Comments on: How Much Traffic Do “WWW” Domains Get: A New Study Says At Least 1% http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/ Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:38:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Matt http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27427 Matt Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:10:53 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27427 CSCGlobal.com, which are basically lawyers that try to protect companies from TM infridgements like WeightWatchers. So the report is already not valid because it's commissioned by a non-neutral party. It'd be in their interest to pump up this figure. Two reasons: 1. They'll get more news coverage (that's already evident from this blog) 2. Companies that read this will see that their www typo is taken and most likely parked, and therefore will contact CSCGlobal for the service. Actually, a load of lying crooks! PS To the person that posted about Alexa. Alexa is not always accurate. They are actually known for being inaccurate. But look at my example on Alexa: WeightWatchers.com is ranked 2853, and WWWWeightWatchers.com is ranked 8,718,231. That's about 0.03%. CSCGlobal.com, which are basically lawyers that try to protect companies from TM infridgements like WeightWatchers.

So the report is already not valid because it’s commissioned by a non-neutral party. It’d be in their interest to pump up this figure. Two reasons:

1. They’ll get more news coverage (that’s already evident from this blog)

2. Companies that read this will see that their www typo is taken and most likely parked, and therefore will contact CSCGlobal for the service.

Actually, a load of lying crooks!

PS
To the person that posted about Alexa. Alexa is not always accurate. They are actually known for being inaccurate. But look at my example on Alexa: WeightWatchers.com is ranked 2853, and WWWWeightWatchers.com is ranked 8,718,231. That’s about 0.03%.

]]> By: MHB http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27426 MHB Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:09:45 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27426 Danny A trademark group Danny

A trademark group

]]> By: Danny Pryor http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27425 Danny Pryor Wed, 10 Mar 2010 00:52:37 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27425 @Matt; thank goodness every missing dot, character, misspelling or other conceivable direct-nav difficulty doesn't manifest. It would be interesting to examine the entire study. BTW: Who commissioned this study? (I didn't check the site listed above, yet) @Matt; thank goodness every missing dot, character, misspelling or other conceivable direct-nav difficulty doesn’t manifest. It would be interesting to examine the entire study.

BTW: Who commissioned this study? (I didn’t check the site listed above, yet)

]]> By: Matt http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27421 Matt Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:06:23 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27421 Another way to look at it. If every missing letter, dot, or character would be 1% loss, then imagine a domain name like Www.WeightWatchers.com. They'd lose about 22% of their visitors just from missing a character. Not to mention garbled characters, and extra characters such as WEEIGHT or WEIGHHT. They' be lose more than 100% of their traffif if this 1% data was correct HEHE. What a load of nonsense. Another way to look at it. If every missing letter, dot, or character would be 1% loss, then imagine a domain name like http://Www.WeightWatchers.com.

They’d lose about 22% of their visitors just from missing a character.

Not to mention garbled characters, and extra characters such as WEEIGHT or WEIGHHT. They’ be lose more than 100% of their traffif if this 1% data was correct HEHE. What a load of nonsense.

]]> By: Matt http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27418 Matt Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:56:24 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27418 And it's 0.1-0.3% only for comparing type-in traffic. Most websites get a lot of back link and search engine traffic which is not included in my estimate. The real number is undoubtedly 0.1% and below comparing the actual site traffic to the type-in traffic of the missing dot. In the .cm domain names, the missing o also generated about 1/1000th traffic of the .com domains according to my estimates and data. There are a few irregularities, but it's definitely not 1/100. And it’s 0.1-0.3% only for comparing type-in traffic.

Most websites get a lot of back link and search engine traffic which is not included in my estimate. The real number is undoubtedly 0.1% and below comparing the actual site traffic to the type-in traffic of the missing dot.

In the .cm domain names, the missing o also generated about 1/1000th traffic of the .com domains according to my estimates and data. There are a few irregularities, but it’s definitely not 1/100.

]]> By: Matt http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27417 Matt Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:52:30 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27417 The actual figure is 0.1% - 0.3%. These figures are wrong, and I agree with D. The actual figure is 0.1% – 0.3%.

These figures are wrong, and I agree with D.

]]> By: Traffic Ultimatum Introduction Review – Traffic Generation System by George Brown | Traffic Ultimatum User Review http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27378 Traffic Ultimatum Introduction Review – Traffic Generation System by George Brown | Traffic Ultimatum User Review Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:51:05 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27378 [...] How Much Traffic Do “WWW” Domains Get: A New Study Says At Least 1 … [...] [...] How Much Traffic Do “WWW” Domains Get: A New Study Says At Least 1 … [...]

]]> By: █████ my OLPC design █████ http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27345 █████ my OLPC design █████ Tue, 09 Mar 2010 07:36:43 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27345 "will provoke a mini land-rush" true... the domains' sellers will love very much this study... :) . “will provoke a mini land-rush”

true… the domains’ sellers will love very much this study… :)

.

]]> By: Danny Pryor http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27344 Danny Pryor Tue, 09 Mar 2010 07:00:22 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27344 This is very interesting to know. I wonder if this will provoke a mini land-rush on any domains with any appendages. Nah. Prob'ly not. This is very interesting to know. I wonder if this will provoke a mini land-rush on any domains with any appendages.

Nah. Prob’ly not.

]]> By: Blog Post Keywords To Search For Relevant Blogs To Pingback | TheGuruSieve.com/Blog http://www.thedomains.com/2010/03/08/how-much-traffic-do-www-domains-get-a-new-study-says-at-least-1/comment-page-1/#comment-27343 Blog Post Keywords To Search For Relevant Blogs To Pingback | TheGuruSieve.com/Blog Tue, 09 Mar 2010 06:52:57 +0000 http://www.thedomains.com/?p=7748#comment-27343 [...] How Much Traffic Do “WWW” Domains Get: A New Study Says At Least 1% | The Domains [...] [...] How Much Traffic Do “WWW” Domains Get: A New Study Says At Least 1% | The Domains [...]

]]>