I listened to two podcast interviews the other day, one with Nathan Hangen and the other with Jordan Cooper. Coincidentally they both talked about the same subject – Twitter clubs (sometimes called “Retweet Clubs”).
If you aren’t familiar with these clubs they are basically groups of people who help each other promote their blog posts by retweeting them. Here is a brief snippet of what each of the guys had to say about them.
You’re now able to lie to yourself by looking at the stats and thinking you’re doing well when you’re really not.
A bunch of fellow marketers and I we usually retweet each others posts… and thats helped me get a lot of traction.
There are plenty of these “Retweet Clubs” around. I’m in at least three of them myself. Basically I agree with both of these guys. There are people out to retweet as many people, and get as many retweets themselves, and then there are people trying to help each other draw attention to their best content and gain new followers and readers.
So what do you think? Are you a member of any of these groups? Do you think they have a place in the internet marketing mix, or do you think they are a sham and a total waste of time?
Image Credit: Flickr
If you found this post useful please leave a comment below. To receive new blog posts automatically subscribe for free to the mailing list or RSS feed.
{ 43 comments… read them below or add one }
BlogcastFM I presume? Did that interview so long ago, I think I forgot everything I said. Hope it was good! lol
Yeah it was a pretty good interview Nathan. In it you mentioned some book you’re co-authoring… something about blogging… hope it worked out well for you ;-)
Oh, and by the way…thank you for letting me be part of the conversation. It’s an honor.
I’m not a fan of retweet clubs at all. The reasoning behind this is, because you’re looking at “false” stats. As bloggers, we need to set out to right quality articles that are WORTH being tweeted. If people just tweet the articles to tweet them, what are we really gaining out of this?
All we know, the articles that are being tweeted just suck. And to go even further, if the persons articles do suck, and you’re only tweeting them just to tweet them, both of you are losing out.
The blogger: Because they are not getting the feedback they need to IMPROVE their article that makes it worthy of reading, so they are only getting hurt in the process.
The tweeter: Because eventually your followers will see that you’re tweeting articles that aren’t worth reading and stop following you and clicking on your tweets.
I’d rather have 20 quality retweets by people who enjoyed my articles, instead of 50 retweets by people who only retweeted my articles just because I asked them to.
And personally.. To end off my rant, I used to be in a “retweet” group, and I never gained anything out of it. I gained more by getting my blog ripped apart my Jordan that helped me become a better blogger.
Hi Rob, thanks for your comment. So what about smaller, more closed groups that help each other out. Do you think those will naturally have a higher quality standard and be more beneficial?
oh yeah, THAT book…it did OK.
Rob,
I think you’re looking at it wrong.
The way I see it is that it’s no different than what companies do when paying for stories on mashable (even though they say it doesn’t happen), Seth Godin getting 50 bloggers to blog about Linchpin the day it launched, and any other marketing tactic that is used to get your foot in the door…and that’s what it’s all about, being able to cut through the noise and get your foot in the door.
From there, if your content sucks, then like any other hack…you fall by the wayside…but if your content is good, then people (who might not have found it otherwise) will start to spread your message and the RT clubs are no longer necessary.
That being said, I wouldn’t ask anyone to RT something that sucks, and I wouldn’t do it for anyone else…that’s why even in my small group, I pick and choose what I promote.
I think were on two different thinking levels. The RT groups I’ve seen, and even some I participated in just re tweeted ALL the articles in the persons group. Half of the time, nobody even read them.
If their is going to be a RT group, let it be a group that RT’s articles that they find of value. Like when I was in a bloggers alliance, we would toss our link into the lounge and tell people to check if out if they want, and if they like it RT it, if they dislike it, tear our articles to shreds and let them know how they can improve it. That way you can get a re-tweet if you article is of quality, and if it isn’t you have feedback on how to improve.
For the companies… if the product is crap, they are not doing themselves any good whatsoever. I like Rackspace’s method of their marketing. They pride themselves in such good hosting that they rely on their customers to promote it. They don’t spend thousands on advertising, or paying companies like Mashable, they rely on their great services to do the marketing.
It’s the same with the affiliate marketing crowd – pitching things the have never used, read, or listened to in full. Values?
The next thing is what happens if those marketers decide to stop retweeting for you? Does your attention drop? Is it only to happen until you reach some type of critical mass for yourself?
@Nathan We all know that people do Retweet crap though. We know this. It’s sad but the mighty dollar signs start flashing over the RT button. You tweet for me and I’ll tweet for you – promise. Then the person gets too busy. *sucks.
A retweet group is fantastic if the entire group is aligned with your beliefs and values. It’s all good then.
PS. Where can I find a retweet group?
Hi Paul,
I hadn’t heard of the podcasts so I’ll be checking them out. My personal opinion is that they are okay, if you keep in mind what their purpose is. If you are sharing other great tweets with your readers and would have done so anyways, then I don’t see anything wrong with that. If you are retweeting non-quality tweets, then you’re not doing anyone a favour, particularly yourself. It is easy to lie to yourself that your articles are so great because they are getting retweeted, but if it’s the same people, is that true? I think they do work, especially if you do not have a huge following on your site and it is just one method of marketing.
What kind of results are/do you get from belonging to 3 of the retweet clubs?
Karen
Hi Karen, the results for me have been mixed. I would echo Nathan that they have helped get me some traction. The groups I’m in seem to have settled into a more useful rythm where people aren’t just blindly retweeting everything from the group and aren’t expecting the same of others.
Personally I think its just another way of discovering new content and blogs. There are bloggers in these groups who I’ve never come across any other way that I now follow and enjoy reading. Hopefully some others can say the same of me :-)
Like it or not, these retweet clubs can expand the potential readership dramatically. If I were in a retweet club (I’m not and have no desire to be) with a combined total of 20,000 followers, there’d be significantly greater clickthrough to an article I posted compared to the potential clickthrough from just my 100-some followers. As @kruby said,it’s just one method of marketing.
However, no matter how many people retweet @guykawasaki, his blog posts don’t interest me. I don’t, however, unfollow folks who retweet him just because of that.
In spite of what Jordan Cooper said in the podcast about monetizing blogs, when I finally get around to building the several blogs I want, they’ll be built as outlets of self expression rather than part of a grand strategy to build a revenue stream. That’s what I appreciate about blogs like John Scalzi’s Whatever (http://whatever.scalzi.com/)… his blog posts are there just to give him a place to say what he wants to say. He’s developed a huge following (~40,000) of people who like to read what he has to say. I’m sure there are some aspects of his blog that bring in revenue but it’s a remarkably “monetization-free” blog.
These clubs are definitely no substitute for genuine quality. You can have as many retweets on an article as Guy Kawasaki gets, but if your article is sucks the traffic will just bounce away and never come back.
The way I get most of my tweets started (I think) is a handful people who I’ve noticed retweet my articles, and I retweet theirs. For me though, it has more to do with being in my niche or my interests – and it has to be a good article =). I figure if I tweet stuff that sucks, my followers will start to tune me out. I also want my twitter stream to reflect who I am, so people can take a look at it, get an idea of what I’m about – and hopefully then check out my blog and sign up
I love nerdy geeky things. I also enjoy reading about social media and blogging. And finally, my niche is personal development, and I like reading other people’s take on the subject.
So I will often retweet people when I’m reading their articles, but a lot of those people are people I found because they retweet me frequently, and it certainly does nudge me to give them preference. For example, in my stream if I see someone has posted a new article, and they frequently tweet my stuff – I’ll probably go check out their article, because it’s probably something I’m interested in – and from there, I’ll likely tweet it.
For the groups I’ve been a part of it does seem that eventually people build their own little quality filter that governs which articles they retweet and which they don’t. Nobody wants to send out low quality or off-topic tweets to their audience all the time, at least not people who value their followers.
I’m not in any retweet clubs. But I have formed alliances. (That’s one of the major benefits of Twitter, after all.) I’m definitely more likely to retweet something from an ‘ally’ than a stranger. But that’s partly ‘cos I’m more likely to see it. And I’ll only ever retweet it if I think it’s worth retweeting. My social media integrity comes before that of my allies!!! :-)
Glenn I suspect those sorts of informal alliances are far more common and more consistent than these groups.
@Paul: First, thanks for the shoutout and linking to the podcast :). I am not part of any of these tweeting alliances to the best of my knowledge. Every now and then I may ask somebody to retweet stuff, but I never force any of it. In fact when I interview people, I assume some amount of people will retweet the interview. But I don’t actually ask anybody to retweet. I’m kind of Jordan’s camp in terms of not wanting to see padded stats. The key I’m aiming for is a highly engaged audience with BlogcastFM. That’s why, if you look at who follows us on Twitter and who we follow back it can be broken down into these groups:
-People We’ve interviewed
-People who commented on the podcast
- People who retweeted one of our interviews
There’s often overlap between those 3 as well. We’ve made a point not to use any mass follow tools and aim for a highly organic growth model. I’m very much a proponent of quality over quantity.
I definitely agree that padded stats are not something to get into these types of groups for. You can get a million retweets but if you get no comments, subscribers, ad clicks, opt-ins, sales, or anything else that you might measure your blog’s success by then its pointless.
I did enjoy those two interviews a lot. Great work by you and your guests.
I’m not sure if I am a fan or not. I belong to one myself. It’s an interesting way to promote blog posts, and to get attention, but on the other hand, you don’t know if what you’ve written is worth the attention. You don’t have any way to measure quality.
I think retweet clubs are ok, but only in order to get attention and more traffic. And, it’s free marketing :)
Another problem is that if a lot of people join clubs like this, you’d never know if what they are retweeting are things they enjoy and suggest you read, or things that they are just retweeting in order to get more traffic themselves. How do you spot quality on Twitter if this happens?
I think over time you just get to recognise certain people and know instinctively whether they tweet quality links or not. If their “quality score” in your mind gets low enough you might even stop following them (I know I’ve done that to some people who offered nothing but low quality links day after day).
These systems can be gamed and no doubt some people take every advantage they can but most of the time quality wins in the long run.
Hi Paul
yes i am in 2 retweet clubs and i like being in them … it gives you a edge over others .. after joining these groups i have obviously increases my followers and blog traffic as well :) so it very helpful for me .
I’m not part of a tweeting club… But it sounds interesting… Are there any good websites or forums you know of that are set up to make these connections?
Hi Brian, they tend to spring up from niche forums. Some bloggers also start their own groups to help out their community. Some Google searches should find those easy enough.
But it seems the most effective alliances come from just normal networking and forming connections on places like Twitter.
I believe they are only as good as the people within it.
Man, why would you need to join a retweet club if you had good content and a good following? Seems to me the only reason to join such a club would be because your content sucked more than your level of follower interaction!
Again, this just seems the same old issue of quality vs quantity and RT club members are being seduced by quantity rather than quality.
Get over it guys, this stuff gets as old as ‘my dad can beat your dad!’
What about if you’ve got great content but no following yet? Would you see these clubs as a way to build followers faster by spreading your content further?
It’s a double-edged sword. It can help you gain online buzz or make you lose followers if you retweet mediocre posts. I read every thing I promote on Twitter. There’s this expectation that you had better filter useful, entertaining stuff. Else you’d just be adding to the noise. When I can’t find a good reason to retweet the post, then I just leave a comment. Or move on.
Hi Jan.
I started out not reading every post I retweeted, but now, I read every single one as well.
Re-Tweet Clubs bring a lot of traffic and gets the momentum started. If you send out the right posts, the results can be big :)
RT Clubs are good for trying to gain traction on Twitter, and trying to gain new followers. But the club only has value if people have the option to tweet only the things that they’re comfortable with. Otherwise, if people are just retweeting stuff without reading it they aren’t doing themselves or the writer any favors.
The choice is upto you, you can tweet really bad stuff, or share something useful, which would require attention and so the retweet club will help you get that
I belong to one retweet group and I only posted a couple of times so far and I must admit I do not retweet much… The reason being is that I want to RT only interesting tweets or tweets that I think might interest others. So I look at the topics and if one or many sound interesting I go and read them then i will send an RT if I think it is worth it instead of tweeting just anything.
I’m in a retweet club and I am very picky about what I’ll retweet (after I’ve actually read the post of course) as the RT is a reflection of my thoughts and opinions and I want what’s be for my readers/followers. Great topic! *huGs* Suzanne
I get the feeling thats how most of the clubs will end up. As long as people post requests with no expectation of being retweeted, retweet the stuff they find genuinely useful and interesting and that their own audience will enjoy, over time everyone would benefit in a genuine way.
Call me incredibly naive, but I didn’t even know these RT clubs existed!?
Having said that, what you said just there about posting without expectation of being retweeted, and retweeting stuff I find interesting & useful & maybe valuable to my followers, seemed the natural thing to do since I started using Twitter a few months ago.
Is there really a great advantage to be gained from belonging to a club, if you are genuine and consistent in what you share? After all, if your own content has value to other people, you WILL get noticed. Or am I being terribly naive again? ;)
Tracy, its a little strange. You would think that interesting stuff would naturally rise to the top, but of course it rarely seems to be true. The reality is that if you can get a little jump start from a club like this then it can really help spread your stuff further.
I liken it a little to Digg. Its supposed to be this great democracy where any website can be a hit but the truth is that getting to the Digg front page is about far more than just having good quality content for most people.
I’ve gone back and forth on this. Or whether I should do it or not.
By way of a story…
Two years ago, I had an extremely frank discussion with a close friend of many year. (The topic is irrelevant.) It disturbed him quite a bit. About a year later we drifted apart.
Last night he told me he trusted me to tell him the truth no matter what, even if the truth sucked.
There used to be value in being known as uncompromising. I don’t see much of that any more. Perhaps I’m blind to it.
Dave, the more I do this and the deeper I get into some circles the more things I see that it would never have occured to me to do (or to compromise on). Twitter clubs are the least of it. But I have to remember – to a lot of people this is pure business, so their ethical line is different to yours and mine.
I wouldn’t say you’re blind, but you’ve found your way and you’re sticking to it.
Thanks, Paul.
I don’t really have anything against these kinds of groups. But my limited experience in the past seems to result in my being asked to do something which is 1. uncomfortable to me, 2. provides no clear benefit to me, and is 3. personally risky.
After more thought: I’m definitely comfortable working with a group to promote a single post or product or anything else that’s well-defined in scope of activity and length time. That is something I have done in the past, and something I’m more than willing to do in the future.
Ongoing arrangements, not so much.
Come to think of it, that’s how I handle linking as well: I’ll link to good content on an ad-hoc basis if it’s good information for my readers.
I’m in an informal network of tweeters who RT each others’ stuff, especially blog posts. It’s kind of an unspoken agreement that if you like someone or someone has been helpful to you, that you RT them. I never though of it as a club, but I do enjoy the relationships this behavior creates.
LaVonne I think you will find the informal ones build better relationships and are more effective long term than any of the “everyone in it for themselves” ones that appear around the place. Glad its working for you.