Yesterday I aired a gripe about online newspapers not putting links to the websites that they’re talking about in their stories. (Thanks for all the retweets and comments!)

Did you find yourself wondering what kind of traffic one might get from a small story in a big print news source’s online version?

Wonder no more. Here’s the traffic we got from the online version of the boston.com post. That was as of this morning. There will obviously be some more traffic today and over the next few days, but you get the idea.

Here’s the traffic that we got from Time.com a few years ago.

I can’t show you the Staten Island news traffic because they didn’t link to me and I don’t see referrer information in reports. (But look at what the Boston Globe and Time Magazine did and you can do the math.)

There are few actual visitors from online news sources. (Not including front-page stories, I’m sure.)

But here’s what really matters.

Google reads every one of them.
If there’s a link in there, the value is huge.
If there’s no link in there, the value is relatively small.

That and I can show my mom what a success her son has become.

Our halloween costume website has received a few press mentions so far this season, thanks to having a PR person on the case and resources like HARO (Help a Reporter, great service from Peter Shankman, check it out.)

It’s exciting to see our name in print, and I know that every press mention is a great benefit to our business and brand. But at the risk of being accused of looking a gift horse in the mouth, I’m going to gripe for a minute here in hopes that awareness will improve the HARO information economy.

And here it is:

Is it me or are newspaper websites way stingy with their links?

Like this one:

Staten Island Advance – HOMEMADE HALLOWEEN DECK: Scare up some savings this holiday by with these do-it-yourself children’s costumes

This is a great article, and some good coverage for us (and I’m not complaining about that.) But wouldn’t it be useful to their readers to be able to click through on just one of the mentions of the website talked about in the article? They literally suggest that their readers go check out a website but they have to type in the URL.

Quid Pro Quo

I’m not pretending for a minute that I’m just looking out for the readers. Of course I’m interested in getting a link from a newspaper. Because that’s a REALLY good link. But that’s just the point. A newspaper felt that we were cool enough to talk about us, but from a search engine “PageRank” and “TrustRank” perspective it’s lost.

This is what is in it for me.

I realize that the newspapers don’t care about this, but they need to. I spend a good amount of time on the phone with reporters and even follow up with information, photos, etc. They get some pretty great articles (I hope they think so), some quotes, and some fun stuff to share with their readers.

I really don’t want much in return. Just a little link.

Otherwise, HARO becomes less cool.

Learn From the Good Ones

They’re not all bad. Here’s a great one:

Boston.com – Trick or Treat Deals

And here’s the best one ever: Hurricane Hannah (a few years old.)

What’s ironic is that Time.com and Boston.com reporters surely have people falling at their feet. And somehow they manage to give a good experience to their readers AND give something to the website that helped make the story.

Thank you Time.com and Boston.com. I’m sure your readers thank you too.

I’ll happily HARO you any time!

Ian Fernando is spending his money so we don’t have to.

Ian did a really interesting test this weekend on a topic near and dear to me… halloween costumes He tested out pushing costumes via Facebook ads and he learned something. Cost per sale (CPS) is a really tough way to make money on Facebook.

Even after an impressive array of split tests and targeting tweaks, he couldn’t make it pay. He spent about $200 to make $16. A failed campaign by any standard.

In my mind, some of this failure has to do with Facebook in general. Some of this has to do with the costume space. Let’s look at both.

Halloween Costume Traffic is Tricky

Everybody is looking for costume ideas right now, and while there are plenty of people buying costumes, most people are just looking for a great idea on what to be for halloween. This translates into lots of lookers, which is the kiss of death for paid traffic.

In my business, we’ve essentially been forced to stop buying costume traffic this year. Between affiliates figuring this out for themselves the hard way, and the incredible influx of costume merchants driving up prices, the margins are gone.

This year, more than ever, if you have to buy traffic, you’ll be making Google, the merchants, and even American Express, more money than yourself. But hey there’s always Membership Rewards points.

Facebook is for Branding

For the most part, people on Facebook are not shopping. They’re interacting.

It is simply too easy to get people to click on Facebook with a very targeted ad. Ian showed a Dexter costume to Dexter fans. What Dexter fan with Halloween on the brain isn’t going to go take a look at a Dexter costume? Especially if you show them a small thumbnail with the promise of seeing it in full detail behind a click. Even with a high conversion due to the targeting, the lookers will click away any profit that you might have had.

There are some things that Ian might have done to dissuade the lookers. One commenter suggested that he put a price in the ad. Good idea. I’d also suggest changing the language to, “Buy a Dexter Costume” instead of “Come take a look at the officially licensed costume”. But even with these changes, or any changes, it’s too much to overcome.

Ian can also do MUCH better than 10% for costumes, but even if he can squeeze twice that out of a merchant, it’s not enough. His current EPC is off by more than 10x for profitability.

It takes an incredibly high EPC to make money with CPS on Facebook. The offers exist, but they’re not low-ticket items like halloween costumes.

There is a branding benefit at play here, but Ian is paying for the merchant to gain it. This increases the chances that the visitor will eventually purchase from that merchant.

The good news is that Ian is getting a tracking cookie set for each of the visitors, and there will be some longer-term lift to his numbers if he had the luxury of waiting for the return visits (most halloween merchants have 30 or more return days). But even though the branding brought the buyer, he still may not get the sale…

It’s the Economy

Add the economic situation onto all this. More than in recent years people are either making their own costumes or are shopping around for coupons or the best deal they can get. So even if Ian delivered a buyer to the merchant he was promoting. The chances that buyer will be lost to another affiliate from deal and coupon hunting is higher than ever.

Thanks for taking one for the team Ian!