Richard

I can see little sense in having Google Advertising links which act to draw custom away from "your" site ; does Macmillan really need the few pence click-thru re-imbursement ? IMVHO a clean page with few exterior distractions would be a better design.

Also, I cannot understand why some "business" blogs are copyright - as is this one - and not issued under Creative Commons License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/

Talking of Creative Commons we are about to publish a book which will be the first of ours to have a creative commons version available online. The book is Blood, Sweat and Tea and the creative commons edition will be available via our site on publication (18 August). It will be interesting to see how this free online version impacts the sales of the print edition, if at all.

Clive, Macmillan owns The Friday Project (a blook publisher (Blook = Book of a blog).) - I guess if Richard owns Copyright, he can print a blook.

Actually Anne, The Friday Project is not owned by Macmillan - but Pan Macmillan provides sales and distribution services. Strictly speaking, we're not a blook publisher either - only one of our 25 titles this year has been developed from a blog although we do develop our books from web content. It's worth noting too that if you publish material online under a creative commons licence, you don't lose copyright - that remains with you and you can therefore publish that material elsewhere should you so desire.
Back to blooks though: if Richard would like us to consider developing Charkin Blog into a book I'd be happy to look at a proposal!

The reason we went for the Google ads is to LEARN. Making a small amount of money is okay but I did point out that the purpose of the blog is to learn by doing.

The reason we went for the Google ads is to LEARN. Making a small amount of money is okay but I did point out that the purpose of the blog is to learn by doing.

The reason we went for the Google ads is to LEARN. Making a small amount of money is okay but I did point out that the purpose of the blog is to learn by doing.

Richard

I am sure that you are aware of the class action law suit against Google for fraud over Google Ad-Words, the predecessor of the present system.

Unsavoury business, that click-thru fraud,with companies - inc some small businesses - losing "big-time".

In the late 1950's my father walked me along the river towpath near Hurst Park racecourse (long gone to housing) to watch the "Find the Lady" card sharks : taught me plenty. There's scams and there's scams and then there's buziness.

Mr Charkin, Sir,

Google ads in side bar remain a sad thought. I dropped in earlier today and found that the two ads featured were both "self publishing" concerns - surely anathema to you?

Tonight I have a "free, do it yourself" blog ad plus "VivaLaDiva" for shoes. Is it me who is supposedly into shoes, or you Mr Charkin?

Seriously though, and might this be a decent feedback to Google, I ignore the side ads to/from Google as:

1. they still appear as an amateur attachment to preceedings on anyone's site due to format, and

2. I hit a site because I am interested in the content and comments on it, and not the ads.

Never will dear old Google, my great and best www. friend distract me with its advertisements for other sites. I land where I do (site-wise) for a purpose, often thanks to its search facilities.

Richard, (may I call you that?), I say: dump the ads (minuscule sinews at the very least) and concentrate on the matter at hand - your thoughts!

I estimate that a Google ad promo might buy a business lunch in three years' time. Just might! But the reason you have in excess of 30k vists in a month is because of what you have to say.

Keep it coming and I'll keep reading. And thanks for the thought provoking posts.

Just dump them Richard. You`ve learned now.