Comments on: Controversial Izea While I Slept

By: The Pied Piper Of PayPerPost? | Andy Beard - Niche Marketing

The Pied Piper Of PayPerPost? | Andy Beard - Niche Marketing — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:15:32 +0000

[...] Over the last year I have given a fair amount of coverage to PayPerPost, who now house the service along with other endeavours under the name Izea. [...]

By: Cosmonica

Cosmonica — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 23:12:18 +0000

Very good coverage Andy. Its really surprising that some of the popular bloggers are against the PayPerPost Idea but they write about the “Search Engine Love” in their advertisement section.

For PPP Posties: Its really important to setup alternative source of traffic instead of relying on Google.

By: No paid links, nofollow, whatever - Google Can Kiss My Ass! - Untwisted Vortex

No paid links, nofollow, whatever - Google Can Kiss My Ass! - Untwisted Vortex — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 20:39:38 +0000

[...] Andy Beard pointed out in a recent post about IZEA, it appears that Google targeted those that use the PayPerPost (PPP) service to write sponsored [...]

By: Laura

Laura — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 17:45:56 +0000

Izea.

When I first saw the announcement in my email, I thought it was “Ikea.”

As in “furniture”.

I was disappointed to learn that they don’t have any office chairs on sale this month.

By: What is the big Izea?

What is the big Izea? — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 13:40:34 +0000

[...] usual, Andy Beard provides the authoritative statement on all things bloggery: Controversial Izea While I Slept. Andy makes more sense than the US Mint, so check it out. If you liked that post, then try [...]

By: Lincoln

Lincoln — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 06:43:35 +0000

The A-listers can go blow it out their fat hairy arses. I’m getting mighty tired of these uppity snobbish obnoxious elitist baboon snotbags dictating how the rest of us should blog.

By: Enter Izea

Enter Izea — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 05:45:43 +0000

[...] reactions from the world of weblogs include: Andy Beard’s take and round-up, Robert Scoble’s thoughts, and Read/Write Web’s write-up, among others. It’s [...]

By: Xavier Vespa

Xavier Vespa — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:17:58 +0000

I’ve really enjoyed this post. That’s what I like to call a nicely wrapped crossblogs post.

By: Richard MacManus

Richard MacManus — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:08:16 +0000

Andy, thanks for reminding me — I’d neglected to add the “nofollow” tag to links in the sidebar. I’ve done that now!

By: lucia

lucia — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:46:27 +0000

Nice write up Andy. I saw Colleen write up last evening, but didn’t have anything in particular to say.

Given the large number of services, setting up a parent company as an umbrella makes sense. I don’t see why that would need to be named after the largest sub-company. There are certainly advantages to having a separate name.

I also don’t see how Read/Write web can be lovin’ the idea of Shared Reviews and disliking PPP.

Am I misunderstanding, or does Shared REviews work like this:

Someone buys domains that already have backlinks for their old content.

That someone these puts new, entirely different, content on those pages. This new content has instant undeserved page rank from the old backlinks. Then, the owners monetize the new contents.

Sure, the new content may be better than stuff we see on splogs, but where, exactly is the brigh line ethical difference between:

a) A small business running a company on a fresh new domain, populating that domain with content, and then buying a link to increase rank and

b) SmartReviews buying domains equipped with now irrelevant links inbound links intended to point to the old content and populating that with content?

Oh well… If Smart Reviews is doing what it sounds like, I’m sure Google will figure this out. It’s not that difficult to figure out the content on a domain is entirely and completely revised after the domain is purchased.