Quote:
Originally Posted by XSAXS
I would strongly argue to the contrary. While the vast majority of these kinds of sites are supremely shitty, the one referenced above is better than most. They use comparative analytics based on traffic data, pageviews, etc. Is the data perfect? No. Are the conclusions perfect? No. But does it provide a quantifiable frame of reference in some cases -- when better, more accurate data is unavailable? Of course it does.
Is Alexa perfect? No way. Is it fairly useful from time to time? Of course it is.
So really... who is the retard?
|
I can see the site uses an algorithm based on impressions per user and total visits to estimate daily earnings and then comes up with a valuation that is largely based on the earnings with some adjustment for the quality of the traffic, or for the metrics the traffic provides. However it fails to take anything else into account. In essence it appears to assume that the only method of monetization for a website is CPM advertising, which is certainly not true.
so, just looking at Roalds last post, it sees Pornhub as a Juggernaut worth hundreds of millions because it has a huge amount of traffic and assumes that all sites make a similar CPM when we all know that CPM on adult traffic is much lower in adult than in mainstream, as instead of holding a credit card, the consumer is holding at least 1 penis, and needs the other hand to search for DP vids. Conversely it sees the relatively low amount of traffic that a site like Brazzers.com has with respect to Pornhub and assumes the value is again derived from that amount of traffic, when the revenue is mainly derived from a tiny portion of that traffic which becomes a member. In this case, the actual value is most likely quite low.
if we skip the reality that different businesses use vastly different monetization models, and assume that it is true that everyone just throws their site in a CPM network and lets those guys do all the selling, and we make the traffic all of equal value, we still miss many pieces of information that are equally important in certain situations. For example the intrinsic value in the name itself. 4 years ago pizza.com sold for $2.6 Million, if it were to sell now, it might sell for a fraction of that, but even it the revenue of the site was $0 and the total daily visits was 0, the domain name itself will still command for more than the $38,000 that worth of web claims it is worth.
http://www.worthofweb.com/website-value/pizza.com
now, if we forget about traffic, forget about sales, forget about the coolness of a name, there are still other issues, for example, the site says that california.com is worth about $6000, but I highly doubt the state/owner would sell it to me so I could put a Hooker Directory on it for that price.
anyways, nice to look at the numbers and pretend sites are worth billions.