competition?

[mdfloyd@gmail.com]

I have a niche related to exotic pets. I've been planning to do a wikipedia-type site about this particular type of pet -- but Wikipedia already has a lot of links and information on them.

Now I'm trying to decide if I'd be wasting my time by repeating what Wikipedia already has. I know a lot of the experts in the field and many of them would be thrilled to contribute content or let me copy some of their stuff. As far as I can tell, they haven't contributed to Wikipedia -- but because of the way wikipedias are designed Wikipedia and I can legitimately copy and use one another's content. There's a ton of useful stuff already on Wikipedia I'd like to use on my site.

So would I be wasting my time and energy or am I looking at this all wrong?

[jetpacklife]

If you just copy it 100%, google won't like your site (look up "duplicate content penalty") ... You should either use a program, or outsource someone to rewrite it for your site. I bet it's hard to outdo Wiki at what it does, so you have to add something else, like a community or additional articles or something.

[mdfloyd@gmail.com]

Thanks -- I plan to let contributors write their own contributions (like Wikipedia) so I won't do any "copying," other than linking once in awhile to Wikipedia. And if I need to do outsourcing it shouldn't be too much material.

[WhiteRabbit]

When the content is the same its all about Presentation.

As an example look at the way Azureus brings torrents to the table. Basically it's just another torrent app, but it looks very slick.

The first thing that came to me reading your post was - user content. That's a big catch phrase these days. There was a slashdot post on it and I agree completely. Your users creating content based on their coveted exotic pets. Posts, videos...etc.

Just thought I'd give you some cross pollinated ideas to consider.

___________________
Follow the WhiteRabbit

[mdfloyd@gmail.com]

Excellent advice, White Rabbit. The quality of the content will be based on what users contribute -- and users in this area want quality content. I know a great deal about this niche and have no qualms about cutting out dangerously incorrect information. Plus there are a lot of folks who want to start getting known in this niche, so they'll most likely contribute quality content, too.

Now all I have to do is finish getting the site set up (have a couple of friends in town who are familiar with PHP and pmwiki and have already told me they'd be thrilled to help me set up for very little money).

Thanks again.

Now, if I can just find a drop shipper who offers quality products at a real discount . . .

[Talon]

Sounds like you have something that could be franchised out to different parts of the country. Good luck

[Random Royalty]

When it comes to selling information (I'm assuming this is what you plan to do) a very simple rule applies: Information that is free has no value! That's right, if it is free, it has NO value. Don't confuse this with "free (as in free beer)"...which means there is always a resource cost that has to be recovered or sponsored).

Buyers of information, the ones that are willing to pay for it, do so for several reasons (in other words, what gives VALUE to information) : 1) the information is not biased 2) trustworthy and accurate 3) credible 4) immediately useful and 5) will take up a lot less time than plowing through thousands of search results.

Essentially follow Tim's advice and micro-test. The idea is get to know your niche market...in terms of what prevents buying decisions or knowing what current practices are harmful, wasteful or expensive or where bad decisions have been made in the past. (for example, kitty litter made out of spent wheat malt vs. kitty litter made out of clay ...or using compact flourescents vs. tungsten lamps...)

In other words you have to test the SORE POINTS of your target market and create value in things that are currently perceived to have no value. (In fact this is why junk food is called junk food...it is making comestible what previously wasn't).

To me the big mistake is giving away information as value added to a product you are selling. Eventually this backfires because of the tendency to commodification of any product. Don't forget that investment firms and analysts pay a fortune for information that can be had for free every day in the newspaper and on-line...because the business of securities has become commoditized..."full service" brokers barely exist anymore because there is little perceived value in value-added information (why spend $50 per trade when you can get a discount broker at less than $10 per trade?)

Hope this all makes sense... :-) and good luck!