• Gardening Tips
• Growing Plants
• Landscaping Ideas
• Garden Furniture
• Garden Shop

Comments

1. Graham Rice November 6, 2007 at 7:23 am

   Setting aside my supposed prophetic skills… I can’t help but suspect that if the publisher of House & Garden is considered an ideal appointment at glamour.com then perhaps he was not best suited to House & Garden! And as magazines close or suffer financially, are readers continuing to get good, authoritative information (to some extent – but it needs picking out amongst the dross) and are writers making a living from blogs in the same way that we once made a living from writing for magazines (I don’t think so)? .

   Reply

2. Richard Boyd November 6, 2007 at 2:33 pm

   Graham’s observations above are spot on.
   G&H is a PR6 from the UK Stu.
   Also I would be very wary about paying a high purchase price for a site like this as it is part of a “group of sites” owned by C.N., e.g. once sold the links from the group which probably make up the bulk of high PR could be pulled, leaving or rater revealing a lame duck.
   I repeat what I said on Philip Voices blog regarding off line publications. Many are folding or about to fold, due to their failure to see what was/is happening with their readership trends. Basically if they can’t forge an online presence to run alongside their print runs they are/will be fish food.
   Emap are another example of a publishing company who have missed the boat.

   Reply

3. Stuart November 6, 2007 at 3:51 pm

   I echo your sentiments Graham and I’m still a bit miffed as to why garden bloggers aren’t making the money for their advice. My theory is that because blogging is so individual and ‘unorganised’ at the moment, advertisers are less likely to pay the dollars . I wouldn’t be surprised if a network of garden bloggers became the next step in financing the content void that these magazine deaths are leaving behind.
   Richard – great point re: the ‘group’ linking. A quick look at their top linkers shows Wired, Golf Digest, Golf for Women, Portfolio etc – all Conde Nast publications.
   Yet, it would still be a good domain name!

   Reply

4. Sarah November 6, 2007 at 6:24 pm

   I hope gardening magazines don’t all go the same way – I buy my collection of home and garden magazines religiously every month/quarter and always will (although I’m surprised I can afford to do any gardening with what I spend on magazines) I travel a lot for work and they are all that keeps me sane during those interminable hours sitting in airports, on planes and sleepless nights in strange, uncomfortable hotel beds.
   And as much as I love, use and appreciate online content you can’t cut it up, stick your favourite ideas in a scrapbook….or read it on the toilet!

   Reply

5. susan harris November 7, 2007 at 3:23 am

   Stuart, for the less savvy, what’s a PR8 rating?
   And Sarah, with laptops and wireless connections we can now surf on the john!

   Reply

6. Stuart November 7, 2007 at 3:54 am

   Sarah – gotta agree with Susan re: the toilet. And in some absurd way I still agree with you about losing all the magazines. There is something inherently different with reading articles from a glossy mag than reading it online – but I’m dealing with it.
   Susan – PR (PageRank) is the rating that Google was built on. It’s a score between 0 and 10 with ten being the highest. Each site is given a PR from Google to determine it’s ‘value’ in the world wide web. Google uses this score, as well as 100+ other variables, to place sites in their search listings. Most established gardening blogs/sites should at least be a PR4 or 5. PR6 is much harder to attain and 7+ is entering almost impossible territory.
   Pagerank is all based on who links to your site and what ranking they have. Therefore, it’s QUALITY of links over QUANTITY.
   If you want to check your blog(s) then try this tool

   Reply

7. Kim/Blackswampgirl November 11, 2007 at 3:53 am

   Re: Stuart’s comment about being miffed that garden bloggers aren’t so much being paid for their information… I feel the need to point out that this isn’t just the case for garden bloggers. Whether because people don’t see the value of information or because our modern age bombards people with so much “information” that each individual piece of it has become devalued through a supply/demand value assessment, I don’t know. I just see it happening all the time.
   One such example are the people who come into the local garden center where I work to pick the brains of those working there… and then go buy their products at Walmart for a few bucks less.

   Reply

8. Stuart November 11, 2007 at 4:44 am

   Great point Kim. Your assessment of the situation would certainly explain Susan’s disappointment with continued Garden Coaching. Once they’ve had a consultation and paid their $X for the service they will most likely try to source it cheaply in other locations.

   Reply

• Home
• About Stuart
• Search Result

© Copyright 2012 - All rights reserved. Gardening Tips ‘n Ideas