Re: Top Text

From: Eric Ward <ericward_at_urlwire.com>
Date: Mon 27 Aug 2001 11:32:44 -0500

JOHN GASKILL <jg_at_info-central-usa.com> WROTE:

> The words intrusive, off topic, inappropriate and
> misdirected all come to mind when thinking about top
> text as an ad vehicle.

It is almost comical to me that Top text thinks this
will be viable long term. The bottom line is that
for any user clicking a top text link, after two or three
clicks to useless pages, users will quit using it.
What are the odds that the word "food" and the top text
link they sell for the word food will be to a page
that helps every single person on that page? Zero.

The immediacy/clickability of the web is such that
in 10 seconds you can be halfway around the world from
where you just were, and back again in six clicks of the
back button. For folks with ADD, the web is heaven.
That's me.

There will be lawsuits, great publicity, more downloads,
and more ranting, but the bottom line is if the links that
top text places on other sites content do not help the
user (and they wont), the user will see that pretty quickly
and quit cliking the yellow links. Sure, top text will sign
up a bunch of advertisers the first time around, but they
wont renew any of them, and will vanish or become so
nichefied it wont be an issue anymore. Pointcast Syndrome.

I think that ultimately they will be forced to offer
an opt-out method, a-la, MS Smart Tags, for both users
and webmasters. And everyone will opt out after 3 useless
clicks.

 -Eric

E r i c W a r d . c o m http://www.EricWard.com
Content Announcements and Link Building Strategies Since 1994
_____________________________________________________________
  Connecting useful web content with its natural audience
_____________________________________________________________
     mailto:ew_at_ericward.com -- voice: 865.637.2438 est




Received on Mon Aug 27 2001 - 11:32:44 CDT