Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites

2,281

Published on

Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites, using data gathered from SimilarWeb. For a complete post on this topic, visit http://bit.ly/tra-so

Comparing online traffic sources of e-commerce and media websites, using data gathered from SimilarWeb. For a complete post on this topic, visit http://bit.ly/tra-so

Published in: Business, Technology
3 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Shyam: Good question. I believe they started with 60%+ social traffic when they launched and were fully focusing on social media as a marketing tool. But mid-late 2012s, their other sources of traffic seems to have caught up significantly. Like,

    http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/02/04/with-2m-members-fab-tips-the-awareness-scale-as-direct-traffic-passes-emails/

    http://www.internetretailer.com/2012/12/11/fabcom-leads-pack-social-commerce

    It them seemed more in the 20-24% range. The data I used is Feb-Mar-Apr 2013, which could explain further erosion in social traffic and gain in other forms of traffic.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Don't you think Social for fab.com is way off the mark? Considering the fact that fab keeps on communicating strongly that their share of socially referred visitors is nearly 60%.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Very useful, thanks for sharing.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,281
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
7
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
3
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. beastoftraal.comComparing traffic sources ofe-commerce and media websitesA rudimentary desktop researchusing data gathered from SimilarWebByFor a detailed post on this topic, visit http://www.bit.ly/tra-so
  • 2. beastoftraal.comWhat is SimilarWeb?• An Israeli company that offers websitecomparison data like Amazon’s Alexa,Quantcast or Compete.• Relatively new player in this space, thoughtheir plugins are supposed to be in existencefor 4+ years.• Data is, of course, questionable, as is Alexa’s.
  • 3. beastoftraal.comWhat kind of data is this?• Tools like Alexa and SimilarWeb are competitiveresearch tools, and should be used only tounderstand competitive environment.• I did speak to a couple of industry folks and most ofthem said (when presented with this data thatincluded a website they are associated with) thenumbers – or at least the split – are not completelyoff the mark.• They are not bang-on target – not at all – but servesthe purpose as a rudimentary competitive analysis.
  • 4. beastoftraal.comWhich sites are included here?• I spent some time in getting data and comparing notes aroundtraffic sources for two industries (among others) for whom onlinetraffic is mighty important (in terms of basic survival) – e-commerceand media.• For e-commerce, I had a list of top Indian online stores (including afew travel websites and restaurant recommendation sites) and 4major global ones (excluding predominantly non-English dependentones like Rakuten or Ozon).• For media, I had a list of top Indian and international mainstreammedia websites and a list of global online-only media properties. Ishudder to call QZ or HuffPo a blog anymore.(Why? See my post - Blogger or journalist? How to tell thedifference? http://bit.ly/blog-j)
  • 5. beastoftraal.comRESULTS
  • 6. beastoftraal.comBrand Direct Referrals Search Social Mail DisplayPepperfry 33.02 19.74 22.65 16.77 6.09 1.72Quikr 15.34 12.50 55.96 0.93 4.85 10.43Zovi 41.72 14.71 12.60 23.83 4.43 2.71Ebay 36.74 14.27 41.91 1.75 4.40 0.94Homeshop18 24.83 19.34 43.00 1.81 3.93 7.08Bestylish 29.09 14.11 30.51 20.75 3.57 1.95Snapdeal 36.46 19.19 30.62 8.87 2.14 2.73Infibeam 23.19 15.04 59.16 0.54 1.96 0.11Yebhi 33.98 21.10 30.13 10.42 1.69 2.68Flipkart 33.46 17.68 43.16 3.26 1.50 0.93Jabong 30.24 23.30 17.16 20.46 1.39 7.44Olx 22.22 10.54 51.93 8.63 1.38 5.30Myntra 37.42 28.72 19.22 10.80 0.93 2.92Urbanladder 24.22 12.76 21.51 39.82 0.36 1.33Junglee 26.39 13.14 46.71 1.15 0.27 12.35Possibly a sign that Zovi’soffline (print, TV andoutdoor) campaigns areworking better thanothers… that peoplebother typing the URLmanually and visiting thesite.Myntra has spoken about referraltraffic working well for them. Thiswas in a Business Today story(http://bit.ly/myntra-BT) aboutservices like Tyroo and Komli,among others.Sign of effective SEO andSEM, perhaps?A combination of very effective organic and paid socialmedia effort, I assume. Another factor is that the productticket price in UrbanLadder is higher than other e-commerce stores like Myntra or Flipkart. Plus, relativelylonger purchase cycles (from a need point of view). These2 could mean that they spend less time on customersupport on social media and could focus more on productpush with links.Really well-targetedand well-designedmailers that inducepurchase? And anindication that theydig into user insightsvery well to suggestrelevant productsbased on browsingor purchase history?Indian e-commerce websitesData gathered from SimilarWeb.com, May 2013.
  • 7. beastoftraal.comI did expect much betterpercentage here for Amazongiven how popular and widelyused their seller program is(enabling blogs with widgets toget commission on productssold). It’s odd that Ebay leadsthis pack!Global e-commerce websitesBrand Direct Referrals Search Social Mail DisplayFab 47.19 9.03 6.84 13.59 20.70 2.66Etsy 40.92 18.95 28.15 9.41 2.54 0.03Amazon 48.28 18.98 27.28 1.73 3.48 0.24Ebay 52.80 20.07 22.20 1.07 3.78 0.08The highest among Indiane-commerce sites was41%. The average forthese 4 global sites aresignificantly higher andstart at 40%! Again, couldindicate strong recallvalue built over the years.This, again, odd. Given the time sites like Ebay andAmazon have been online and the sheer range ofproducts they sell, I would have assumed that theyhad mastered SEO and SEM, and even organicplacements in search. Indian sites, in comparison,seem to be doing it more aggressively.Again, much lesser thanIndian counterparts,surprisingly. Would love to see an e-mailer from Fab.com! 20%is incredibly high andclass-leading, Indian orglobal! An early 2012 NYTstory did refer to Fab as apioneer in social retailing!(http://nyti.ms/fab-NYT)Data gathered from SimilarWeb.com, May 2013.
  • 8. beastoftraal.comE-commerce – social trafficData gathered from SimilarWeb.com, May 2013.Brand Facebook Twitter LinkedIn YouTube Pinterest Reddit StumbleuponJabong 97.35 2.45Bestylish 99.13 0.03 0.74Zovi 99.12 0.03 0.10 0.63Pepperfry 99.23 0.03 0.08 0.55Myntra 87.64 0.02 0.04 12.15Yebhi 80.61 19.12Snapdeal 99.14 0.02 0.65Flipkart 75.65 19.53Ebay 93.90 0.31 0.14 5.05Homeshop18 82.30 0.27 14.81Junglee 75.64 20.93Infibeam 88.48 1.28 3.52Urbanladder 99.78 0.22Quikr 82.75 0.25 5.83Olx 94.32 0.04 0.04 5.27Fab 85.55 0.79 1.47 10.86Etsy 49.84 4.79 29.75Amazon 50.11 4.38 20.53Ebay 64.92 2.93 14.95The dependence on Facebook is not surprising at all. Butthe extent of dependence is staggering! One big reasoncould be the fact that they have an evolved system ofgaming reach, using promotional posts. That makes organicpush a second option, for brands that have the money.The limited impactof Twitter is ashocker! Does thisimply that Twitterperhaps is lessuseful in drivingtraffic (andeventually purchaseconsideration),given how fastthings change onthe platform?The power of YouTube to push so much traffic andbeing next only to Facebook (beating Twitter) ishugely surprising! Given Flipkart’s recent tie-up withYouTube (in India - http://bit.ly/YT-MN) to add Flytestore links to relevant songs, they may do better inthe future.Just goes to showthat Pinterest is yet totake off in India, inany sense. And thefact that newer e-commerce stores likeFab and Etsy havetaken to itconsiderably betterthan old warriors likeAmazon or Ebay!
  • 9. beastoftraal.comTravel websitesData gathered from SimilarWeb.com, May 2013.Brand Direct Referrals Search Social Mail DisplayMakeMyTrip 33.92 16.49 44.81 1.83 1.44 1.52Cleartrip 31.69 15.90 50.84 0.23 0.66 0.68Yatra 40.30 19.00 37.82 0.28 0.53 2.07Ixigo 16.36 9.58 72.59 1.14 0.26 0.08Expedia 42.82 26.88 26.08 0.37 3.32 0.53In line with numbers ofglobal and Indian e-commerce stores.Mighty less, compared to e-commercestores. Possible reason could be need-based purchase pattern as againstchances of impulse and out-of-turnpurchases, which could affect theamount of promotion and social sharingon social media websites.The highest among Indian and global e-commercesites was 59%. In comparison, Ixigo’s 72% seemsmassive! More evolved SEO and search advertisingin play?
  • 10. beastoftraal.comRestaurant recommendationsData gathered from SimilarWeb.com, May 2013.Brand Direct Referrals Search Social Mail DisplayZomato 16.11 7.23 75.04 0.91 0.12 0.59Burrp 10.82 5.28 83.17 0.58 0.12 0.03Yelp 20.33 5.09 73.44 0.59 0.52 0.03Quite obvious! The fact that most users perhaps do not goto a site like Burrp or Zomato directly to search for arestaurant and use a search engine to reach such sitesbecomes apparent here. Increased use of mobile appswhere there is direct interaction between the service anduser (without the search in between) could topple thisequation, however, in the near future,
  • 11. beastoftraal.comIndian mediaData gathered from SimilarWeb.com, May 2013.Brand Direct Referrals Search Social Mail DisplayEconomic Times 34.15 15.35 36.46 11.66 1.89 0.48Telegraph 23.39 13.54 56.68 5.78 0.55 0.05Outlook 23.77 8.91 58.55 6.59 2.08 0.08The Hindu 34.37 11.94 47.52 5.63 0.54 0.01CNN IBN 38.60 9.57 46.24 5.08 0.41 0.10Indian Express 26.39 7.52 61.88 3.75 0.44 0.02Times of India 30.01 23.77 41.33 3.99 0.89 0.02NDTV 47.04 10.28 38.07 3.61 0.43 0.56Mint 21.37 9.59 64.19 3.80 0.63 0.42Hindustan Times 34.49 6.30 55.42 3.30 0.21 0.28DNA 15.90 6.25 74.49 3.00 0.34 0.02Given the strong brand names built over years, directtraffic seems lesser (except for NDTV). It could also be aplay of limited internet access (that is, the number ofpeople preferring the other version of these media brands(TV or print) than online, for consuming news.The sheer number ofonline properties theTimes Group has builtover the years couldbe at play here,helping them withcross-linking eachother websitegenerously.Mighty obvious, Iassume. Search drivesmost of news mediatraffic. DNA’s leadhere is surprisingthough – would loveto know what they aredoing so well to leadwith such a margin!Are people sharingmore links from TheEconomic Times onsocial media? Or, arethey promoting theirposts better on socialmedia?
  • 12. beastoftraal.comGlobal mediaData gathered from SimilarWeb.com, May 2013.Brand Direct Referrals Search Social Mail DisplayNew Yorker 34.15 16.05 24.62 20.43 4.67 0.09Newsweek 39.81 17.61 24.97 17.61Economist 41.55 12.74 28.99 13.84 2.48 0.41Guardian 28.71 15.15 45.59 9.58 0.91 0.06Forbes 19.89 19.64 51.33 7.99 0.75 0.40NYT 41.22 16.03 32.31 7.36 2.68 0.41WSJ 40.22 18.73 32.77 6.18 1.67 0.43Indicative of moreevolved SEO and SEM,probably.Relatively high… for amedia publication!I’d love to see whatNew Yorker does withits emails!
  • 13. beastoftraal.comOnline publicationsData gathered from SimilarWeb.com, May 2013.Brand Direct Referrals Search Social Mail DisplayBoing Boing 42.76 10.88 18.20 27.68 0.47Gizmodo 38.32 14.35 24.46 21.42 1.37 0.07Arstechnica 39.07 15.34 23.93 21.09 0.55 0.01Wired 34.30 15.60 30.91 18.54 0.64 0.01Mashable 23.60 6.51 52.08 16.96 0.82 0.03Slate 38.06 21.01 17.76 15.83 2.33 0.01Techcrunch 32.61 13.46 37.66 14.98 0.96 0.32Gigaom 27.87 10.69 46.61 13.65 0.65 0.53AllthingsD 33.12 21.39 32.28 11.82 1.23 0.16Lifehacker 42.31 12.45 34.98 9.64 0.58 0.05Engadget 46.28 11.29 32.89 9.20 0.32 0.02HuffPo 25.24 36.89 22.28 7.91 7.60 0.07Buzzfeed 28.15 12.82 8.85 49.13 0.94 0.11QZ 31.12 16.27 10.81 40.67 1.07 0.07Such high direct traffic for relatively new brands is aninteresting phenomenon. Does this mean that thesebrands have gained as much significance as their age-oldmainstream media counterparts? That’s quite a feat!I suppose Mashable has masteredthe art of SEO/SEM!This is amazing! Are storiesfrom Buzzfeed (and Quartz)shared more often on socialmedia than others?Does HuffPo has anemail push too? If yes,wonder what they aredoing right to do sowell, compared toothers!
  • 14. beastoftraal.comMedia – social trafficData gathered from SimilarWeb.com, May 2013.Indicative of moreevolved SEO and SEM,probably.The entry ofStumbleupon as amajor traffic sourceonly for onlinepublications is a majorrevelation! In manycases, it is as good as,or better than evenFacebook! Are thesepublications spendingless on Facebook andmaking more evolveduse of Stumbleupon?Brand Facebook Twitter LinkedIn YouTube Pinterest Reddit StumbleuponEconomic Times 65.62 31.99 1.01Telegraph 79.10 17.01 1.94Outlook 59.78 35.53 1.16 2.72The Hindu 82.89 13.49 0.69 1.22CNN IBN 78.93 13.58 1.34 2.23 1.83Indian Express 57.96 16.97 0.82 6.84Times of India 74.63 15.34 0.71 1.79 7.06NDTV 76.31 9.21 0.74 4.20 8.52Mint 59.04 33.06 1.93 3.36Hindustan Times 50.04 16.36 1.14 20.90DNA 57.75 25.23 3.52Newyorker 54.23 13.33 9.57Newsweek 7.37 2.24Economist 44.28 14.86 18.22Guardian 46.67 16.11 1.08 18.74Forbes 34.29 10.55 7.30 13.96NYT 49.81 16.72 2.69 14.79WSJ 44.73 25.08 8.68 13.78Boing Boing 12.53 7.59 16.00 60.23Gizmodo 33.54 3.53 8.29 45.89Arstechnica 8.16 4.51 58.89 22.12Wired 18.80 8.50 27.08 33.08Mashable 45.78 10.84 3.69 1.71 35.20Slate 41.24 12.11 17.39 21.74Techcrunch 33.69 12.66 7.95 35.50Gigaom 13.01 11.90 7.42 11.96 50.60AllthingsD 18.03 22.84 30.22 6.96 13.19Lifehacker 17.52 5.71 3.99 64.55Engadget 16.80 7.72 9.51 59.83HuffPo 68.19 11.70 1.10 8.06 9.46Buzzfeed 63.06 3.50 6.00 2.81 23.04QZ 11.81 9.64 36.52 16.23Honest wonder! Whatdoes Hindustan Timesdo to get so muchsocial traffic fromReddit? Particularlywhen other Indianmedia get meagretraffic from it!Unlike e-commercewebsites, Indianmedia gainstremendously fromTwitter! Thedependence onFacebook, as acontrary, is alsolesser. Outlook, aweekly magazineleading this part issurprising though. Iwould have expecteda daily newspublication leadingthis!Given how muchmore bigger Twitteris, in the US (andoutside India), it issurprising to see itsending lesser trafficthan to does toIndian media!
  • 15. beastoftraal.comVisit my blog, beastoftraal.com for more!

×