Ahh, sorry, I do apologise. I thought you were referring to whoever I quoted that said good sites. But thanks for the link, very informative. I suppose if 40%

Ahh, sorry, I do apologise. I thought you were referring to whoever I quoted that said good sites. But thanks for the link, very informative. I suppose if 40% of internet users are low-literacy then such sites as about.com sort of make sense. I think we need to differentiate between content mills and spam sites though. Although many do not like content mills, I would not consider them spam but low quality content. Spam sites seem to be more reliant on affiliate marketing, especially in the review of products niche, as well as monetised by adsense. I do however think that it would help the discussion immensely if adword users can provide some data as to how does the quality of the site compare with conversion. I would assume that the higher the quality of the site content, the better the conversion, but, assumptions can be wrong.