Twitter: Quantity Or Quality | Yakezie Reader Insights | Yakezie Forums

Hey all,

Hope you're enjoying your 4th of July.  Using Twitter more often and picking up followers, which is good, but then it hit me.  Which is better, quantity or quality?  On one hand, 30 of your best blogging buddies on the other hand 300 random people who happen to link to you.  Initially I thought the bigger number has to be better.  But now I'm not so sure.  On the surface, you look better because you have a bigger social reach, but they may not even have a clue about your niche, so things might get diluted in terms of promoting or even trying to sift through all the tweets.

Any thoughts? 

I like to talk to as many people on Twitter as I can.  I'd rather have 50 active people than 34592495032 followers who are bots.  I think I have 400 or so followers right now, of which Klout says I have talked to 153.

I've started posting to Twitter more frequently.  I've had success with sharing 1 time per hour, so I usually do that, and then share content from other people in the mix.  I promote my links 1 time per day, and then other people's blog posts and news items for the remainder.  I think I've found a balance here, though I'm no SMO.

Looking forward to other bloggers' input.

I have little experience with Twitter and have less than 200 followers, but growing rapidly. I promote my latest post once or twice a day, and get very few referrals from this. I enjoy promoting others and find this to be a good way to support others. I find that any promotion of others is returned in bucket-loads, and I really appreciate this reciprocity. I'll be sticking with it and aiming for as many followers as possible.

Hi guys,

Thanks for the feedback.  Derek, I'm see your point.  It's sad, but it's the name of the game.  I guess since my followers are growing I notice some people probably don't even know what personal finance means.  It is what it is.

I like a large number of followers related to my sites.

I aim for quantity but I also don't follow people just in hopes of a followback.  I focus on quality and hope for quantity.  Over time I think you can have both. 

Hi Buck Inspire,

I think the most important metric in twitter is the "re-tweet" rate. getting 100 followers that don't retweet your posts vs. 10 that constantly do makes a HUGE difference.

Re-tweets can be a measure of how fast your messages/content can spread within networks. I don't really think about having a large # of followers because you can have a good amount of widespread exposure by using hashtags like #PersonalFinance and tweeting regularly enough.

But this is just my personal opinion. Let me know what works for you! :)

- James L.

I have over 3,000 followers on twitter (all organic growth) and don't see the tweets of most of them.  I only read tweets by lists I've created or hash tags I'm interested in following (including #yakezie).

Untemplater said:

It's hard to keep up with all the social media platforms these days.  I should probably tweet way more than I do now.  I just don't find myself watching people's streams that often right now or find myself logged in all the time. 

Anyone use an automatic posting sync between twitter and facebook and have any recommendations?  I've been thinking about doing that for a while but haven't gotten around to finding a way to do it.

I currently use Networked Blogs for both Facebook and Twitter http://w.networkedblogs.com/. I also use Onlywire for some of the other Social Networking/Bookmarking sites http://www.onlywire.com/

Barb Friedberg said:

Peripheral comment;

Went to a hub spot on line conference on social media. They said that there is no such thing a too frequent tweeting and that the more you tweet, the more benefit you will receive. (Of course, it's tough to find the time for me for a lot of tweeting!!!! )  :)

That's good to know!  One of the reasons why I don't tweet that much (besides the time it takes) is because I thought frequent tweeting was annoying to people.  Glad to hear it leads to more benefits!