Content Marketing, Blogging and Content Creation

To Build Blog Subscribers, Get Narrow-Minded

Narrow Street To Build Blog Subscribers, Get Narrow MindedI had an interesting conversation about blog visitors and blog subscribers with my friend Doug Karr a few weeks ago at the Blog Indiana conference.

Doug’s blog covers a wide swath of digital marketing topics, whereas Convince & Convert is of course mostly in the social media lane with occasional dalliances in email, conversion optimization, metrics, and other related topics.

As a result of this difference in breadth, I think it stands to reason that Doug has more traffic on his blog, but I have more subscribers – which is the case.

I have never run the numbers on this definitively, and I’m sure there are outliers, but I believe it to be true anecdotally. What I tell my clients who blog is that the narrower your content focus, the more likely you are to drive sharing and subscription behaviors, because it’s more likely the reader feels like you are talking directly about their situation. And the content is more relevant more often. The trade-off is traffic. 

A broader focus creates more traffic because you have more types of Google bait in the water, and you are simply appealing to a wider variety of readers.

Broad Topics = more visitors, less sharing, less subscriptions

Narrow Topics = fewer visitors, more sharing, more subscriptions

In addition to topical focus, I’d also wager that blogs with more authors – and a corresponding mixture of voices and writing styles – have fewer subscribers as a percentage of visitors than solo-written blogs.

The Effect of Content Breadth in Other Media

I suspect the same dynamic exists in other forms of media. USA Today has a ton of readers, but perhaps fewer subscribers (as a percentage of total readers) than my local newspaper, because USA Today covers such a broad range of topics it’s not a can’t-miss proposition for anyone.

TV shows that appeal very specifically to a particular type of audience (Walking Dead comes to mind) are probably DVR’d at a higher rate than more general fare (again as a percentage of total audience), because they are must see TV for that audience.

It’s why some movies become “cult classics” and why many musical acts can make a very nice living without ever breaking big. I think about Roger Clyne in Arizona, or Bob Schneider from Austin, both terrific musicians with very little in the way of mainstream hits. Both tour incessantly though, and almost always go to the same cities and venues over and over. They have a very loyal audience who will turn out and buy tickets every time they’re in town. That’s the concert-going version of subscribing to a blog.

Again, I don’t have any big data on this, although I’d love to work on a research project about it. I’m mostly just noodling. What do you think?

  • http://johnfalchetto.com/ John Falchetto

    Great insight, you are right. I noticed this when I launch a new product which is very specific targeted.

    I guess it comes down to narrowing our niche and knowing who we talk to very precisely. I know it’s easier said than done as I often feel the message should appeal to more.

    This post is so true. On the flip side less traffic?

    Perhaps but I’m sure the bounce rate will go down and the page views will go up right?

  • kyleplacy

    Great post Jay. You could apply this principal to any type of business focus. A narrow niche allows you to target a specific group of people using direct content.

    It is also dependent on your personal business model. Doug makes money off of affiliates and traffic (I’m assuming) a higher traffic rate gives him more opportunities for financial gain. My content is more direct and my revenue model is based off of consulting… not advertising or affiliate revenue.

    • douglaskarr

      @kyleplacy Hmmm… how do you know how we make money? You couldn’t be more wrong. DK New Media’s primary revenue is from companies who require assistance in leveraging technology to maximize inbound marketing efforts. Our secondary revenue stream is from venture and investment companies looking to invest in marketing technologies. Our third revenue stream is sponsorship and affiliate marketing – but that is reinvested into further promotion of the blog. Our blog’s primary purpose is to help marketers. It always has been, it always will be. Having sponsors is a solid signal to our audience that the content we’re generating is of value.

      That said, Jay’s post is correct in one respect. His focus is laser sharp and it’s outstanding. Ours is more broad. The other aspect of that, though, is that Jay’s niche is focused on social media and he attracts social media readers. I believe that the average behavior of a visitor on Jay’s blog is much more apt to promote his content than the folks that promote content on the Marketing Technology Blog.

      Great post, Jay!

      • kyleplacy

        @douglaskarr I wasn’t speaking on behalf of your company but your blog. I understand your primary revenue for DK New Media is not ad revenue. However, you do sell more targeted ads with more traffic.. or am I wrong? My apologies if that is not correct. I did state in the previous comment that it was an assumption.

        • douglaskarr

          @kyleplacy The Marketing Tech Blog is still our primary vehicle for leads for DK New Media, so yes… you’re still wrong. :) As for traffic, it’s something we monitor but is not a priority. It’s why you don’t see us writing about the ‘next big thing’ or using news link-baiting techniques. We would rather sacrifice traffic than sell out for big numbers. Our goal is that you should be able to visit the Marketing Tech blog on a daily basis and learn something you may be able to apply to your own marketing efforts.

  • http://www.arielmarketinggroup.com/ AmyMccTobin

    I’ve thought about this again and again as I blog for Small Business Owners. By their very nature they wear many hats, have many concerns. Sometimes my posts are motivational, a lot of them are about Social Media Marketing for small biz, and some are on pure Sales.

    I’ve often thought that I need to split them – have a straight Soc. Media for small business, have a separate Sales Blog, and an entirely separate Bus. Motivational Blog. The only road block has been time to provide content to each blog….

    Now I will spend the rest of the day thinking about it MORE. :)

  • TrishJones

    Thanks for this great reminder, Jay,

    I confess, I’ve deviated from this somewhat over the past couple months and, I’m noticing that my subscribers are not the same quality and, I’ve been getting fewer … back to focusing me thinks!

  • http://www.elliottshultz.com/ ElliottShultz

    There are some great local cover bands (wide appeal) who can draw a big crowd, but no-one is buying the album.

    “Good Morning America” definitely has more total viewers than my local Fox59, but I wager the local news gets watched longer than GMA because people want information that is specific to their interests (i.e. local weather and traffic).

  • skooloflife

    Jay,

    OVer the last few days I’ve been rereading Made to Stick and they talk about the importance of identify your core in order to make your message stick. For months, when people asked me what my blog was about I would say personal development, self help, self improvement, and those kinds of things. IT was a vague answer. Then I thought about what the Skool of Life is really about and I said “The things you should have learned in school but never did.” What I realized is that is a much easier message for somebody to spread. To me, when you get narrow it serves as great way to fuel your content, but give somebody an easy way to remember you. The real test to me is if that person has an easy enough time remembering your tagline or theme so they can tell somebody else.

  • hanelly

    Amen, Jay. The nicher the richer.

  • http://monicahemingway.com/ Monica Hemingway

    I think you’ve hit the nail on the head here Jay. It’s human nature to want to hear more about ourselves – which means a blog focused on the topic(s) of interest to a particular person will cause that person to keep coming back for more. It becomes a “must read” blog, as opposed to a “nice to read once in a while just to see what they’ve posted recently that might be of interest to me”. Must read = subscribe so I don’t miss anything. Pretty simple.

    But I think Kyle also raises a good point. The narrowly-focused blog only works if increasing subscribers helps you achieve your business goals. If more traffic works better, then a broader fan base (and more diverse topics) is probably a better option.

  • briandshelton

    Jay, even without citing hard data to support it, you’re spot on that narrower focus breeds “fewer visitors, more sharing, more subscriptions.” It stands to reason because those are the hallmarks of a niche – by narrowing focus you are tapping into what that (smaller) group of people are most interested in and most passionate about. Consequently, they are much more interested in consuming related content and in having conversations about it.

  • karenbdc

    Jay – I am with you completely on this one but I don’t have any real evidence. I do know that K D Lang talked about this topic from a music career perspective at SXSW in 2006. Her theory of building an audience was circles. Your local market is the center and then you tour in ever widening circles outward from that center. You build a market by going back to the same venues over and over again until your audidence is too big for that venue, and then you move to a bigger venue, and at the same time you are widening your circle and moving to new markets. To me that totally makes sense and I know other (Canadian) musicians who are following the same road – just as you mentioned with your examples.

    The music industry is a good parallel to blog audience because there is a never ending supply of great music because the barriers to entry in that industry are gone. No one needs a record label to record – they just need a computer. Distributing that music – completely easy. Making money from it – a different matter.

    Just as we used to need a publisher to get our written word out there and now we don’t. We just need a keyboard.

    Have fun with this topic!

    • NickSweeney

      @karenbdc Great point, Karen. Steve Poltz has said the same thing about circles when it comes to touring. I think the circle idea is a great way to not only engage your niche (your original circle), but also grow into other related areas. Focus is great, especially when you can really dive into a specific subject. But if you’ve been blogging for years on say, fly fishing, it’s only a matter of time before you either a) scrape the bottom of that barrel; or b) get bored.Circling allows a blogger to grow as a writer and a person. It’s a very rare (and extremely boring) person who has only one interest. But a lot of interests feed into other related niches.

      My $.02.

      Oh, and Bob Schneider is the man.

  • Neicolec

    This makes a lot of sense to me. Would love to see it validated through some research, though I supposed it’d be hard to do an apples-to-apples comparison and eliminate other factors.

  • nrobins1

    Yes, that would be an interesting study to find the relative correlation to topic and subscriber/traffic. Makes sense though.

  • mattmedeiros

    I need to start getting more focused. It’s tough when you have so much to say ;)

  • susanbaier

    Jay, this makes complete sense to me because it mirrors what I see every time i do an audience segmentation research initiative for a client — consumers are much more engaged with content and messages that appeal directly to them, and the appeal of any given product, service or brand can vary dramatically between audience segments. My only disagreement with your post is that I’m not sure a group approach to blogging is NECESSARILY a recipe for less engagement — especially if the bloggers involved all speak to a particular (and narrow) content area and have expertise that relates to in. In fact, this may in fact increase engagement because it speaks to the blog’s collective depth of expertise in a particular topic area.

    I’d love to figure out a way to do this research with you — I have my thinking cap on!

    Thanks for another thoughtful, practical post.

    • http://www.lancasterpablog.com/ danielklotz

      @susanbaier I’m in love with one thing The Atlantic is doing with its online presence, and I wonder how it can be translated to work for blogs rather than periodical publications. With The Atlantic, a single author writes a cover story (e.g. The Shame of College Sports), and then online, a diverse group of writers are invited to response to aspects of that article with blog posts (see How To Fix College Sports). They invite readers to jump in in the comments and with a Twitter hashtag.

      In that case, I subscribe to The Atlantic because individual authors regularly contribute exceptional journalism. I get engaged because of how they bring in other writers.

      When we’re talking about a single-author blog, can that blog be the Atlantic cover story that spurs engagement by inviting other writers to contribute thoughtful responses in a panel structure? I think the possibilities and parallel probably extend beyond guest blog posts and active comments.

  • http://www.aweber.com/blog/ justinpremick

    Jay,

    Thanks for starting this discussion. Overall, I think what you’re saying makes a lot of sense.

    What I’m interested in is whether periodic strategic deviations from that focus – in the name of getting more traffic – can also lead to more (quality) subscribers.

    Would-be subscribers have to find you somehow, after all, and while WOM from existing subscribers is a powerful method of reaching new people, there are people out there who you’re not going to reach (at least, not in a timely fashion) that way, who you could potentially be getting to your site through a post that deviates somewhat from that narrow focus while staying relevant to the sort of people who fit your audience profile.

    Would be curious to get your (and anyone else’s) thoughts on this…

    • susanbaier

      @justinpremick Justin — it seems to me that what you need to gain more traffic isn’t necessarily to divert from a specific focus, but instead to carry that focus to a broader audience — basically, exposing your core content to more people likely to find it relevant. That would require a good understanding of who those folks are and what motivates them — and some insight as to where you’re likely to find them — but it seems to me would be a better path to still highly engaged but more significant traffic numbers, rather than broadening (and maybe watering down) your message to get more folks who might not find your core expertise as relevant to them.

  • http://www.lancasterpablog.com/ danielklotz

    I agree with your analysis. Another telling stat is SEOmoz Domain Authority. Yours is 75, compared to Doug’s 55. That fits in with newspaper examples. USA Today is a mile wide and an inch thin, so it’s widely read but not cited very often and not considered authoritative. The Financial Times is the opposite.

  • ValerieStrohl

    Agree. I will also say it takes more time to penetrate the narrow topic arena, but we can’t have it all. But for example, I blog on disabilities. My readership doesn’t come even close to you or Doug, but my retweet percentage is pretty high. The people who read my blog are passionate about disabilities and their loyalty shows.

  • kyleplacy

    @douglaskarr – I wasn’t speaking on behalf of your company but your blog. I understand your primary revenue for DK New Media is not ad revenue. However, you do sell more targeted ads with more traffic.. or am I wrong? My apologies if that is not correct. I did state in the previous comment that it was an assumption.

  • OnlineBusinesVA

    I need to work hard and spend more time on my twitter and thanks Jay for this awesome post.

    Shilpi Singha Roy http://www.online-business-virtual-ssistant.com/

  • http://intensefence.com/ adamtoporek

    I literally changed my entire blog after 6 months because of the dynamic you discuss above. I was writing about everything, and thus about nothing. (in my case, not Doug’s) Now, I’ve gotten laser focused topically. It’s too early to tell, but it seems to be trending in the way you discuss.

    I think the follow up questions would be 1) which strategy converts better (I would assume narrow) and 2) which has the better ROI, i.e. does the lower conversion rate on a higher traffic base come out ahead of the higher conversion rate on a lower traffic base. The last one is probably impossible to measure because its apples and oranges.

  • t.greaves

    I bet research would confirm your hypothesis that blogs with narrow scopes have a higher percentage of subscribers than those with broad scopes, and vice versa in terms of traffic. Blog audiences are intrinsically segmented. Readers seek out bloggers who share their views and opinions on specific topics. They tend to subscribe to blogs that validate and reinforce their opinions. Bloggers who routinely vary their focus or stance attract a wider following, but they are less likely to hold people’s attention. Bloggers with a more narrow focus better maintain their reader’s interest because the readers already agree with what the blogger has to say.

    • douglaskarr

      @t.greaves I’m pretty sure the Huffington Post, TechCrunch and Mashable alone prove that having wide scopes can be successful. Key is the quality of the content.

      • daduneverhad

        I was hanging with you until you mentioned Huff and “quality” in the same paragraph.

  • jaybaer

    @ArgylePR thanks guys!

  • http://www.janwong.my/ janwong

    It will be great if there is a research on this matter as it can work in both ways. While it is true that blogs with narrow scopes can have a higher % of subscribers, blogs with wide scopes may have a better % of converting visitors into subscribers. I would love to find out more if anyone has already done a research of this matter.

  • DaraBell

    @lisaarthur I feel this too Lisa. The broader the better without being vague.

    • lisaarthur

      @DaraBell It’s a tough balance to strike, but those who can pull it off tend to be handsomely rewarded.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone said: For marketers, the “inconvenient truth” isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the silly notion that he’s important – and, even sillier still, that he’s unique.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal and (b) it can’t be scratched unless you can reach it.

    Scratch MY itch, and I’ll subscribe to your back-scratcher.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone said: For marketers, the “inconvenient truth” isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the silly notion that he’s important – and, even sillier still, that he’s unique.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal and (b) it can’t be scratched unless you can reach it.

    Scratch MY back (not someone else’s), and I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone said: For marketers, the “inconvenient truth” isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the silly notion that he’s important – and, even sillier still, that he’s unique.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal and (b) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I come to your blog because I have an itch that I can’t scratch for myself.

    So – if you’ll scratch MY back (not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone said: For marketers, the “inconvenient truth” isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the silly notion that he’s important – and, even sillier still, that he’s unique.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog because I have a (specific) itch that I can’t scratch for myself.

    If you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: For marketers, the “inconvenient truth” isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique. Tongue in cheek, of course, but a rephrasing of another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers”.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog because I have a (specific) itch that I can’t scratch for myself.

    If you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: For marketers, the “inconvenient truth” isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique. Tongue in cheek, of course, but a rephrasing of another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers”.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog because I have a (specific) itch that I can’t scratch for myself.

    It’s hard enough to scratch AN itch, let alone dozens. But if you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: For marketers, the “inconvenient truth” isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique. Tongue in cheek, of course, but a rephrasing of another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers – except me, of course”.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog because I have a (specific) itch that I can’t scratch for myself.

    It’s hard enough to scratch AN itch, let alone dozens. But if you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: For marketers, the “inconvenient truth” isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique. Tongue in cheek, of course, but a rephrasing of another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers – except for me, of course”.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog because I have a (specific) itch that I can’t scratch for myself.

    It’s hard enough to scratch ONE person’s itch, let alone tens or hundreds of thousands. But if you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: “For marketers, the inconvenient truth isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique.” Tongue in cheek, of course, but it restates another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers – except for me, of course”.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog because I have a (specific) itch that I can’t scratch for myself.

    It’s hard enough to scratch ONE person’s itch, let alone tens or hundreds of thousands. But if you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: “For marketers, the inconvenient truth isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique.” Tongue in cheek, of course, but it restates another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers – except for me, of course”.

    A niche is an itch. And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog and invest my time reading it because I have a (specific) itch that I really need you to scratch. I can’t reach it myself.

    It’s hard enough to scratch ONE person’s itch, let alone those of tens or hundreds of thousands. But if you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: “For marketers, the inconvenient truth isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique.” Tongue in cheek, of course, but it restates another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers – except for me, of course”.

    A niche is an itch that demands scratching (if not, it’s not a niche itch). And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s very specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog because I have a (specific) itch that I can’t scratch for myself.

    It’s hard enough to scratch ONE person’s itch, let alone tens or hundreds of thousands. But if you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: “For marketers, the inconvenient truth isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique.” Tongue in cheek, of course, but it restates another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers – except for me, of course”.

    A niche is an itch – and one that demands scratching (if not, it’s not a niche itch). And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s very specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog because I have a (specific) itch that I can’t scratch for myself.

    It’s hard enough to scratch ONE person’s itch, let alone tens or hundreds of thousands. But if you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: “For marketers, the inconvenient truth isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique.” Tongue in cheek, of course, but it restates another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers – except for me, of course”.

    A niche is an itch that demands scratching (if not, it’s not a niche itch). And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s very specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog and invest my valuable time reading it for one reason – because I have a (specific) itch that I’m hoping you’ll scratch for me. I can’t reach it myself.

    It’s hard enough to scratch ONE person’s itch, let alone those of tens or hundreds of thousands. But if you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • daduneverhad

    Someone (Seth Godin?) said: “For marketers, the inconvenient truth isn’t global warming. It’s the fact that each and every customer entertains the ridiculous notion that he’s important – and, even more silly, that he’s unique.” Tongue in cheek, of course, but it restates another observation: “The Internet is a cesspool of self-absorbed attention-seekers – except for me, of course”.

    A niche is an itch – and one that demands scratching (if not, it’s not a “niche itch”). And like any itch, (a) it’s intensely personal, (b) it’s very specific, and (c) it can’t be scratched unless you – or someone else – can reach it. I (personally) come to your blog and invest my valuable time reading it for one reason – because I have a (specific) itch that I’m hoping you’ll scratch for me. I can’t reach it myself.

    It’s hard enough to scratch ONE person’s itch, let alone those of tens or hundreds of thousands. But if you’ll scratch MY back (and not someone else’s), I’ll scratch yours.

  • Carl Friesen

    One implication of “go narrow” is that writers must be certain that their content meets the needs of that narrowly-defined group of people. It helps if they’re part of that narrow definition themselves (say, an independent retailer writing for independent retailers) but if they’re part of a Microsoft team writing for indie retailers, they’ll need to do a lot of research and talk with a lot of people in their target group. Otherwise, they risk sounding out of touch, as well as not meeting their target’s needs. This isn’t new, of course – editors of specialty magazines “live” in their readers’ worlds vicariously, whether that world involves plumbing supplies, polo or corporate finance. They do it by going to conferences, voracious reading (including blogs) and a lot of lunches out.

  • http://nickwestergaard.com/ NickWestergaard

    I agree 100% Jay on narrow vs. broad. The thing about narrow is … it’s scary for people to commit to a narrow position in business and especially in blogging where you need to produce a consistent stream of content. “If I go narrow – what if I run out of things to say???” But, as you note, I think the rewards are tenfold as you can reap greater rewards in terms of subscribers. Great post!

  • toshibaburton

    Thanks for sharing this post I have definitely learned something new that makes a lot of sense.

  • letstalkandchat

    great article. i learned so much from reading blogposts in this site. will be checkin once in a while for new info. thumbs up!

    I just found a great company that builds websites for info products. To keep your costs low, they’ll mentor you on how to create your site, design a marketing funnel (one of the guys works in Hollywood and makes really slick videos), and the other guy programmed Myspace. If you’re looking to have professional web design for your small business and not waste any time or money then check their site out. Check them out: http://www.mikelmurphy.com/easy-info-product-site-system/

  • MidlifeMona

    Thanks for the great reminder that the riches are in the niches. It’s so easy to try to give everybody everything and you end up exhausted and undermonetized

  • J.G. Howard

    Interesting. Did you begin a research project on this matter? It appears from comments you wrote this about a year ago, but I don’t see a dateline in your post. I’d like to learn what you found.