What is better?

What is better?

1. Have 500 accounts and 1 website to repin on all of these accounts.
2. Have 500 accounts and 5 websites, and repin 100 (times) accounts per website.

What you think?

1van said:

What is better?

1. Have 500 accounts and 1 website to repin on all of these accounts.
2. Have 500 accounts and 5 websites, and repin 100 (times) accounts per website.

What you think?

Click to expand...

2. Have 500 accounts and 5 websites, and repin 100 (times) accounts per website.

100 accounts and 5 websites, but try to have more websites since one account might get banned you have more on other accounts

You can use 500 accs for 5 websites but i suggest to build niche relevance websites

1van said:

What is better?

1. Have 500 accounts and 1 website to repin on all of these accounts.
2. Have 500 accounts and 5 websites, and repin 100 (times) accounts per website.

What you think?

Click to expand...

Option 2. You are spreading any level of risk across 100 accounts X 5 domains = 500 accounts.

This does come with one caveat, however and my 2 cents.

You could have 1000 accounts to 1 domain and still make pennies due to the quality of the domain, its content, and monetization. Not to mention getting poor CTR at pin level from your images or accounts.

Converting the traffic into hard cash on the back end and doing this well should be the first step, only then is it worth scaling to more and more accounts. As you have a better expectation of results or the effect extra pinning and accounts will have on your bottom line.

Either that or you have accumulated data from another site that can be used in a related / subniche of sorts to give you a leg up on how to move forward or mirror your past optimization.

What's the difference? What's your concern about between these two plans?

The difference is that if you have 500 accounts, first option will 500 accounts repin 5 websites.
Second option will 100 accounts pin 1 website.

The main difference is number of repin (number of accounts)