In a comment the other day, I mentioned that I would write a post about the origins of Rain City Guide, and while my initial reaction was to talk about all the different influences that led me to think that blogging about real estate was a great marketing idea, I realized that (1) those influences were already discussed when Andy interviewed me last December and (2) that background is only interesting on a personal level.
So instead, I’ll take a different tack and start with the risks of starting the blog as I saw them… What did Anna and I have working against us when we started blogging about real estate?
- Time: I had a full-time job as an engineer and could only devote a few hours a week to real estate writing
- Knowledge: Both of us were new to real estate and had very little technical knowledge and/or experience to add value to existing real estate discussions
- Money: We had no extra money to devote to the site. Life as a transportation engineer had pretty much tapped out our family budget.
However, I’m rarely one to look at the glass half-empty and instead I looked for ways to benefit from our weaknesses.
[photopress:sashas_shoes.JPG,thumb,alignright]To address the time, knowledge and money issues, the obvious solution was to attract knowledgeable professionals to write for Anna’s site. Not having many resources, my best bet for attracting others was to build something where “they” could directly benefit. Hence, the name change from Homes By Anna to Rain City Guide and a lot of altering of the design to highlight other contributors (like the photos by the side of each post, the photos along the sidepanel, and the listing of recent comments).
This led to the empowering realization that the site was no longer a marketing brochure for Anna’s real estate business, but rather, it was a destination worth visiting in it’s own right… For better or worse, I saw our main competitors being the online real estate section of the Seattle Times, although in retrospect they seem like an easy target. For a blog, we have a lot more freedom than they will ever have to be more controversial, interesting, and up-to-date.
My first steps were to read and study the types of things that the popular bloggers were writing about and how they approached topics. Much of my initial posts were copied from others except I’d add to the conversation by talking about how popular technology and/or marketing issue related to real estate. That strategy worked to my advantage because I definitely felt more confident writing about real estate technology than real estate transactions.
I then sent Anna out to attract additional writers at every opportunity. If she was on one side of a home buying transaction, I made her promise to tell the other agent about the site and see if they would be interested in writing on RCG. If a mortgage broker delivered a presentation to her office, I made her promise that she was ask him/her if they would write articles for RCG. This continued all through the Summer of ’05.
[photopress:dustins_shoes.jpg,thumb,alignright]The end result was that we dealt with our main disadvantages by getting experts to write for the site. Not only was the writing of these professionals free, but they also had time and added knowledge that went beyond what Anna and I could produce. Ironically, if we were experts, I bet this would have been much more difficult as the contributors would have been more likely to view us as a threat and/or competitor.
However, this set-up was not the panacea. We simply were not attracting enough eyeballs to get enough leads to keep other contributors interested in writing on a regular basis. It really wasn’t until Google began sending us a significant amount of free search traffic in the Fall of ’05 that we were able to attract other real estate professionals.
This brings us to early winter of last year when things seemed to be pretty good. We were getting decent traffic and I noticed that people started to link to RCG as a real estate resource. And then Ardell happened. It won’t surprise any long-time RCG reader to hear that when Ardell started frequenting the comment section of posts, her spunk and insider knowledge brought the energy level of every conversation up a few notches. Right around Ardell’s first posts, the traffic on RCG started to spike and has yet to let up.
Since then, getting people to write for RCG has been much easier (although not as easy as you might think!). I tend to troll all the local real estate blogs and contact the professionals that “get it”. Normally, the promise of more people reading their writing is enough to convince them to join us at RCG, but not for everyone. You might also find it interesting that I’ve never signed an agreement with any of the contributors. About as complicated as things get is that I make a vague promise that if they are willing to publish on a regular basis, then I will:
- List them as a “Featured Contributor” on the sidepanel
- Add a mini-bio (including their contact information) on the Contributor’s page
I feel pretty darn lucky that we’ve been able to keep things so simple and still have it function. If I had to give any advice to someone interested in starting a similar blog, it would be:
- Keep it simple. Don’t start writing up complicated revenue-sharing plans before you have any revenue!
- Don’t charge for things that should be free (i.e. blogging technology)
- Focus on being interesting!
In the beginning, I had no idea what type of content would make for an interesting real estate blog. It has only been through a ton of trial-and-error that we’ve even approached the level of engaging conversations that occur today. With that said, I feel lucky in knowing that we are still in the primitive ages of real estate blogging and I’m still learning new things every day! 😉
Dustin,
Thanks for your informative article. What do you think it is that caused google to start sending RCG so much free traffic last year?
Dustin, I curious about how you handle moderating the posts… I’m guessing that even if you don’t moderate the comments, you moderate the actual articles. Are you and Anna the moderators? Or others here?
Do you pretty much let everything in? Have you ever rejected some really dumb article? Did the author of the rejected article have a fit?
Do your contributors email you first to discuss an article they want to write? Or do you just give contributors the password to post articles?
Dustin, I curious about how you handle moderating the posts… I’m guessing that even if you don’t moderate the comments, you moderate the actual articles. Are you and Anna the moderators? Or others here?
Do you pretty much let everything in? Have you ever rejected some really dumb article? Did the author of the rejected article have a fit?
Do your contributors email you first to discuss an article they want to write? Or do you just give contributors the password to post articles?
Harvey,
That’s a great question, and while I don’t pretend to know Google’s algorithms, I may be able to provide some insight.
From Google’s perspective, their search engine is optimized to send traffic to the places where their searchers will be happy. Their first incarnation of this was called PageRank and it based the value of any website based on the number of incoming links. This was a massive improvement, but it turns out it is pretty easy to game (hence, the millions of link directories that real estate agents can pay to be part of)… so Google has gotten much more sophisticated and now pays a lot more attention to the quality of the content (I don’t know how they do this, but for the sake of my argument, let’s assume that they have found ways to quantify this information).
All of this leads to the main point which is that Blogs do a much better job adding useful content on “off topics” (check out my post on The Long Tail for more background)
To give an example of this in practice, I went to the “bottom” of my search stats). Below is a partial list of the 85 or so search terms that people have used today to get to RCG. What I find interesting about this list is that there is really on a few other people on the web who are providing interesting information on these topics:
Harvey,
That’s a great question, and while I don’t pretend to know Google’s algorithms, I may be able to provide some insight.
From Google’s perspective, their search engine is optimized to send traffic to the places where their searchers will be happy. Their first incarnation of this was called PageRank and it based the value of any website based on the number of incoming links. This was a massive improvement, but it turns out it is pretty easy to game (hence, the millions of link directories that real estate agents can pay to be part of)… so Google has gotten much more sophisticated and now pays a lot more attention to the quality of the content (I don’t know how they do this, but for the sake of my argument, let’s assume that they have found ways to quantify this information).
All of this leads to the main point which is that Blogs do a much better job adding useful content on “off topics” (check out my post on The Long Tail for more background)
To give an example of this in practice, I went to the “bottom” of my search stats). Below is a partial list of the 85 or so search terms that people have used today to get to RCG. What I find interesting about this list is that there is really on a few other people on the web who are providing interesting information on these topics:
Cheryl,
I actually try to leave myself out of moderating articles as much as possible.
The exception is for new contributors. I give them rights to “save” but not “publish” articles. But rather than moderating what the new contributors say, I mostly use this buffer to give them ideas on how to improve their articles. Typically, I might suggest additional links, remind them to use the spell check, and/or let them know how to add photos.
However, once a contributor has successfully posted a few articles, I then give them authority to post at will. There are tons of articles I’ve cringed at when I first see them published, but that is par for the course and part of what I think makes RCG interesting.
For two of the contributors, I’ve even bumped them up to “editor” status so that they can edit articles and comments. This is great for me because I go through phases when I’m simply too busy to play the editor role, so there are others available to keep up the site. Obviously, I reserve the right to modify any contributor’s status, but I’ve never had any of them even come close to abusing the system, and I definitely don’t anticipate any problems into the future. I wouldn’t bring them on unless I thought they were good people! 🙂
Cheryl,
I actually try to leave myself out of moderating articles as much as possible.
The exception is for new contributors. I give them rights to “save” but not “publish” articles. But rather than moderating what the new contributors say, I mostly use this buffer to give them ideas on how to improve their articles. Typically, I might suggest additional links, remind them to use the spell check, and/or let them know how to add photos.
However, once a contributor has successfully posted a few articles, I then give them authority to post at will. There are tons of articles I’ve cringed at when I first see them published, but that is par for the course and part of what I think makes RCG interesting.
For two of the contributors, I’ve even bumped them up to “editor” status so that they can edit articles and comments. This is great for me because I go through phases when I’m simply too busy to play the editor role, so there are others available to keep up the site. Obviously, I reserve the right to modify any contributor’s status, but I’ve never had any of them even come close to abusing the system, and I definitely don’t anticipate any problems into the future. I wouldn’t bring them on unless I thought they were good people! 🙂
Cheryl,
Dustin does not moderate my posts and they hit “real time” as soon as I “hit the button”. I expect we all “self moderate” to some extent, I know I do.
Once in a while I do a “Trifecta” of posts, but generally I try to monitor myself with regard to “space” between my posts. Space not being “time” but other contributors’ articles in between mine. I look at the cumulative product, in deciding when to post and when not to post, like a big “Dagwood Sandwich”.
Sometimes two of us “hit the button” at the same time. But generally we can see the “layers” of the sandwich” we are building. When choosing a topic, I try to mix up “industry talk” with “consumer issues” with “technology” posts. And, of course, a little comic relief or “fluff” piece, when the tension gets thick over a controversial subject.
I don’t think Dustin even knows that I’m doing that, and I doubt he’s envisioning RCG as a “big Dagwood Sandwich”, the concept probably being “before his time” 🙂
My dilemma surfaces when I butt heads with the attorneys. Butting heads with Robbie on mls viewed as “data” vs “the mls as a cooperative body of people”, offers some good techie viewpoint/consumer viewpoint/agent viewpoint scenarios. Seeing the mls through different colored glasses can be quite interesting. But some of the exchanges between Craig and Russ have been difficult for me, Craig moreso than Russ, but both of them more than me and other contributors. You’d think it might be two agents butting heads…but didn’t turn out that way…so far.
Cheryl,
Dustin does not moderate my posts and they hit “real time” as soon as I “hit the button”. I expect we all “self moderate” to some extent, I know I do.
Once in a while I do a “Trifecta” of posts, but generally I try to monitor myself with regard to “space” between my posts. Space not being “time” but other contributors’ articles in between mine. I look at the cumulative product, in deciding when to post and when not to post, like a big “Dagwood Sandwich”.
Sometimes two of us “hit the button” at the same time. But generally we can see the “layers” of the sandwich” we are building. When choosing a topic, I try to mix up “industry talk” with “consumer issues” with “technology” posts. And, of course, a little comic relief or “fluff” piece, when the tension gets thick over a controversial subject.
I don’t think Dustin even knows that I’m doing that, and I doubt he’s envisioning RCG as a “big Dagwood Sandwich”, the concept probably being “before his time” 🙂
My dilemma surfaces when I butt heads with the attorneys. Butting heads with Robbie on mls viewed as “data” vs “the mls as a cooperative body of people”, offers some good techie viewpoint/consumer viewpoint/agent viewpoint scenarios. Seeing the mls through different colored glasses can be quite interesting. But some of the exchanges between Craig and Russ have been difficult for me, Craig moreso than Russ, but both of them more than me and other contributors. You’d think it might be two agents butting heads…but didn’t turn out that way…so far.
There’s a good example of “two of us hitting the button” at the same time.” I don’t recall my articles ever going to SAVE for Dustin to monitor. Not even my very first one. And I’m quite sure some of my articles caused a bit of cringe.
Here is our initial exchange: We did not know each other at all at the time of these intitial emails.
_
Dustin asks: Ardell, I just checked out your blog and it looks like you’ve got a good thing going… I’ve been thinking of branching Rain City Guide to cover more Eastside real estate issues… If you’re interested in becoming Rain City Guide’s Kirkland expert, we should talk about what options might be available… The only real benefit to blogging on Rain City Guide as oppose to your own site is that I get quite a bit of traffic, so you’d get a lot of exposure quickly. (Plus, I’ve got a pretty advance back-end that makes blogging quite easy…). Best,Dustin
Ardell replies: I would certainly like to discuss it. But my entries can be somewhat controversial. See my latest beginning a series on the DOJ suing NAR. Would you control my content in any way?
_
I do recall my wanting to meet Dustin in person before agreeing to be a contributor, but it just didn’t work out that way. I did invite several to my home for dinner after I started posting, and that helped me view everyone as a team, and those I did meet moreso than those I did not.
As you can see, from my very first response to Dustin’s inquiry, I warned him regarding my controversial style. I likely would not have agreed to be a contributor if his response to whether or not he would control my content was yes. His original idea that I would be posting about “the Eastside”, and what I actually ended up posting about, didn’t quite match up 🙂
Dustin’s focus and mine are fairly far apart, as I am most interested in “speaking to” local people as my audience and Dustin has a much broader audience to address. We have discussed this from time to time and so are aware of the difference as in “he prefers high Google ranking” while I prefer “high MSN ranking”. I guess that’s why his site is more highly ranked at Google and my blogs are more highly ranked at MSN, at least the way I check ranking, which is quite different from the way a techie checks ranking.
If people wonder why I focus on Google instead of the other search engines, this data (showing traffic to RCG as of noon today) should help make sense out of my bias:
Google has sent us 95% of our search-related traffic. MSN, Yahoo, Search.com and Ask add up to 10 hits, whereas google has sent us 196 hits!
If people wonder why I focus on Google instead of the other search engines, this data (showing traffic to RCG as of noon today) should help make sense out of my bias:
Google has sent us 95% of our search-related traffic. MSN, Yahoo, Search.com and Ask add up to 10 hits, whereas google has sent us 196 hits!
Ardell, since you are the expert on Kirkland real estate, and since the Google office is in Kirkland, closer to where you are than the Microsoft campus, shouldn’t you be speaking to Google more? 😉
Maybe RCG isn’t relevant and Google is easily duped? 😉
Although it is interesting that Google has such a disproportionate amount of your search traffic. On the Zearch side, Google only generates 62% of it’s search traffic (Yahoo is about 20%, and everybody fights for what’s left), which is closer to internet averages.
Better hope that Google never changes PageRank to your detriment.
Deadra,
Sorry, missed that one. I can tell you that my clients who work for Google are some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. Is being a really good person a requirement to work for Google?
A larger percentage of my clients work for Microsoft than Google, but I think that’s because Microsoft has a few more employees here on the Eastside than Google 🙂
Deadra,
Sorry, missed that one. I can tell you that my clients who work for Google are some of the most wonderful people I have ever met. Is being a really good person a requirement to work for Google?
A larger percentage of my clients work for Microsoft than Google, but I think that’s because Microsoft has a few more employees here on the Eastside than Google 🙂