Comments on: Gawker Media, Real Traffic Data and Estimated Revenues

By: Lee, Blogger's Workshop

Lee, Blogger's Workshop — Sat, 23 May 2009 16:01:35 +0000

So maybe the numbers aren't right... but I still applaud you for struggling to understand. If nothing else, it gets the wheels turning in your readers' minds... And, honestly, you know a thousand times more than I do about selling ads on high volume sites. Lee, Blogger's Workshops last blog post..Does Your Blog Educate and Entertain?

By: If You’re Still Not Convinced There’s Money In Blogs…. | Indie Marketing & PR

Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:34:22 +0000

[...] Source: Click here to read the article [...]

By: Shylock

Shylock — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:53:42 +0000

Hi Nick, and thanks for clarifying. I had a few questions that needed answers before I edited the article (though I’ll leave most of it as it is so people see what all the fuss was about).

My big problem was the fact that people said “unused ad inventory”. Couldn’t really grasp the concept of letting 10 million page views or more go to waste without having some money making ads on them. The fact that they might be tacky and some didn’t want to display them didn’t really cross my mind.

I still don’t get however the $30 price for the 4 ads. If the number quoted by web publisher (a troll since he doesn’t know how to behave in a comment) of 10-30% is true, then maybe dropping the price to $10 would sell the entire inventory and make more money?

Still talking like a newbie perhaps, just trying to understand the thinking behind the method.

Good luck growing Gawker and I hope you didn’t get too many requests for wage raises

By: Nick Denton

Nick Denton — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:33:24 +0000

Shylock, I have to agree with “web publisher” — above. (Incidentally, I think he or she counts as a critic, rather than a troll.) It’s absurd to assume that any site on the web is sold out. Also, that network ads, running in remnant inventory, provide any support to your revenue number.

Network ads tend to be cheap and tacky — which is why we rarely run them in remnant. You’ll see house and trade ads, and campaigns by blue-chip brands, but no network, right now. Easily verified.

Also, our traffic numbers are public, as you have discovered. If you look at the month-by-month Sitemeter stats, you’ll see that there is no summer dip. Therefore you can’t assume that our underlying traffic level is higher than 150m a month.

In short: your methodology is seriously flawed.

By: Does Gawker Media Really Take in $52 Million a Year? « I’m Not Going to Do This Every Day

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:25:12 +0000

[...] Gawker Media Really Take in $52 Million a Year? That’s the ballpark figure of this blogger. And while that’s almost certainly the high end (the blogger arrives at this [...]

By: If You’re Still Not Convinced There’s Money In Blogs…. >> Viya Unlimited, Inc.

Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:16:35 +0000

[...] article: http://shylockblogging.com Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and [...]

By: raincoaster

raincoaster — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 01:39:38 +0000

FYI sitemeter stats are pretty good. It would be to their advantage to display inflated stats, but sitemeter actually gives me lower numbers than the Wordpress.com stats program. No idea how it compares to Google Analytics, though.

By: Shylock

Shylock — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 21:41:28 +0000

And another thing. It would be pretty stupid to sell those 4 ads at $30 if they sold only 10-30% of their inventory. $10-15 would make them more money probably. I’m pretty sure Nick Denton is a smart guy and sells at the optimum price for his blogs.

By: Shylock

Shylock — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:42:50 +0000

Ahh, a troll. I’ve heard about you. Welcome to my blog!

And yeah, I’m looking at Gawker blogs right now and seeing all ads sold out. Those that show up for me anyway. Chill dude. “Estimated” and “guesses”, both words show up in my article before I even start quoting numbers.

And yeah, I have no experience when it comes to selling inventories of 34 million page views per week. So sue me.

But, just because “you’re telling me”, doesn’t mean I’m convinced. If they would sell only 10-30% of their inventory then they would use a CPC or CPM program to cover their extra page views. I doubt they would just leave 70% of their page views without ads on them. So, I’m sure they’re using other programs for unsold inventory. Those programs are still likely to make money.

By: Web Publisher

Web Publisher — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:25:58 +0000

You are a complete idiot if you think that the sell-through rate on that network is higher than 10-30%. Your numbers are completely worthless. You clearly know nothing about how the online business model works in the real world.

How many house ads do you see on those blogs? Run your numbers again, factoring in how many of the ads that appear actually appear to be from paying customers, as a percentage of all ads. Rebates are barely an issue — it’s unsold inventory! I’m telling you, they probably sell 10-30%, meaning the real revenue is probably 10-30% of your estimate.