Many Web 2.0 Traffic Numbers Seem Like Baloney

Article Submitted by: LikeItIs
Technology


Today, Rafat Ali posted in his PaidContent.org newsletter that video site Break.com received $21 million in funding. Okay, seems a bit high but maybe it’s true. He then went on to say that the site reports receiving 17 million unique visitors per month. 17 MILLION UNIQUE VISITORS. That caught my attention.

 

Submitted: Jul 12, 2007    Views: 516    Comments: 6    Likes: 14   


Today, Rafat Ali posted in his PaidContent.org newsletter that video site Break.com received $21 million in funding.  Okay, seems a bit high but maybe it's true.  He then went on to say that the site reports receiving 17 million unique visitors per month.  17        MILLION UNIQUE VISITORS.  That caught my attention.

Thanks to a great article at eBizMBA.com I found the US traffic stats for the top web 2.0 sites on the web.  The information was calculated by Compete, a recognized source for third-party web information:

  1. Myspace:          68,000,000 monthly unique visitors
  2. Wikipedia:        47,000,000 monthly unique visitors
  3. YouTube:          44,000,000 monthly unique visitors
  4. Facebook:         20,000,000 monthly unique visitors
  5. Photobucket:    24,000,000 monthly unique visitors
  6. digg:                 22,000,000 monthly unique visitors
  7. Craigslist:         21,000,000 monthly unique visitors
  8. Topix:               20,000,000 monthly unique visitors
  9. flickr:                18,000,000 monthly unique visitors
  10. TypePad:          6,000,000 monthly unique visitors

Based on these numbers, it seems unlikely to me that Break.com had anywhere near the 17 million unique visitors per month reported in the article.  I've never heard of the site, have you?  How is it that a site we've never heard of is almost the same size as Facebook and 1/3 the size of YouTube.  If it was that big, shouldn't it have raised much more than $21 million?  YouTube was purchased for $1.5 billion.

Looking at these numbers made me curious.  In total, these sites represent 290,000,000 unique visits.  Nielsen NetRatings estimates the digital universe in the US is 66,000,000 people.  This means:

  • Everyone in the US would have to visit about 4.5 of these sites every month.
  • Everyone in the US who uses the Internet would have to visit MySpace at least once per month.
  • 1/3 of the US digital population would have to visit Digg.

Some of this seems unlikely.  My Mother, Father, Sister, an In-laws use the Web and I know that none of them have ever visited MySpace or Facebook, or Digg.  I've asked many of my tech literate friends about Digg and none of them know about it.

So, what's my point?  The point is that I'd be highly skeptical about any numbers you see reported for sites on the Web.  I believe many of them are highly inflated and that the methodologies of the different third-party reporting companies are not accurate or correlated.  They might have some value as relative measures but even that may not be true.

If you're competing against these companies or starting a new venture, don't use these numbers as yardsticks of success.  They are most likely being manipulated in ways we don't know and you might wrongly conclude your business isn't doing well when it is indeed move right along.





14

Email this story Email to someone | Print Story Print Content | Add to reading list

Comments Received:

Mass Market Tech
Mass_Market_Tech

He must have confused unique visitors with unique visits for Break.com. I've seen it happen all of the time.

I do agree thougho that the Compete numbers seem a bit inflated. I've always wondered how these sites can all pull in so much traffic. Is everyone on the Web 24/7? Maybe they are.

Posted: Jul 12, 2007

Mkhan
Mkhan

I agree. The web is healthy, but not that healthy. You need to be very skeptical when you see these types of numbers.

Posted: Jul 12, 2007

JCoop

Are we being bamboozled into using sites that really are not that well travelled? Aside from the sites themselves, who else would benefit from the inflated stats?

Posted: Jul 12, 2007

LikeItIs

@JCoop The sites benefit enormously in terms of raising capital and getting press. In the early days of the Web, sites trumpeted that they had millions of "hits." Remember that. It is a meangingless, inflated numbers. But everyone was impressed by it and sites used it to raise capital. VCs, investment bankers, etc. all benefit from making sites look bigger and more attractive.

I'm not saying the Internet isn't real. You just need to be a bit cautious when every site out there reports that it has millions of users per month.

Posted: Jul 12, 2007

AronLiv
AronLiv

@MassMarketTech I don't know Break.com, but I don't think it gets 17 million unique visitors or 17 million unique visits.

Posted: Jul 12, 2007

johnny rocket
(Unregistered)

break definitely does have that traffic - you guys are idiots they buy the traffic not so hard to figure out then they get users who come back its ranked 330 on alexa definitely true - look at vois.com it has 1 million uniques and its 6840 on alexa.com - its a publicly traded company so its stats are public notice

Posted: Dec 30, 2007



Add Your Comments:

Your Name:

Spam protection control:


© Copyright 2008 LikeItIs All rights reserved. LikeItIs has granted BestCashCow.com, LLC non-exclusive rights to display this work on Bestcashcow.com.

Financial products of all nature bear inherent risks and this website is not a financial advisory service; it is a forum for users to share and to compare notes and observations on financial publications. The website provides, free of charge, the technical and logistical apparatus and the medium for users to share and to publish financial information and to comment on publications. As such, the website’s operator can not and does not take responsibility for information, observations or opinions of any sort or nature provided by third parties with whom it is not affiliated who use the website to publish, to comment or as a means of solicitation. Users are specifically warned against following any advice related to specific instruments, including, but not limited to, equity securities, that may be provided by other users directly on this site or on web pages to which other users have provided links on this site. BestCashCow.com can not and does not check or verify the qualifications and credentials of users who publish or comment on this site or on linked pages. Users should seek personalized advice from qualified professionals regarding all personal financial issues and evaluate the risks and applicability to their own circumstances of each financial product discussed regardless of who the publisher is or purports to be. Should you, through your use of this site, identify an individual or organization purporting to offer personalized advice, you bear all responsibility to ensure that the individual or organization has the qualifications that they may represent on the website, and that their advice is appropriate for your circumstances. On certain webpages, BestCashCow.com provides information related to rates on US-based savings accounts, CDs, short-term government bonds, and other US cash equivalent securities, also free of charge to internet users for their independent use. The accuracy of this information is not guaranteed, and the information, like all other information on this website, should not be construed to provide investment advice, nor to endorse a financial product of any sort.

© 2007 BestCashCow.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Policy.