Comments on: Would You Prefer More Feed Subscribers or Twitter Followers ?

By: Wess Stewart

Wess Stewart — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 03:06:18 +0000

I agree with the other commenters completely. I wish I would have known about this post earlier, I would have linked it to my post on this topic.

http://thesugarbuzzproject.net/twitter-followers-versus-blog-subscriptions/

I’ll take RSS subscribers any day. Followers are great, and they can turn into subscribers, but with RSS you know that your content will be delivered…unlike that Tweet you posted when your followers were offline…

By: Ugo onah

Ugo onah — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 20:42:39 +0000

I’ll go with feed suscribers anytime. They are responsive, and in the larger proportion, humans, who have genuine interest in your blog posts. On the flip side, majority of twitter followers, are auto-following bots…no thanks to self-promoting and shylock twitter-ers.

By: Jake

Jake — Sat, 30 May 2009 22:57:08 +0000

Feed subscribers 100%. They are more willing to read your content and are generally more interested in your site altogether.

By: Tom - StandOutBlogger.com

Tom - StandOutBlogger.com — Sat, 30 May 2009 15:01:21 +0000

I voted for feed subscribers because if I had 6,000 feed subscribers it would be a lot more valuable that 6,000 twitter followers (which I have).

However, I personally would rather have 6,000 email subscribers