aberkok

Hi folks. I've had a personal website for the last 4 years which I've used to post gigs and stuff like that. I use Macromedia Contribute to do the editing, which, although limited to the templates the original designer set up for me, is pretty easy.

http://www.aliberkok.com

I also recently set up a band website late last year to aid in promoting the band. This one I did through Dynamod portals. Again, there is a high ease of editing at the expense of flexibility.

http://www.arkanamusic.com

Now here's my question: in light of Googlepages, should I just pack the other two in and save some money?

I'm not blowing the bank on the other two. Hosting for the first one costs me very little, and the Dynamod portal is about $20 a month, so I can afford this, but why not just get the same level of flexibility for free? There's not a heck of a lot that I can't do with Googlepages that I also can't do with what I have now.

In terms of pure economics, the answer is clear, but here's where things get a little hairier and where the web-savvy amongst you could lend your advice... by starting a new site, will I be shooting myself in the foot as far as traffic? I'm not too sure how being "in" Google works and I wonder how long it would take for the new page to, I don't know what the expression is... seed into Google? Any lost ground in this department could, I suppose be regained by taking a lot of steps to link my site around (something I didn't do too aggressively with the other ones).

Honestly, I could use a change, and the way in which I want to present my cyber-self is changing. What do you all think?

By the way, here's the prototype for the Googlepage:

http://ali.berkok.googlepages.com/

__________________
!check out my new blog! http://arkanamusic.wordpress.com

Warden Gentiles: "It? Perfectly innocent. But I can see how, if our roles were reversed, I might have you beaten with a pillowcase full of batteries."