Two Banners is One Too Many

[Boston Guy]

When I'm in Boston, I have a very high speed connection to the Internet and I really don't care how fast a page loads. However, when I'm on the road and connecting over a modem, it's a completely different story.

 

The addition of the new Male Nation banner on the top of every single page has slowed down access to the site significantly, especially since so many of the pages insist on constantly refreshing all of the components at each access.

 

It's been my experience that things are running at about 50% to 60% of the former speed over the past few days. It's slow enough that I now consider whether I want to check in instead of simply doing so.

 

The addition of the second banner now makes it more difficult to check out this site discreetly, as well: every single page shows up with two glaring banners with bare male chests and, because the pages won't move until the banners have loaded, paging past them while they are loading is close to impossible. I was in a crowded airline club lounge yesterday and was online for about an hour. But there was no way I was accessing this site with people standing around me. Before, with one, it was possible to do so. Now, it's not and I won't.

 

If the new Male Nation banner is really necessary, I suggest replacing the M4M banner with plain text that will load instantly and will be just a little more discreet.

 

And, on a final note, I personally despise banners that shift back and forth in an effort to attract your eye. I treat them much I like I treat inserts in magazines: I tear out and throw the inserts away without looking at them, as a matter of principle. And I page past blinking banners as quickly as I can get them off the screen and refuse as a matter of principle to click on them.

[+ bigjoey]

my personal rule is to never check on ANY banner; it only encourages the practice. this applies to regular "secular" sites as well as "sex" sites. once you click on. you get pages of "junk mail" back and on some sites you will find yourself in a loop and can not get back at all to the original site.

 

i do realize that these banners help pay for the site. however, i have sent hooboy money and hope others do,too. this keeps down the need for such banners. on the muscleservice site, the popups became so bad i stopped going to that site. recently, they seem to have been removed.

 

in the "secular" world, banners have been a total commercial failure. the click through rate fell to almost zero and the sites that expected to become rich by selling advertising are now about all gone.

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

bigjoey ,

 

"i do realize that these banners help pay for the site. however, i have sent hooboy money and hope others do,too. this keeps down the need for such banners".

 

You are very right on both counts...

[J-Man]

Have you considered installing "AdSubtract"? It's free (http://www.adsubtract.com) and blocks most advertising content. I just checked the "stats" on my AdSubtract filter -- it's already blocked 47 ads just from male4malescorts this morning alone.

[Bilbo]

And another thing about blinking banners - I have two friends, (and if I have two then there are many, many more out there), who are prone to seisures from blinking lights. A blinking banner doesn't always give them seisures, though it could, but it very often gives them headaches, at least.

 

I am reminded of a story. There was a special effect on an animated show in Japan of a blinking light nature and it gave thousands of children strokes. Later, on the nightly news, they wanted to show everyone what they were talking about and showed just a little of it, enough to get a smaller crowd, but still hundreds, to stroke.

[bluenix]

I use WebWasher, a German product originally developed by/for Siemens employees. Pages load faster because WebWasher instructs the host not to download the ad in the first place.

 

The surfing experience is significantly enhanced. Free download at http://www.webwasher.com

 

Which reminds me to make, as someone mentions above, a contribution. I like this site and am happy to oblige. Now the question is, if it isn't too tacky to ask, what the heck constitutes a reasonable contribution?

[Guest AIM]

When Hooboy has the pic showing the tin cup humorously asking for donations, he is criticized. He finds an additional sponsor resulting in the second banner, and again he is criticized. It seems to me that he has been going out of his way to keep this site free! This site has provided a lot of information to clients, extra business for escorts (at least the good ones), and a lot of entertainment for all. But this site has to be financially supported somehow. And it's my understanding that he's not trying to make money, but rather just keep it afloat.

 

I suggest that unless we are willing to pay a monthly access fee to this site, that we be a little more supportive of Hooboy's attempts to keep this site free. I, for one, am not bothered by the second banner (and feel that it is a small price to pay) if it helps support this site and keeps it free. :-)

[Boston Guy]

As an entrepreneur, I'm all for generating revenue. :-)

 

However, I haven't seen the lower of the two current banners (the "HooBoy's male 4 male escort reviews" banner) as being revenue-generating. After all, it's an advertisement for THIS site.

 

Instead, it has always appeared to me to simply be there for aesthetics. That's nice, so long as it was all by itself. If the top banner is a revenue-generating one, however, I'd suggest foregoing the pretty M4M banner in favor of a simpler, faster-loading text item (or small graphic).

 

I don't see how that would affect this site's revenue stream or revenue capabilities at all.

[Justice]

The banners sometimes can be pretty useful, IMHO. First of all they help support this site. (I have sent money to HooBoy ... more than once.) Second, my first escort experience was with an escort who use to work for Maximum Escorts. They used to advertise here. I clicked on their banner, liked what I saw and the rest as they say is history. As for the http://www.malenation.com banner -- well I clicked on it and discovered another escort related message board (it's fairly new so it doesn't have that many posts) and some hot new pictures of one of my favorite escorts. What more can I guy ask for?

[Guest AIM]

>However, I haven't seen the lower

>of the two current banners

>(the "HooBoy's male 4 male

>escort reviews" banner) as being

>revenue-generating. After all, it's

>an advertisement for THIS site.

>

 

Ya know, that's a damn good point! I mean we're already here, right? I guess my point would only apply if BOTH banners were revenue-generating. I stand corrected. :-)

[Guest 7Zach]

Well, after a couple of the posts, i went to the site. Similar in style to here; Hoo, Malenation ur site too?

[HooBoy]

>>>7Zach asks: Hoo, Malenation ur site too?<<<

 

No, they are a paying advertiser.

 

And I just love coming onto my free site and getting tips on how to avoid the ads that keep this site free.

 

Hopefully these freeloaders will remain in the minority.

 

HooBoy

Email: HooBoy@male4malescorts.com

[Guest Tampa Yankee]

"Now the question is, if it isn't too tacky to ask, what the heck constitutes a reasonable contribution"?

 

bluenix,

 

Each of us has to answer that questioin for ourselves but I offer for your condiseration two of a few yard sticks I used to meaure my contribution against. --

 

What is the monetary cost to you of one single unpleasant escort experience (forget the intangible costs). I'm not suggesting this is the right number at all, just that whatever you choose to contribute might be contrasted with it. Another yardstick might be -- What is a reasonable monthly fee for access to all of the information, exictement, and sparkling personalities found here? Multiply by twelve (or six if you might wish to contribute semianually). Whatever you choose to contribute will be appreciated, I'm sure -- and thanks for helping to support this site.

 

Also consider, if you have a favorite escort, sponsoring him by using your contribution $ to place a pic if him in the listing of reviewed escorts by state. Not only does Hoo get the contribution but it does some good for your fav guy (or two). Info on this can be found at the top of the page listing all of the forums on this message board.

[Boston Guy]

test post .. having problems posting anything

[bluenix]

Okay, okay. I started on the paypal thing. Meanwhile, I hope you'll allow that banner ads are and never were a viable Internet business model. Who in his right mind wouldn't avoid advertising given half a chance. Anyhow, what's the big deal about "keeping this site free." Hooboy, look at us poor bastards. We're hooked. This crowd can afford a subscription fee. (And for those between jobs, maybe you can offer scholarships.) ;-)

[Guest 7Zach]

Yeah, and then u can run WINGO type contests to build interest, and the winner gets his choice from the reviews, right?

[Boston Guy]

I haven't suggested that anyone avoid taking steps that bring this site revenue.

 

I have suggested removing a banner that advertises this site alone, can't possibly be a revenue producer and, in combination with the new banner, seems to greatly slow down the delivery of every single page, at least over a modem.

 

I also made note of my personal reaction to blinking banners: I don't like them, because I find them so annoying that I cannot concentrate on the page I am viewing. When I encounter them on any site, I immediately move the page around to hide the animation. If Web experts are to be believed, I am hardly alone in this behavior. This is good feedback and I am sorry you don't view it that way.

 

Marketing a Web site is just that: marketing, not selling. Getting good, honest feedback on site changes is worth its weight in gold. Can you imagine the price most advertisers would pay to have customers tell them what they like and don't like about their ads?

 

The last time I checked, traffic was still important to a Web site. If the design of a Web site changes and that design slows down the site significantly, it will reduce traffic -- every time -- unless the site is deemed critical by its audience and then it will simply frustrate that audience.

 

Most people viewing a Web site will not report changes in the site's performance or in the patterns by which they visit the site. When their frustration reaches a certain level, they will simply disappear.

 

In an article about e-Commerce in the NY Times a few days ago, one of the quoted e-Commerce authorities said "it's more important to be fast than to be right." With Web sites, speed is everything. It may be unfortunate, but it's still true.

 

I like this site and I like visiting it. I like the people I find here. But finding every page loading slowly is already becoming tiring.

 

I am not unfamiliar with the technology underlying Web site creation and maintenance. When the new banner went up, access speed went down and, for me, it is still noticeably slower.

 

My response wasn't to disappear. It was to try to identify the cause of the problem, report it, and make a suggestion that might lead to a solution that seemingly would not affect this site's revenue.

 

Most Web sites consider all visitors critical and all traffic important. Advertising-supported sites, especially, use many approaches to increase traffic, with two goals in mind: that some small part of that traffic will actually click through to paying sites; and that the revenue generated from those clicks will be sufficient to meet the site's goals. Adding a message center to a site is just one way to try to increase traffic.

 

People who take the time to make contributions to a message center that is allied with a site that is advertising-supported are giving their valuable time to support that site. To call people who come to a site and contribute in the message center 'freeloaders', whether or not they are clicking through, is to miss the point entirely.

 

No one expects every visitor to a site to click through. And few sites openly ask for contributions. It's all about traffic: if there is sufficient traffic to maintain interest, some people will click through and some people will contribute. If the traffic dies, the site will too. Consequently, most Webmasters are extremely leery of anything that has even the potential to reduce traffic, including and especially things that slow down delivery of the site's services.