NONE: re visits versus hits
re visits versus hits
zapworks (zapworks_at_easynet.fr)
Thu, 25 Jul 96 14:32:11 -0000
this one will run and run...
>William Henry <bobhenry_at_cymedia.com> wrote
>>> same user becomes another unique visitor again tomorrow, too, if he/she
>>> really likes your site and comes back tomorrow. That presents another
>>> possible "flaw" in the method, but I think that it actually works as an
>>> offset to the first "flaw". The odds are probably inverse to the
>>> multiple-user-on-one-ip flaw, so the stats may end up being accurate in the
>>> end, through one flaw negating the other. (well, it could happen! really!)
;)
with over a million people walking into cybercafes each month for only
around 4,000 ip addresses (the number of terminals we have catalogued in
the cafes), the multiple-user-on-one-ip flaw is probably bigger than most
people think. chances are your stats will have the visits down as
repeats, but you'll never know. and what if there are multiple users for
each terminal - as often happens in cybercafes?
>"S. Finer" <xerxes_at_clark.net>
>Traditionally, advertising has been priced on the basis of "impressions"
>and hits can be equated to these.
oh really?
>An
>impression can be completely neutral....not so a visit, because it
>requires actions on the part of the potential customer. Visits should be
>documentable, and should receive compensation on a higher scale than hits
>or impressions. Much of the market still needs to be educated in the
>logic behind this reasoning. This was the lesson behind P&G's contract
>with one of the search engines (Yahoo!).
i think we could do with a once-and-for-all definition of *hits* and
*page views/impressions* here. oh, and also how they differ from
click-through rate which was the basis of the Yahoo / P&G deal.
> Peter Hartley <hartley_at_shop.hartley.on.ca>
>so many are locked into historical print-media and TV type analysis
>of what is allegedly happening with their advertising dollars, when in fact
>a PERFECT analysis is available with the data provided by 98% of the
>browsers-in-us and the WWW servers-in-use.
>PERFECT analysis
- see comment above on hits / page views from cybercafes.
given that it may take 5 impressions of the banner for it to be clicked
on, what happens for the four suckers who hosted the banner before it got
clicked elsewhere - don't they deserve a fifth of the cash for inciting
the final click-thrus? i'd love to know how you'd solve THAT ONE with
three hours of coding ;)
purlease, let's not get too worried about this - and learn selectively
from the offline world. for its advertisers, even Wired magazine only
gives out its rate base and not its circulation, let alone its readers
per copy. and it hasn't stopped them raking in the ad revenues
dont concentrate on the stats just because we can...
given this is my first post here's some background: i am working on a
new marketing medium to boost site traffic using a novel off-line medium.
so far, just about everybody we have approached has shown an interest (we
reckon we can generate page-views for less than they charge them out to
advertisers) and i'll post full details to this list before launch (end
August) or contact me tout-de-suite if you are looking to make a big
splash
as this is for the mailing list, this is the first and last time you'll
see my sig file
"And now," cried Max, "let the wild rumpus start!"
+---------------------+-----------------------+
+ Mark Dolley + +
+ zapworks + zapworks_at_easynet.fr +
+ 18 rue du grand + www.iway.fr/zapworks +
+ Prieure, + (33.1) 40.21.75.75 +
+ 75011, Paris + +
+ FRANCE + +
+---------------------+-----------------------+
