Market pre-research dealing with a future-state competitor

[The Kloser]

Hello,

I was looking at an industry/market that I'm highly motivated to enter with a mid-level site build (wherever that means) and while performing some competition analysis, I run across this one site with the same concept closing that market gap. This site is about 1 year old with content been published weekly but nothing that you can not compete against with the right team in place.

To add a little context:

- I will be formatting the content close to this competitor been doing
- I will be going after the same set of keywords he has researched
- Site structure will be close with some new CATs that I plan to add
- Monetization is the same vanilla (ads/aff links)

Will this be an issue?

 

[The Kloser]

After reading this post by @Mr Potato I'm not going to pursue this unless I'm 100% committed to it. Able to add value beyond the 2K words article written for the BoFU because that was the plan

It's been a while since I launched a new project (2 years) obviously things have changed drastically when it comes to online businesses and most importantly where the energy/time should be spent and not just the money

​

 

[Ryuzaki]

I'm not going to pursue this unless I'm 100% committed to it.

This is what it's really about. You don't have to change the world. Very few projects do that, globally, in any generation. All we have to do is offer value.

And that can be something as mundane and simple as connecting internet users to high quality businesses, products, and services. It can be offering your own product or service. Your product may simply be informational content that users read for free. Or being able to offer them a generic product for cheaper than everyone else.

Several times a year here on BuSo someone randomly is like "I just sold a site for over a million bucks, several million bucks, six hundred thousand" etc. None of these sites do anything more than what I'm describing above.

But if you earn a million during the operation and growth of a site and then sell it for a million, you've created more value for the planet than most people in our generation that won't create multiple millions in value their entire lives.

My point is, I agree that if you aren't 100% in on a project, there's no point because it won't create enough of a value impact to your wallet in a life changing way (because it doesn't impact others at that level of value). You can also go 100% in on the wrong project which is doomed before it starts too.

But at the same time, not every project has to be the moon shot. If you listen to people that continually move the goal posts while not achieving these things themselves, you'll never create any value.

As long as a project isn't doomed from the start, any idea is better than inaction. It's only with action that ideas, theories, and concepts earn money and become real world entities with an actual existence. A shitty EMD site that makes $5 a day produces more value than people flogging their log and derailing conversation talking about all the "what ifs" of running an SEO site like it's a Fortune 100 company.

A doer doing and talking about what they're doing is 1000x more advanced than someone in the peanut gallery telling the doer why what they're doing is wrong (while having never done themselves what the doer is doing or the thing the flogger is proposing himself).

Will this be an issue?

As long as you aren't plagiarizing their content, then no. Sounds perfectly fine. It might piss them off, but it's legal and fine.

I'm not going to pursue this unless I'm 100% committed to it. Able to add value beyond the 2K words article written for the BoFU because that was the plan

This doesn't add value and is likely doomed from the start thanks to Google's algorithm, assuming you planned on taking advantage of organic SEO (which everyone should be doing). Definitely don't do a "bottom of the funnel only site". Any sites like this that aren't tanked yet will get their turn.

 

[Philip J. Fry]

But at the same time, not every project has to be the moon shot. If you listen to people that continually move the goal posts while not achieving these things themselves, you'll never create any value.

As long as a project isn't doomed from the start, any idea is better than inaction. It's only with action that ideas, theories, and concepts earn money and become real world entities with an actual existence. A shitty EMD site that makes $5 a day produces more value than people flogging their log and derailing conversation talking about all the "what ifs" of running an SEO site like it's a Fortune 100 company.

A doer doing and talking about what they're doing is 1000x more advanced than someone in the peanut gallery telling the doer why what they're doing is wrong (while having never done themselves what the doer is doing or the thing the flogger is proposing himself).

The whole point of running operations is so that you can divorce yourself from the action doing itself. The sales manager doesn't handle the clients himself. The SEO manager doesn't actually send outreach emails or builds links himself either. By divorcing yourself from the action, you are able to increase your output. So, what you can do in 40 hours of work by yourself becomes what 4 people can do in 160 hours of work, when you manage the spreadsheet, procedures, cash flow, reviews, and so forth.

Similar to how passive income can be generated from dividends and one can divorce his earnings from his labor with passive income; one can also divorce his action from himself.

If you happen to be someone who has divorced his earnings from his labor, by something such as equity in a company or a profit share or something else, and also divorced your labor from your actual working, then you would have a very leisurely life.