Some years ago I had a business doing techno raves and I hardly made any money from it. (lots of beers and girls though) Then I started doing boring stuff, and I realised something important:
The more interesting or cool a niche is, the more people will flock to fill it. Which results in lower income for each business owner. Just look at artists, musicians and DJ's. Lots of girls, fun and beer. But on average, not a lot of money.
On the contrary I know people that are in the furniture moving business that make insane amounts of money. Why? Because it is a shitty business and nobody wants to do it.
Basically it's about supply and demand - the more people that want to pursue a career in a given niche the less the average businessowner will make in that niche.
So you should all stop doing ultracool social network apps and start doing boring ERP systems. If you want to make money that is. ;-)
This is almost completely wrong. In any major city most furniture movers are on the verge of bankrupcy because it is so easy to set up a furniture moving business. You just need a truck and some dudes who will work for $15/hr.
In contrast, if you are a broke musician it means you aren't any good, or you are playing music nobody likes, or you live in a place where nobody cares about music.
I can't comment on your data, only draw conclusions on my empirical knowledge. Maybe things are different in the US. (I assume you live in the US with that username)
And according to your comment 99.9% of musicians are no good and should find another job. Or else I live in a country where nobody cares about music.
Edit: I just reread the comment and thought it did sound a bit insulting.It wasn't meant to be... :-)
I'm guessing from your name that you're in Menlo Park. And, that might account for the difference in perspective.
In many parts of the country, $15 an hour is seen as really good money for unskilled labor. But, in Silicon Valley, $15 an hour is well below the poverty line. I'm sure that works its way up the economic ladder as well. If a moving company owner can make $60-100k a year, in many parts of the country, that's considered rather wealthy. In Silicon Valley, that would probably be a lower middle class income.
Where my in-laws live, in Toledo, Ohio, there are tons of talented artists and musicians. But while there is a great supply, and no demand from wealthy music lovers to support them. So, while a relative plays in a Jazz band every weekend and packs out the club, he has to keep his day job as a small engine mechanic. The clubs just don't pay enough. It's not that people don't like his music. It's that there is no money in that part of the country for skills. It's a lot harder to pay musicians when you're charging $2 for a beer instead of $8 for a mixed drink, or $120 for dinner and drinks for two at Yoshi's in San Francisco.
I'm assuming that if he move to the Bay area, where there is a lot more demand for Jazz, he might be able to make a decent living by playing clubs.
I know the owner of a moving company. He has a large mansion in the hills of Santa Barbara (with fake-rock landscaped pool, etc.), plus a large ranch in Utah (which he bought after he sold his beach house).
In my personal experience (working as a mover for four years during college) the drivers made a good yearly take. It really depended on the driver but there were some making 200-300k in a good year
There's a coastal bay town in the UK called Brighton where furniture moving is very profitable. This may be because distance travelled is very small and this allows a greater number of tasks to be completed without diminishing value.
"For anyone, no matter what age they are, if they find something they truly love, write about it. You have nothing to lose but time. And it could really pay off."
Geeks are a niche market, except apparently on the Internet (too many geeks, too many sites (gizmodo, boingboing, techcrunch, etc.).
Take a look at online poker instruction sites - a very good niche market if you have the credentials - people are competitive and will pay $10 or more a month for the edge.
If you truly like doing something obscure, there are other people who probably like doing it. And if you take the lead (important) and build a community/blog, you reap the rewards.
It's nice to know for every ShoeMoney.com, there are hobbyist sites that are making hundreds if not thousands in supplementary cash flow.
Interesting story, but Niche Geek scraped this plagiarized story from another blog. Give credit where it's due, and recognize that the original source -- USA Today -- probably does have contacts with Google PR.
My question is, as an advertiser, is it worth advertising with google if they pay out so much to fraudulent clicking? Everyone's seen those spam sites laden with google ads. Yet somehow many of them make money. Fraudulent clicking.
I'm sure they're real. In addition to the headline stories about big $$$, there's this:
Scott says she posted an unsold novel on Google and earns about $5 a month from the AdSense ads on the site. Al Needham, 74, who runs a site about the care of bees (bees-online.com) from his home near Boston, reaps about $250 a month.
"Forget about getting rich overnight," says Alonzy. "It takes time to learn."
--
There are bajillions of AdSense customers, so some of them are making bank and most are making squat. I don't know that it's easy to make money from an adsense site, but if I were doing it, I would NOT make a geek site. Geeks don't like to click (heck, I use AdBlockPlus so I don't even see them!).
A very interesting read, even though it was just a press release about the study, not the full results.
-----
Full findings of the study, its methodology and results are being presented this afternoon at the iMedia Brand Summit in Coconut Point, Florida.
----
Dogbert recommends golf because it is on the intersection of people with too much time, too much money and no taste. I'm sure that they'd click on your ads.
Yes. If you're the definitive source of something say, "switching mode power supplies," writing lots will instantly get you to the top of google for those words. Also to note is that the articles on the site probably address other parts, tools and other such things, so contextual advertising will potentially bring in some competitive ads, and thus pay out big, potentially even with little traffic.
From the article: "I put in two, maybe three hours a day on the site, and the checks pour in," he says. "What's not to like?"
My first reaction was that if you spend three hours per day and earn a huge amount of money then why not spend six hours per day and earn twice as much money? He cannot do that because he's maxed his niche. Any additional effort obtains diminishing returns and he cannot scale this success as a business with employees.
"Any additional effort obtains diminishing returns and he cannot scale this success as a business with employees."
Most webmasters who make money operate more than one website (usually by themselves) and if they need more work done, they simply outsource it by hiring writers (if it's a content site), having someone do some PHP work, etc.
I guess this is why most webmasters make a lot more money than the average hacker here. It seems a lot of those on Hacker News fall into the "build one site, one unique idea, pitch it to an investor, form a company for this single website, receive a lot of money and try to monetize it later" idea and waste a lot of time on something that probably won't work, or, if it does, take an incredibly long time to see any returns. In contrast, most of the people making real money don't worry about forming a company (until they start to make enough money to justify it), do everything themselves, and don't try to build the next "killer web app" (most probably have limited programming knowledge) but instead create useful websites that they can monetize via AdSense and CPM networks right away while working on SEO and building content.
But it's hard to imagine 75 year olds worrying about SEO. The people described in these stories seem to be just putting up websites to occupy time and have something to do. The little known fact about SEO is that if you have tons of great content, it doesn't matter what SEO you do, you'll get search traffic.
yeah but they are using blogs so virtually all the on page SEO is done automatically (title tag, H1 tag, URL etc) if they are creating good content they'll get links - hey presto
No. There's tons of people (even a lot of teens) who make very good money via AdSense and other CPC/CPM ad networks by creating useful content websites instead of thinking they need $20,000 from an "investor" to build a techie-related website.
But it's also likely that someone inside Google kicked this off by compiling a list of sites which do make that kind of money, then suggesting it to the press.
I.e., the "get-rich-quick" loving press probably had no idea that some (albeit probably very small number of) people make that kind of money from their Google ads until someone from Google told them.
Some years ago I had a business doing techno raves and I hardly made any money from it. (lots of beers and girls though) Then I started doing boring stuff, and I realised something important:
The more interesting or cool a niche is, the more people will flock to fill it. Which results in lower income for each business owner. Just look at artists, musicians and DJ's. Lots of girls, fun and beer. But on average, not a lot of money.
On the contrary I know people that are in the furniture moving business that make insane amounts of money. Why? Because it is a shitty business and nobody wants to do it.
Basically it's about supply and demand - the more people that want to pursue a career in a given niche the less the average businessowner will make in that niche.
So you should all stop doing ultracool social network apps and start doing boring ERP systems. If you want to make money that is. ;-)