring… Yawn..

Don’t you think it would be more accurate to use this graph of traffic, from the same source:

http://www.alexaholic.com/edge.....crunch.com

Why choose a two year scale for a company that’s been in business for just one year?

Our Google Analytics numbers, which are certainly more accurate, indicate that we just crossed 200,000 unique visitors per week, a 6x increase in six months.

Traffic truth aside, we’re busy building schools in Southeast Asia, funding research on diabetes research and making it easier for people to find the perfect link about their favorite professional wrestler. That, and I get to work with some absolutely amazing people.

Good luck. Squidoo hasn’t really had the impact they expected when they started it (I was an early beta tester), we’ll see if HubPages does any different.

Bummer is, these kinds of sites are pretty boring. At least people might be paid for making someone else rich along the way.

[Then again, why people re-upped after Pets.com and WBVN, I’ll never understand.]

Let see if it makes any money.

http://hubpages.com/help/#impressions

HubPages tools are simpler. Capsules are added directly to a page on HubPages. Squidoo takes you through a process that is more difficult to add modules. I think HubPages will get more content just because pages can be assembled quicker.

Revenue wise. Squidoo hasn’t paid me much and HubPages just started, so we’ll see. One thing I like on HubPages is I don’t have to have any ads.

I received a message from Squidoo saying traffic was up 3X.
Mike, you need reliable traffic numbers. Delicious, now Squidoo, don’t quote something if you know it’s bad. It just spreads lies.