Ana’s Foreword
Cat fight!
What? Too girly? Fine, let’s call it a faceoff.
A couple of weeks ago I asked Nick Cardot from SiteSketch101.com to try to disprove my Twitter theory that quantity trumps quality.
You know what I am talking about… I’ve written about it once or twice…
So why Nick?
Because of the millions of tweeple out there, Nick is THE king of making friends on Twitter.
So today is THE day.
I wrote a post on Nick’s blog - TRUST me, you’ll want to read it; and he wrote one on mine (below).
Here’s my post Ana Hoffman vs Nick Cardot Twitter Faceoff: Quantity Trumps Quality on Nick’s blog.
And now it’s up to you, the readers, to give us thumbs up or down.
Ana Hoffman vs Nick Cardot Twitter Faceoff: Quality Trumps Quantity
In the Twitterverse today, a war is raging between those who would engage as broadly as possible and those who would be as personal as possible.
Most of you are probably convinced that the greatest possible strategy to building your online presence and driving traffic and sales at your site is to create as many accounts as possible online and to throw out as many links as possible.
In fact, this is an incredibly popular trend among tweeters.
Here’s a few characteristics that you’ll notice of these:
- They have different accounts for each site or project.
- They automate the publishing of their links.
- They seldom respond to those who retweet or mention them.
- They often follow/unfollow using automated software to build as many followers as possible.
When Twitter first began to be popular, this was a fairly suitable method for content distribution regardless of the fact that it is incredibly impersonal.
This type of usage defies the title of social media.
There is nothing social about it. It is media, nothing more.
Unless you are a powerful brand, a celebrity, or you have a site who’s content is amazingly powerful on it’s own, this quantity method of engagement seldom reaches past a few hundred or even a few thousand followers and its impact often diminishes as people discover the unsocial nature of your account.
I’m finding, however, that when folks engage on Twitter and social media as a friend among friend that although the momentum is often slower starting out, as it begins to build, it becomes more and more powerful as it grows eventually providing you with a powerful army of friends sharing and promoting your content.
This is the method of engagement that I pursue and the following are a few principles that I try to keep in mind as I engage across social media platforms.
- I respond conversationally as much as possible.
- When possible, I thank folks for tweeting or retweeting links.
- I work to meet up with fellow Tweeters (to include flying across the country to meet someone).
- I limit my automated tweets (I do have a few).
You’ll find that when you use the same principles that allow you to connect and engage with your friends offline and you use those concepts to build relationships online, it’s powerful.
Be friendly. Be chatty but not overbearing. Treat people as friends and watch as the community will grow and rally around you.
The key is to build real relationships, to make real friends.
Marketing Takeaway from Ana
Numbers don’t lie.
My question to Nick was how much time do you spend engaging with your followers and how much traffic do you get out of it?
As you can see from my post on Nick’s blog, my position is clear: QUANTITY trumps QUALITY.
I looked forward to seeing Nick proving me wrong, but so far…. I don’t see it!
By the way, those of us who are all for quantity are not hiding behind our automated software.
We are still active members of Twitter community (just check me out @AnaTrafficCafe), we are still personal, but we also understand that Twitter equals business.
A very insightful post, indeed!
While getting a lot of traffic to your blog is good, connecting with people in a personal way is better. This is something I haven’t devoted as much time to as I should have for the past four years that I’ve been blogging. But I plan on working harder at it.
Hopefully, 2013 will prove to be a very fruitful year for my online ministry!
Thanks for the advice!
Hi Anna,
You’ve heard this from me before. I run my business using the same principles you do. And, that could be because I’m a Christian too.
People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.
I try to spend about 4 hrs. a day on Twitter talking to people that talk to me, replying to my messages, and trying to provide the kind of content that people are interested in. Currently 16% of my traffic is coming from Twitter. 8% is coming from blog posts. The rest is coming from search engines. This is during a period of one week.
My Alexa rating on 3/3/10 = 27,324,158
3/8/10 = 1,549,469
Kinda disappointed, because I know I really need to be under 100,000
Like your Alexa rating = 12,600
Not to get off base too much. I put these statistics out there to show that Twitter has been responsible for a lot of my success.
I think sometimes people get disappointed when they post a link and they don’t get much response. Not even a visit to their website. And here’s why they don’t get more response.
I’ve heard time and time again, 80 % of your Twitter followers aren’t active. So, if I had 10,000 followers ONLY 2,000 followers will see the post. And, then 1% of that is 20. And, this is what is happening with me. And, that’s after I built my Twitter site solely on the principle that :
QUALITY TRUMPS QUANTITY
I totally agree with you!
I found you on Twitter. And, that’s worth being on Twitter by itself. If it weren’t for Twitter, our paths probably would never have crossed.
Conclusion : The relationships that can be built from engaging on Twitter, are worth more than any money you can make. And, if people will follow in your footsteps, they will start to make money too.
Cashprofits (Twitter)
“Without contraries is no progress” — W Blake.
I was very inspired by you (Ana) and you (Arturo), to consider some of the “less mystic” purposes of twitter…which are also very valuable.
I like how you (Ana), have “resurrected” the word fellowship. This pushes toward “excellence” in influence, rather than “ego” in followship.
“Be as peaceful as doves and shrewd as serpents.”
O Brave New (Both/And) World, with such beauteous creatures on ‘t.
Inspired,
Mark
I want to chime in but I think eveything has been said so….
I can say BOTH Ana and Nick have reached out to me on Twitter, on their own. They don’t know me and actually the tweets had nothing to do business, both instances were about life in general. You only get that from people who care and want to make a simple connection. This keeps me coming back to their blogs to support them.
When I read about how Ana got her Twitter followers I was a little turned off, it seemed so impersonal BUT she is running a business. My favorite restaurant offers coupons, deals and advertises everywhere, that is impersonal. Yet when I walk through the doors it’s the quality of the food and service that keeps me coming back. Online biz is no different.
In business, quality and quantity count. But does the end justify the means? Humm? In this case, sure.
I guess I lean a little on Ana’s side but only with the perspective of getting more traffic. The real question would be: ROI?
Here’s the deal. It’s not always about the traffic metrics you are currently following.
Yes traffic matters and yes tracking traffic is important but perhaps you are looking at direct traffic too much. When Nick builds a quality relationship through Twitter it might take time and not turn into tons of traffic. But in the long run these relationships turn into business. This business turns into money.
You see I have known Nick for over a year now and we talk on Twitter regularly.With the relationship he has with me I know that he also has one with hundreds of other people too. I’d consider myself a close friend and would promote, purchase, and help Nick however I could. The thing is thought that even though I think I’m part of Nick’s “inner circle” so do a hundred other people. Not only will I click Nick’s links but I’ll also share them, comment on them, and do what I can to further his business.
Link pushers don’t get that from me.
That’s a very good point, Seth. I am trying to build the same @WebTrafficCafe. It’s time that I don’t have though, so I have to take that into consideration along with my blog objections.
Nice of you to stop by though!
I know right where all that came from. Very sad indeed.
Hey Anna,
First off thanks for referencing my post. That seems like it will soon be my calling card in the blogosphere considering I just shared it in a talk with 500 people. So let me share my thoughts on it. I guess there’s one component missing from my notion that 150 followers is all you need. It’s that when you get to that 150, the numbers start to happen and the #of followers grows. The ultimate irony of writing that post is it resulted in more than 150 new followers. I think that when people are starting out they get caught up in trying to get as many followers as possible, but the question becomes “are you getting any value from those followers or are you giving value to them.” You and Nick clearly accomplish both even if you do a have a substantial following.
If people are just starting out and they focus on building a powerful inner circle I think that their following will grow organically. This is going to be a really interesting discussion among people in the blogosphere.
I definitely see your point, Srinivas.
When I first read your post, I turned off all the automation and went exclusively for dialogue.
Actually I became on of 150 on top of 150 of your followers! 🙂
Didn’t work for me. I heard crickets on my blog and all my time was sucked up by “hanging out” on Twitter.
In the end, I do have one “quality account” where I follow about 50 people I actually want to see and hear from. That list changes all the time depending on what kind of info I am looking for, but it’s always quality no matter what.
And my other Twitter accounts… they don’t get me, but they still get a lot of valuable info from many great bloggers around - yes, through automation, but really - who doesn’t use it these days?
Thanks for coming by; love hearing your perspective!
I think the question shouldn’t be quantity vs. quality, but more how much quality can you put into the quantity. There is a reason why we have multiple avenues for engaging people, though. 😉
Sure, you can relink posts that I may miss or provide endless streams of ‘good information’ but if you aren’t adding to the value of the content than all it becomes is a constant stream of things to ignore. However if you link to a blog often.. that just leads the reader from the quantity of smaller stuff to the big quality stuff.
I’m a huge fan of reading all mediums to gather the information needed to decide whether or not to continue to follow someone and I keep track of people who provide both quantity and quality.
I’ve just recently stumbled across your blog, Ana, and I have spent a lot of time delving back through your posts and enjoying them all. So as long as you continue to deliver quality through your quantity.. the more the better!
Cheers and thanks for all the nudges that make my brain think in a new way!
Shawna
Thanks, Shawna - I am not planning turning that quality post tab any time soon.
So you keep on reading!
Is there room for both/and; I think the either/or of western thinking needs a consciousness revolt.
Deliberate action is both/and. Twitter is comprehensive enough for both.
That said, thereis a “situational ethic” for every person. It’s in their DNA. Ev Bogue wants to have a Twitter ratio of 1:300, THAT’S HIS YOGINI “SO-GURU-i-DON’T-HAVE-TO-SAY-IT” swagger.
I like twitter as a diversion for the spread of ideas.
I have no invested interest in ROI (especially immediately). I’m a gardener; an observer; a perennialist.
Thanks for the cat fight!
You are very welcome, Mark - sounds like you are in a perfect position to stand back and watch. 🙂
By the way, I posted your comment about Arturo’s comment down below - again, thanks for such encouraging thoughts for both of us.
Blessings.
Thats encouraging Anna,
So uve found good friends on ur blog and facebook?
Ana,
I can not let Jon Thomases comments pass without retort.
He clearly misses the point that most twitters wouldn’t consider him a “g-e-e-k”,
they would consider him a “j-e-r-k.”
Jon shows has zero focus on anyone else but himself - and Nick. Nick, I can understand.
A person’s character resounds, reverberates in their writing style.
Jon has a superiority complex (most likely toward women) that he must flex. “Smack!” Take that b***h!
Take a cheap shot and run - this is my cheap shot back at Outhouse Jon. After 35 years of in road sales, dealing with about every slime ball and dirt bag possible I can get right down to Jon’s level without spitting in a beautiful face.
Stephen Anderson
That’s EXACTLY how I do it as well, Robert. That, plus 5 more accounts. 🙂
There’s no reason why this can’t work: quantity traffic generation with quality communication with those who want to.
Ana,
My vote is “Quantity” every time.
The majority of twitters I have stumbled across were more inclined to want their message read and spread being the reason for a “follow” to begin with. Very little, if any interest in a dialogue.
No one can build a relationship with an ego-tripper. I should know, it’s one of my most outstanding character traits!
You are welcome of course for my comments,
Stephen
“I’ll follow you if you follow me” - how many times have I heard that on Twitter?
I am with you, Stephen - as you well know. 🙂
Arturo says
Ana, having read both entries, I think you make a more solid argument for your case than Nick, though I understand and do not fully disagree with his position regarding the significance of nurturing quality connections through Twitter.
However, I find both your cases a bit flawed in one regard. Neither one of you explains why either methodology really works. Your aim is to argue why one is superior to the other. But both of you argue that the two have been successful in their own ways. And that’s because the two of you seem focused on achieving different objectives through the same mechanism — Twitter.
Granted the aim of the debate was to show us how Twitter is a terrific means to build an online presence and drive traffic to our sites to monetize it there through sales, you did a far better job showing us your own experience in achieving part of this, by sharing empirical evidence of your success (Google Analytics report).
But in the end you don’t explain why your success could transfer to me or someone else. And I think that’s where I find the flaw in both arguments, because Nick did likewise.
I have a theory to share with you that might help here and, since you’re a Christian, I’ll preface it with a couple of biblical reference. One is in the book of Judges 1:7. The other is in Matthew 22:35-40.
The former reference tells the story of king by the name of Adoni-Bezek. He was the leader of Canaanites, known as the “lord of lightning” who, upon realizing the defeat of 10,000 of his men at the hands of Hebrew champions Judah and Simeon, by the order of their captain Joshua, fled from the city, was captured and dealt a blow not unlike that which he had dealt to his own foes. He loss both his thumbs and big toes, rendering him thereby incapable of keeping balance for further flight or delivering useful manual labor. He became incapacitated by losing 20% of his digits.
Now let’s jump to the book of Matthew. There we find the story of Jesus answering to the question posed by a lawyer, who asked “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And Jesus gave him 2 commandments out of 10 that God had given Moses. He said to the lawyer, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”
There is a natural phenomenon that has come to be known as Pareto’s law, which amounts to “the law of vital few” that says that roughly 80% of the natural and social effects of anything come from 20% of their causes. It is not known why this proportion holds in nature. But it does.
And, as you can see, even Jesus in saying that 2 out of the 10 commandments generate ALL the important principles spoken of in the entire Torah and the prophets, and just as Adoni-Bezek’s loss of his thumbs and toes rendered him powerless as a warrior, so does Pareto’s law give us insight into why using Twitter either for quality or quantity makes sense. And here’s why.
Twitter can give us access in the most effective and direct way to people who we might otherwise not be able to reach. That means that by focusing on getting connected via Twitter to the most vital individuals to our success, we may be able to side-step the quantity issue entirely. Why? Because those few, high-quality connections could generate the critical visibility, traffic and business that we want. The trade-off? Time. We’d need to spend 80% of out time seeking for the 20% of people who would produce 80% of the results that we want. That’s Nicks’ approach.
Now let’s look at your approach.
You prefer to spend your time blogging. So, to produce 80% of traffic results from a source like Twitter without spending 80% of your time tweeting, you need to play the numbers. You need tons of contacts and an automated process to procure them, with an added token element of humanity to ensure that you’re not perceived as being just an automaton but an actual twitterer. So you’re willing to spend 20% of your time creating the accounts and setting up the automation platform and loading the tweets to produce the 80% of results which, by the very nature of using automation rather than personal time, will produce a ton of contacts of lesser quality than any number of contacts that Nick would have secured in the same timeframe.
In short, both of you are using the Pareto principle but in different application, because the two of you have different preferences in how to use your time.
The question for the rest of us is how do we want to spend our time? Will more quality produce better results for us long-term than greater quantity short-term? Will greater quantity give our businesses short-term a greater likelihood of success long-term? Is there a happy balance between the two and can I find it as it applies to my particular circumstances and objectives?
That I think is a more intrinsically significant series of questions to ask than whether quality or quantity trump each other.
But then I’ve been known for being too professorial in my conversations. So, if I’ve already lost half of you with what I’ve shared, just tell me to buzz off next time. 😀
Good point, Arturo! 🙂
I pretty much assumed that since I run a traffic generation blog, my readers come here to learn more about traffic generation. That’s why I showed them how to use Twitter for that.
I am still not entirely sure what Nick’s Twitter goals are.
As for the rest of your comment, Arturo, all I can say it WOW. You gave me a lot to think about.
One flaw I see here though: you are saying that making yourself more visible with the right people will in the end generate similar result, like traffic.
I am very much into numbers and research (that’s why I loved your analogy - that and the fact that I love God and His word), and so far I haven’t seen any proof that retweets bring actual traffic.
If you take a look at the retweet and Facebook shares numbers on both of our posts, mine are higher, and the only reason Nick has what he has is because of me sharing his post through my networks. The reason I say that is because Nick is MIA today (I think he is pulling a 24-hour shift), so he can’t do it himself.
So without his active involvement, it seems like his social empire is limping.
Let’s see what Nick has to say on that!
PS Loved your blog - great niche!
Arturo@Starting Your Own Business says
Now it’s my turn to say WOW, Ana. This is a GREAT compliment coming from you. Thank you! 😀
On your point about visibility with the right people maybe in the end not generating similar results, like traffic, relative to collecting a mass of lower quality contacts using automation, I’d just like to point out how successful Nick already seems to be by the mere fact that he is connected to — who else? — you!
Imagine if he had a Twitter list of 2,000 Anas (I know…I know…fat chance, but…), which might have taken him, um, a couple of years to build up, right? That list represents, let’s say, one-fifth of the size of your own list that might have taken you 6 months to produce with automation. Can we assume that with 2,000 Anas in his Twitter list, eagerly interacting with him in well-nurtured relationships, his tweets might get not merely RT’ed but, more importantly, his tweeted posts might get linked-to by these powerfully influential and referencing Ana sites?
I’d bet you a hole in a virtual donut that they would, and this would drive traffic to his site a la Twitter. That would be the kind of interaction that he would generate, which certainly differs from your kind of interaction which begins at your blog with Twitter strangers.
But note the disparity in time between you and Nick before there is an effect on the traffic needle. I can’t prove it inductively, but by logical deduction, if we assume that the weight of intimate relationship is greater than that of a mass of connections to total strangers, then relationship building, though it takes longer to accomplish Nick’s style, would eventually prove good for business traffic-wise after a LONG time of nurturing these high-quality Twitter contacts.
Personally, I’m not willing to wait that long. I think there are other media that can more effectively develop these high-quality relationships than a microblog. So I’m with you in the end.
And what am I betting in potentially being wrong? Not much, just my future business.
But at least we’re in it together. 😀
Funny thing though, it was me who reached out to Nick. Yet I am labeled as a spammer by some of the commentators below. 🙂
You are right Arturo, IF it were possible to create such a great followship on Twitter and not spend every minute of your day tending to it, I’d do it in a heartbeat.
But given what Twitter is, it’s the only way for me to do what I need to do.
By the way, one of my readers, Mark, wasn’t able to post his comment for some reason, but he emailed it to me and here’s what he had to say to both of us:
“Seems I can’t reply to him, but I was amazed (A) by his comment, (B) the extensively wide Net you’ve cast.
Some generative free associations:
“The kingdom of heaven is like a Net.” Matthew 13:47
“I will follow…” U2
“It’s a magnificent idea – an idea that appears in India in the mythic image of the Net of Indra, which is a net of gems, where at every crossing of one thread over another there is a gem reflecting all the other reflective gems. Everything arises in mutual relation to everything else, so you can’t blame anybody for anything.” Joseph Campbell
Just wanted to remind you your work-making inroads for traffic and communication-is part of the ‘Brave New World’ Christ promises.”
Nice thought to end the day with. 🙂
Nick,
I am on board with your philosophy, however your case against Ana’s isn’t strong enough. She made some great points in her post and I’m hoping you come back with some powerful responses!
I would!
Recently when I switched to WP from Blogger I discovered a few bugs in the theme. I wrote to Ana personally asking for help. She answered, personally. She followed up repeatedly. When the problem still couldn’t be solved she asked me for my login information and went as far as to log on, and attempt to fix my blog theme. She took time out of her schedule to try and fix my blog.
Ana has never asked for anything in return.
Yes, she’s a business person. But behind that, she’s pure gold.
@Gibson - thanks so much, Gibson. I was really taken back by Jon’s comment. Wasn’t ready to be flogged by some dude I’ll never talk to again - on my own blog. 🙂
Hey Nick and Hola Ana,
I’ve read both posts and they each make great cases.
I was and am a firm believer of quality over quantity. So far, it seems to be working for me and I am making the time I need to interact with folks that interest me. I realize that this is a much slower method but it has its perks.
A few of the people I’ve met online via Twitter - are truly exceptional. Unless if they’ve managed to dupe me for months then I can call them a few friends now.
They do much of the things RLF do except from afar. They support you (and vice versa), they ask about you, they show interest, they share their stories with you, sometimes they tell about something personal in their life if they trust you enough, they make you laugh, the teach you, they ask you how your day is going, they tease you with silly jokes, they recommend some of their friends to you, they take the time to ask questions, they help when you need it…
Those type of followers are what I call quality!!! They add value to your work by commenting and sharing their views and more. You don’t make those kind of friends if you don’t give them the time of day.
However, Ana made some pretty good points as well in her GP over at your place. It put a few things into perspective and maybe even realize the importance of quantity. Nice job on that Ana. I know that a lot of people usually prefer quality over quantity but you did a heck of a job with your counter-argument and provided stats to back it up.
All in all, I suppose it will always depend on what you’re looking for and what you’re aiming to achieved through out your blogging journey. I know I want a bit of both - actually a lot of both lol. But I think for now, I will continue to go about it the way I have and see where it leads me. You never know though ;).
Thanks to both of you for a great job. 2 excellent posts worth reading and taking into consideration.
Cheers Nick - and welcome back!
Ciao Tzarina
You are definitely quality all around, Ingrid. 🙂
However, isn’t it your goal for your quality Twitter followers to come to your blog, read your content, share it? I don’t believe you just stay on Twitter and never visit each other’s humble blog-abodes, right?
Which is exactly what I am doing; just in reverse. 🙂 I prefer much more close and personal relationships not confined by 140 characters.
Glad you are one of them!
HI Nick,
Great post, I certainly see your point about engaging and connecting with others to put the social in social media, but with only so much time in the day, I struggle to prioritize it all and get it all in. My blog, by far, is the best social media relationship incubator I know of, with facebook second, and twitter third. And with twitter on the bottom of my list, I end up letting it slide when things get hectic.
Love to know how you balance it all, time-wise. 🙂
Heather
I am with you, Heather: I have about 20-30 min per day for Twitter. Better make the best of it and that’s how I do it.
Well yes, I am not going to comment about the quality-quantity thing here, I have already done that at Nick’s blog.
But as you have pointed out here Nick, I was one of those people following the “incredibly popular trend”. But I recently did a very big washout at my Twitter account, and have made the clouds clear so that I can see and interact with real people.
I am writing a post on the why and how of it. I surely have to link to these two posts of yours and Ana.
Jane.
Look forward to it, Jane. I know many readers are still trying to figure it out; yet another perspective might help.
Very nice idea this face off post, in fact I came here directly from Nick’s blog after having read Ana’s one.
As I said there, I confirm quantity-vs-quality is still something I have to wrap my head around, but as Ana mentioned in her reply to me, there’s no reason not to at least try to integrate both methods.
I have to agree, after having read this side as well. You can aim for a better quantity without compromising your quality as well. It’s surely more difficult than focusing on a single side of the equation, but the results are kinda evident.
It all depends on your goals. Mine are traffic generation; Nick’s are… well I am not sure yet.
Figure out what you want out of Twitter and at accordingly.
We need to all raise our focus to the outcomes, not the persona or the methodology. Twitter is the locomotive. But you’re both trying to get to 2 different stations. And you’re both on the right train, going to the right place.
I think the true difference here is ‘BRAND LOYALTY’ vs ‘PROVIDER LOYALTY’. Ana is building a ‘Brand’ - Ana Hoffman - Traffic Generation Cafe. Provider of money making ideas and advice to all bloggers. Her USP (Unique Selling Proposition) is that she knows her stuff! And everyone, from complete newby to veteran can find great ideas and genuine help from Ana. Cadillac. Mercedes. Rollsssssss Royce!
Nick is building a ‘Provider’ - Nick. That’s Nick. He has a blog (actually a couple’a few . .). But that’s NICK! I believe it because Nick said it. Nick helped me out today. Nick passed the love around today and we all got to share. NICK! Gold. Platinum. Diamonds.
Nicks methods wouldn’t work for Ana, and Ana’s won’t work for Nick. But I know and love both of them. And so do you, because of who they are. Try imagining this place without Nick, or Ana.
They are just lucky enough to have found what works for them.
Thanks to Ana and Nick for thought-provoking points of view - and “Gib@Gibson Goff”, I really liked your analogy so thanks for that too!
I went more for quantity (and some automated following & replying) for the past 2 & 1/2 years until about a month ago - when I got SO fed up with trying to find who I *actually* wanted to read stuff from - that I switched off the automation, started a MAJOR cleansing of who I followed, and I have to confess I’m feeling less Twitter-stress as a result 🙂 I still have way more followers than I can comfortably handle, but I’ve set myself an ongoing of unfollowing at least 5 people a day, if their tweets are of no interest, or aren’t relevant, to me.
So I guess that means I’m supporting the “quality” camp here - although I can definitely see how the “quantity” option has it merits, depending on what you want from your Twitter account perhaps.
Thanks Ana & Nick for great blogs & tweets!
Tracey 🙂
@traci_london
I actually did the same with my main Twitter account, Tracey - unfollowed EVERYONE and started following only people who I am interested in - about 50 thus far. 🙂
Sure lots of my “followers” fell away after I did that, but that’s OK. That’s my quality account.
Wow, Gibson - you made me teary-eyed! 🙂
I’ve never seen it this way… And now thinking about it, I don’t see how you are not right.
We both have different purposes. And whatever we do, works for us.
I just wish Nick went a bit more into WHY he’s on Twitter; what his ultimate goals are.
Maybe he will, when he gets to these comments. 🙂
Gibby has that effect!! 🙂
Hey Nick,
Great points you’re sharing here. Although I use automated software for certain tasks, I still interact with people, respond to mentions/questions and thank people for the retweets 🙂
As you pointed out, the key is to engage with your followers and add a personal touch.
Thanks for sharing your insights, Nick.
All the best,
Mavis
Ana and Nick: I am still somewhat skeptical about how valuable Twitter is. Since I know that I cannot afford to spend much time monitoring tweets throughout the day, I have tried to largely automate Tweets (@greenwise1). It built the followers up steadily for a while and then plateaued. I get some traffic from Twitter, but it has never been above about 5th place. Perhaps if I engaged more, as both of you recommend, Twitter would provide a bigger pay off. For me, I don;t think Twitter is useless; I just have found so far that the cost in time is not worth the value it provides. (But I am admittedly less experienced and ready to be set straight!)
Hi, Steve - before I started using Twitter 8 months ago, I learned everything I could about it.
Tried a few ways, and this is what works for me. It generates tons of traffic that converts. And that works for me.
Both are equally important in their right perspective. And surely excess of both affect you adversely.
I think twitter has changed from the days when we could generate a lot of followers with good content to now when we are just swamped with content - good and bad - and it’s better to go and reach out to people.
I guess the analogy is like an intimate dinner party where we can expect someone to engage us in conversation (the old days) compared to a huge gathering where we just need to break into a group or risk standing alone by the back wall…
Like the debate though 🙂
Cathy
To me, Twitter is more like drinking out of Niagra Falls. You make the best of it. That’s it.
I think it is a matter of degree and therefore this is a bit of a pillow fight. I’m sure the Quantity people have quality standards and thet the Quality people have time limits on their chuminess.
False dichotomy really.
🙂
Wow, lots of big words, Sandy! 🙂 Sounds like you are more of a quantity person…
Of all the online “friends” I have made since my first blog appeared in 2003, I wonder if there are any of them I could truly call upon if I were truly “a friend in need”… Maybe I should fly across the country to commiserate (sp?) in person????
I know I can, Dave, and I’ve been online for a lot less than you. 🙂
Friends are not found on Twitter - that I know.
So basically Anna, u use a quantity strategy to drive traffic to your quality content on your blog..
Makes sense to want to engage with them on your blog instead of on twitter
I with u with that strategy.. as Ive never really “connected” with alot of people on twitter..
Cheers