Comments on: The Return of Monetized Eyeballs http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/ Tracking the Internet Evolution Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:25:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU hourly 1 By: Web 2.0: Valuation of Web Sites 101 at thinkbeta.com http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-636416 Web 2.0: Valuation of Web Sites 101 at thinkbeta.com Tue, 30 Oct 2007 08:02:03 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-636416 <p>[...] that unique visitors should be counted over a period of one month, usually the most recent). This well known and oft-quoted article from November 2005 establishes an average of $38 per unique visitor based on a range of different website [...]</p> [...] that unique visitors should be counted over a period of one month, usually the most recent). This well known and oft-quoted article from November 2005 establishes an average of $38 per unique visitor based on a range of different website [...]

]]> By: nicod3mus http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-563890 nicod3mus Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:14:30 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-563890 <p>Ha the sites and portals being purchased for big moeny are much more than the eyeballs of the early days.</p> <p><a href="http://mmostrategyguides.com/2moons" rel="nofollow">2Moons Guide</a></p> Ha the sites and portals being purchased for big moeny are much more than the eyeballs of the early days.

2Moons Guide

]]> By: walltag http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-279098 walltag Thu, 28 Jun 2007 14:30:33 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-279098 <p>Both links give a 404 from CNN</p> Both links give a 404 from CNN

]]> By: Rich http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35534 Rich Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:52:35 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35534 <p>I have a four year old web propert with a 3 mo Alexa rating of 390 and currently at 290 and rising. We get approximately 2.5MM users per month and over 20MM hits per month. We also have more search engine links than Napster and Target. Through surveys of our users we know they love the site and the free tools we provide. We will not take adveritising but instead sell premium versions of our free tools at a low cost so users do not have to come back over and over again. The technology is considered the best in the industry. We also have inquries from other countries to create foreign language versions. I belive this is a new category of social networking. Any thoughts on potential value or what I should ask for a valuation from VC's?</p> I have a four year old web propert with a 3 mo Alexa rating of 390 and currently at 290 and rising. We get approximately 2.5MM users per month and over 20MM hits per month. We also have more search engine links than Napster and Target. Through surveys of our users we know they love the site and the free tools we provide. We will not take adveritising but instead sell premium versions of our free tools at a low cost so users do not have to come back over and over again. The technology is considered the best in the industry. We also have inquries from other countries to create foreign language versions. I belive this is a new category of social networking. Any thoughts on potential value or what I should ask for a valuation from VC’s?

]]> By: GigaOM » Blog Archive » 2Moons, An Ad-Supported MMORPG Rises http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35532 GigaOM » Blog Archive » 2Moons, An Ad-Supported MMORPG Rises Fri, 11 Aug 2006 06:49:24 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35532 <p>[…] The eyeball-based business model has a new game - massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG.) […]</p> […] The eyeball-based business model has a new game - massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG.) […]

]]> By: Conversion Rater http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35530 Conversion Rater Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:33:06 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35530 <p><strong>How Much Is Your Site Worth?</strong></p> <p>Here we go again. Once again, people are valuing sites based on the amount of traffic or pageviews they’re getting. To Om’s credit, it’s a good article with some very informative graphs and some nice comparisons to pre-bubble company…</p> How Much Is Your Site Worth?

Here we go again. Once again, people are valuing sites based on the amount of traffic or pageviews they’re getting.
To Om’s credit, it’s a good article with some very informative graphs and some nice comparisons to pre-bubble company…

]]> By: The Steinhorn Stare http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35528 The Steinhorn Stare Sun, 25 Dec 2005 19:38:03 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35528 <strong>Not All Users Are Created Equal</strong> Om Malik recently wrote an article for Business 2.0 magazine, in which he discussed “the value of eyeballs.” The point of the article is that over the past 6-8 years, Internet companies have been bought and sold, and if you believe the pr... Not All Users Are Created Equal

Om Malik recently wrote an article for Business 2.0 magazine, in which he discussed “the value of eyeballs.” The point of the article is that over the past 6-8 years, Internet companies have been bought and sold, and if you believe the pr…

]]> By: www.Wadblog.com http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35526 www.Wadblog.com Fri, 16 Dec 2005 22:47:11 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35526 <strong>Top Ten Web 2.0 moments of 2005</strong> I was reading an article from Richard MacManus where he lists his top 10 web 2.0 moments for this year. Blogging of course features, with the sale of both bloglines to ask jeeves, and also weblogsinc to AOL. The hype does seem to be back with the web... Top Ten Web 2.0 moments of 2005

I was reading an article from Richard MacManus where he lists his top 10 web 2.0 moments for this year. Blogging of course features, with the sale of both bloglines to ask jeeves, and also weblogsinc to AOL.
The hype does seem to be back with the web…

]]> By: Shiwej » Blog Series: Om Malik on the Blogosphere http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35524 Shiwej » Blog Series: Om Malik on the Blogosphere Sun, 11 Dec 2005 20:50:28 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35524 [...] Together with Miel Van Opstal from Coolz0r, we’ve decided to start a guestblogging series which will run on both our blogs at about the same time. Today is installment number eight of the series and this time we turned to a blogging journalist who’s very well known in the blogosphere: Om Malik. Om writes mostly about the next generation of internet and he also has a weekly 20-minute podcast session with Niall about technology. Besides this he has a big archive of articles he wrote for the Business 2.0 website, where he is a senior writer. [...] [...] Together with Miel Van Opstal from Coolz0r, we’ve decided to start a guestblogging series which will run on both our blogs at about the same time. Today is installment number eight of the series and this time we turned to a blogging journalist who’s very well known in the blogosphere: Om Malik. Om writes mostly about the next generation of internet and he also has a weekly 20-minute podcast session with Niall about technology. Besides this he has a big archive of articles he wrote for the Business 2.0 website, where he is a senior writer. [...]

]]> By: Ross Dawson http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35522 Ross Dawson Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:56:20 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35522 I'm on your side Om - in late September I wrote a blog post titled "Back to Monetizing Eyeballs". However what is really interesting about all this is that the New York Times is commenting on blog discussions. In which case, why read the newspapers when you can go straight to source? References and more meat on all this at: http://www.rossdawsonblog.com/weblog/archives/2005/12/the_debate_on_m.html I’m on your side Om - in late September I wrote a blog post titled “Back to Monetizing Eyeballs”. However what is really interesting about all this is that the New York Times is commenting on blog discussions. In which case, why read the newspapers when you can go straight to source?
References and more meat on all this at:
(link)

]]> By: Michael Eisenberg http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35520 Michael Eisenberg Tue, 06 Dec 2005 11:30:04 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35520 See this interesting post from Seeking alpha on some stock implications for the argument as it relates to slashdot http://internetstockblog.com/article/4701 See this interesting post from Seeking alpha on some stock implications for the argument as it relates to slashdot (link)

]]> By: Peterson http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35519 Peterson Sun, 04 Dec 2005 00:42:40 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35519 I am not necessarily agreeing with Om's valuation methodology but I don't agree with Jason's view point. I checked out his Blog and the reasons for why he is disagreeing with Om. I dont think his reasoning ties out. If you use his assumptions at http://www.calacanis.com/2005/11/29/ok-lets-stop-the-bubble-machine-right-now#c123226 The numbers at the high end of the range come in the same ballpark as Om's. But, as I mentioned in that comment, I didn't fully read Om's article but the table seems to be catching everybody's attention and Om should have probably used a range instead of an absolute number in that table atleast for CYA purposes. I am not necessarily agreeing with Om’s valuation methodology but I don’t agree with Jason’s view point.

I checked out his Blog and the reasons for why he is disagreeing with Om. I dont think his reasoning ties out. If you use his assumptions at (link)

The numbers at the high end of the range come in the same ballpark as Om’s.

But, as I mentioned in that comment, I didn’t fully read Om’s article but the table seems to be catching everybody’s attention and Om should have probably used a range instead of an absolute number in that table atleast for CYA purposes.

]]> By: ZuDfunck http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35518 ZuDfunck Sat, 03 Dec 2005 13:30:05 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35518 Would these fanatastic figures apply to a Vlog? Would these fanatastic figures apply to a Vlog?

]]> By: Ian Bell http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35517 Ian Bell Wed, 30 Nov 2005 05:10:43 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35517 I think a lot of people are missing the point. The article IMO is taking a number of factors and brings them down to the lowest common denominator – cost per unique visitor. I don't think OM intended to break open the gat and flow charts to figure out some sort of elaborate equation to a company's net worth. The reason why there is an average dollar amount tied into each visitor is because each site is different; their readers behave and react differently and create a different ROI depending on the sites business structure and market segment. I found the article interesting and sort of fun/light-hearted to read. It’s like listening to those bizarre sports facts you hear the announcers talk about during the football game. You wouldn’t base a business decision on them, but it’s still interesting to know. I think a lot of people are missing the point. The article IMO is taking a number of factors and brings them down to the lowest common denominator – cost per unique visitor. I don’t think OM intended to break open the gat and flow charts to figure out some sort of elaborate equation to a company’s net worth.

The reason why there is an average dollar amount tied into each visitor is because each site is different; their readers behave and react differently and create a different ROI depending on the sites business structure and market segment.

I found the article interesting and sort of fun/light-hearted to read. It’s like listening to those bizarre sports facts you hear the announcers talk about during the football game. You wouldn’t base a business decision on them, but it’s still interesting to know.

]]> By: Ian Bell http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35515 Ian Bell Wed, 30 Nov 2005 05:02:36 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35515 What a genius comment: "And according to Weblogs Inc. co-founder Jason Calacanis, the most valuable online media companies are those that are already generating revenue. " What a genius comment:

“And according to Weblogs Inc. co-founder Jason Calacanis, the most valuable online media companies are those that are already generating revenue. “

]]> By: Carsten http://gigaom.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35513 Carsten Wed, 30 Nov 2005 03:44:25 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/11/28/the-return-of-monetized-eyeballs/#comment-35513 Hmmm... I have to believe the value of a site can't be derived simply by the number of visitors... There has to be a viable business model for any real value to exist, no? Maybe I'm too Web1.0... oh wait, that was the web of the bubble wasn't it. Hmmm… I have to believe the value of a site can’t be derived simply by the number of visitors… There has to be a viable business model for any real value to exist, no? Maybe I’m too Web1.0… oh wait, that was the web of the bubble wasn’t it.

]]>