- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I am interested in selling my poker forum. http://www.thechipleaders.com
Currently just over 300 registered members, ongoing freerolls, cash giveaway plus over 40 hats designed for the site.
It has made me an average of around 500 a month since opening it last fall. Recently did upgrade to vbulletin and implemented many of the extra features including googlemapping (popular myspace tool) and zoints a myspace type program.
The site averages 5000-6000 visitors a month and growing with a current PR rank of 1. If your interested please PM me with questions and offer. I am starting it at 2000 and up from there.
Thanks
WillWhere is all this traffic coming from? I don’t find any on topic backlinks and your Alexa is 1,475,777 with a reach of 0.00003%.
Alexa ranking means absolutely nothing, all that means is someone with the alexa toolbar installed on their pc used the toolbar to search, that is how alexa ranking is achieved, please tell me you dont think that has anything to do with his actual traffic POKERADDICT, LMAO
Alexa is 1,475,777 with a reach of 0.00003%.
freydaddy wrote:Alexa ranking means absolutely nothing, all that means is someone with the alexa toolbar installed on their pc used the toolbar to search, that is how alexa ranking is achieved, please tell me you dont think that has anything to do with his actual traffic POKERADDICT, LMAOActually what it tells you is what percentage of alexa toolbar users have visited the site recently – and is not really to do with “searches” – and then this number is extrapolated to “guesstimate” the share of entire internet audience.
Alexa themselves say that they know that the database will be biased towards North American users and other specific niche groups where Alexa usage is higher … webmasters for one.
:wink-winkAt the higher reaches (say 500,000 and lower) then Alexa does a pretty good job of ranking traffic.
And … if you’re site is not breaking in to the top 1,000,000 rankings then you’re probably getting less than 100 different visitors a day.
So it does have some relevance – unless the sites users are pathalogically opposed to installing Alexa – possible but not likely.
:eh:TheGooner wrote:And … if you’re site is not breaking in to the top 1,000,000 rankings then you’re probably getting less than 100 different visitors a day.So it does have some relevance – unless the sites users are pathalogically opposed to installing Alexa – possible but not likely.
:eh:Alexa rankings offer no real measuring stick as to how much “overall” traffic a site gets. I am pretty sure it counts only the hits to a site using its toolbar, which has to be installed and active on the end-users computer.
I have sites getting in excess of 5000 “legit” hits a day which really dont rank that high according to Alexa. I imagine if just 5% of those normal visitors who visit my site had done so with Alexa toolbar installed that particular site would probably rank in the top 1000.
If the rankings really mean anything, I might have to ask a couple hundred people to install the toolbar and visit my site daily; maybe even utilize a script to do that for me. Rankings which can be so easily manipulated mean squat to me. Also, I have no numbers as to the value of players who have the toolbar installed. LOL
I think it is extremely unlikely to have 200 English uniques a day and have a 1,475,000 Alexa rating. I agree it is far from exact but it is fair to use as a guage, especially when there are no on topic backlinks. Where is the traffic coming from? Non English bulk?
Yes, you can call me a pessimist.
I have dozens of sites which get that much traffic and more, yet some are not even ranked that high by alexa. Hell I have sites, which are listed in dmoz, yahoo, and google at the top of the serps, and according to Alexa they rank in the 8,000,000 range. :laughcry:
If you wish to rely on Alexa thats your perogative, but IMO it is not a fair guage of traffic, only a guage of Alexa users who visit your site.
axl wrote:If you wish to rely on Alexa thats your perogative, but IMO it is not a fair guage of traffic, only a guage of Alexa users who visit your site.
Again that might be true at ranges from 1,000,000+ because numbers up there simply means little or no discernable traffic from their database.I’ve never seen an 8,000,000+ rating though mate – what’s the site I’ll have to go and have look
:bigsmile:As for under 500,000 – I believe that Alexa works well enough – albeit it with their biases – and I know avertisers do too. They’re always interested in the Alexa RANK when booking monthly advertising and paying fees.
Their lists of movers and shakers (rises and falls in traffic) are always interesting and the changes can usually be tied into something topical.
Personally – my main site is a European football site first and foremost – and I can see Alexa pretty much nailing the correct traffic for weekdays vs weekends and also whenever the football is on a break.
Alexa is accurate enough for sites that actually get REAL traffic.
Give me a site and pay me good enough and in three months I will have it in the top 5000 of alexa rankings.
Here are just a few articles on the uselessness of Alexa rankings.
http://www.davidgalbraith.org/archives/001165.html
http://www.seologs.com/how-accurate-is-alexa-rank/
http://www.e-consultancy.com/forum/101280-how-accurate-is-alexa-for-traffic-measurement.html
You can find hundreds of more doing a search on google.
Sites which get REAL traffic dont need the false sense of security a useless alexa ranking provides. On the other hand if youre not getting that much REAL traffic, doing what you can to boost your alexa rank might be of some use. :3eyes:
Again, the current system is very flawed due to the average internet user is does not have the toolbar installed. Webmasters might though, maybe that explains why your traffic stats and your alexa metrics are similar. Possibly a lot of webmasters are over at your place stripping content giving a hit to both your stats and one to your alexa rankings.
axl wrote:Give me a site and pay me good enough and in three months I will have it in the top 5000 of alexa rankings.
You’ve put the cart before the horse there mate – I’m not paying a cent – I’m collecting ..Gimme a site in the top 5000 and I can lead you to several advertisers that will pay significant monthly fees up front just to be on your site. Isn’t that the WHOLE idea?
:bigsmile:Yes – Alexa does not give the whole picture. But … it’s better than PR numbers where I see $1,000s wasted each and every month, it’s better than SE placement positions, it’s marketed and aimed at advertisers as being an industry metric – And THEY believe it.
:letspartyYou’re railing against the wrong thing – and you’re missing out on good money by ignoring it.
:crazy:Alexa rankings are $$$ in the bank account if you’ve got any business acumen – so go to it and create that top 5,000 site and you’ll be rolling in it …
And all I’ll want is a 10% fee for pointing you inn the right direction.
:cheers:And interestingly … here is what the posts that you provided say :
Post #2 says :
So does this mean that Alexa rank is completely useless? Not really. In fact it can be extremely useful, but (*** another big but) in my experience, only if the 3 month average rank is 100,000 or higher. Anything below that is just too easy to fake with just one person.
I can’t compare the Alexa rank of seologs.com to that of any non-seo.com site, but I can compare it to very similar sites, like SEOmoz.org, webmasterworld.com, and any other SEO related sites, and get a pretty good idea of how this site’s traffic compares.
While Post #3 actually says :
* So when is Alexa useful? *
Alexa can be useful for monitoring site traffic trends for one particular site – and for generating a list of similar sites by seeing which other sites Alexa users read once they’ve read the site you are checking up on. The average page views data is also much less likely to be skewed by the Alexa readership bias, so can be used to compare different sites.
Above all, though, I would say Alexa is useful for checking on any site you are thinking of partnering with / advertising on. If a site does not appear in the top 100,000 sites then for us that sets alarm bells ringing and we would not proceed any further with that site without seeing independently produced / audited site stats.
Post #1 says
Because Gawker is transparent about page views, and has a property whose readership is part of the Web 2.0 scene, Valleywag (Trivia fact – I chose the name Valleywag) and one that definitely isn’t, Deadspin, Alexa’s accuracy can be correlated to real data other than Comscore.Valleywag traffic: 600 thousand page views per month
Deadspin traffic: 4.5 million page views per monthAccording to Alexa, however, Valleywag ranks twice as highly as Deadspin, with a rank of 5,000, compared to Deadspin’s 10,000 ranking.
Which means that Alexa skews tech. sites such as Web 2.0 favs by a huge factor of 15 even within the top 10,000 sites where the accuracy is higher.
In short, Alexa is almost useless for websites outside of the top 1000, and no sensible investment or reporting should be influenced by it.
=======
Basically he’s arguing as I did that webmasters will skew it …. and then disses Alexa as you suggest … but then he would say that … after all he’s ranking at 380,000+ and slipping every day.
:bigsmile:Alexa is fine, just you should not use it as your major measure.
All you have to do is compare the Alexa traffic of gambling911.com and casinocity.com to realise that Alexa data could be quite flawed
When you factor in that Alexa shows on average 2 page views per visitor for gambling911 and 4 for casinocity – then according to Alexa, gambling911 gets 4 times more visitors than casinocity, which is quite impossible.
And at the same time, porn.com has Alexa of 300,000+ :inlove:
Good link about Alexa:
xxxhttp://norvig.com/logs-alexa.html
xxxhttp://www.mattcutts.com/blog/estimating-webmaster-skew-in-alexa-metrics/
interesting – because the comments then referenced an outfit called compete.com that claims to be in this space (i’d never heard of them)
They’re US centric – but they also suggested that the google man wasn’t nearly as popular as his ego would like to believe.
:laugh:Alexa is a good tool. But it does not give you much information. A good Alexa ranking could mean for example:
a.) that you have a huge number of visitors, and that’s why you have such a big number of visitors with the toolbar installed
b.) you have a small number of visiotrs, but most of them have the toolbar installed.
c.) you faking the Alexa rank
Our website for example doubled the unique traffic in the past week, and yet, Alexa ranking moved from 90,000+ to 260,000, i.e. according to Alexa now we are getting 3 times less visitors, when we acctualy are getting two times more.
Or if you take CAP, for example, with 3,000+ reg. members, it is safe to asume that about 200-300 visit the forum on a daily basis, and about 200-300 unregistered visitors. But with 500-600 unique visits a day, CAP according to Alexa ranks in the top 5,000 most popular sites, while we get more uniques than that. :wink-wink
Dont get me wrong, though. If tomorrow Alexa show us under 50,000, I will make sure that all my contacts know about it :angel:
P.S. I appologize to Chip Leader for taking over his post, maybe someone should separate our Alexa rant from his thread. :cheers:
