<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Looking for reliable site-traffic data</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/</link>
	<description>By Dan Kennedy • The press, politics, technology, culture and other passions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:59:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: LFNeilson</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-51021</link>
		<dc:creator>LFNeilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:53:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-51021</guid>
		<description>Off-season, our traffic counts are pretty low. The meter reader came down the road today and tripled it.
zzzzzzzz</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Off-season, our traffic counts are pretty low. The meter reader came down the road today and tripled it.<br />
zzzzzzzz</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-50991</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-50991</guid>
		<description>I should explain that the Google stuff is search volume, but it&#039;s been shown to be a somewhat reasonable proxy for site sizing/traffic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I should explain that the Google stuff is search volume, but it&#8217;s been shown to be a somewhat reasonable proxy for site sizing/traffic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-50990</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:04:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-50990</guid>
		<description>Google has their Trends site to compare websites:

http://www.google.com/trends?q=cnn.com%2C+msnbc.com%2C+foxnews.com&amp;ctab=0&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google has their Trends site to compare websites:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.google.com/trends?q=cnn.com%2C+msnbc.com%2C+foxnews.com&amp;ctab=0&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/trends?q=cnn.com%2C+msnbc.com%2C+foxnews.com&amp;ctab=0&amp;geo=all&amp;date=all&amp;sort=0</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Gaffin</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-50988</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Gaffin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:39:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-50988</guid>
		<description>Ah! What Jason said. The main issue is that, yes, Quantcast is more accurate with sites running their code.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah! What Jason said. The main issue is that, yes, Quantcast is more accurate with sites running their code.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Name</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-50986</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Name</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:18:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-50986</guid>
		<description>Data on other people&#039;s websites is a closely guarded secret in most cases. I doubt you&#039;d find anything really reliable that they wouldn&#039;t tell you themselves.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Data on other people&#8217;s websites is a closely guarded secret in most cases. I doubt you&#8217;d find anything really reliable that they wouldn&#8217;t tell you themselves.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lkcape</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-50985</link>
		<dc:creator>lkcape</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:12:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-50985</guid>
		<description>Try Alexa... http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/dankennedy.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Try Alexa&#8230; <a href="http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/dankennedy.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/dankennedy.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Fontaine</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-50984</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Fontaine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:09:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-50984</guid>
		<description>Your prior posters are correct with both Quantcast and Compete. I have about 20+ sites myself, and another few dozen clients, and both of those measurments are way off, unfortunately. If you&#039;re looking to measure a given site vs another I could probably help you using various other tools. If you looking for position related to specific search criteria, same thing. You can look at page rank, positioning, paid positions, the average pay-per price for a given term, etc.. But I have not found a reliable tool to measure other website&#039;s traffic. If there&#039;s something specific you&#039;re seeking, other than a &quot;number&quot;, shoot me an email and i&#039;d be happy to let you know what I come up with.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your prior posters are correct with both Quantcast and Compete. I have about 20+ sites myself, and another few dozen clients, and both of those measurments are way off, unfortunately. If you&#8217;re looking to measure a given site vs another I could probably help you using various other tools. If you looking for position related to specific search criteria, same thing. You can look at page rank, positioning, paid positions, the average pay-per price for a given term, etc.. But I have not found a reliable tool to measure other website&#8217;s traffic. If there&#8217;s something specific you&#8217;re seeking, other than a &#8220;number&#8221;, shoot me an email and i&#8217;d be happy to let you know what I come up with.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Butler</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-50978</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Butler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:56:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-50978</guid>
		<description>If you&#039;re just looking for rough comparisons (apples to apples) without putting money of the precision of the results, then either Quantcast or Compete are fine. I&#039;ve found that Quantcast gives you a bit more useful information up front; Compete is quicker to demand money.

Compete also tends to give much higher unique visitor numbers (on the tests I&#039;ve run recently).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you&#8217;re just looking for rough comparisons (apples to apples) without putting money of the precision of the results, then either Quantcast or Compete are fine. I&#8217;ve found that Quantcast gives you a bit more useful information up front; Compete is quicker to demand money.</p>
<p>Compete also tends to give much higher unique visitor numbers (on the tests I&#8217;ve run recently).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Kennedy</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-50977</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Kennedy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-50977</guid>
		<description>Adam and Ikcape: I didn&#039;t explain myself well at all. I&#039;m looking for data on other people&#039;s Web sites, not mine. I use SiteMeter and WordPress&#039;s own system, which are more than sufficient for my purposes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adam and Ikcape: I didn&#8217;t explain myself well at all. I&#8217;m looking for data on other people&#8217;s Web sites, not mine. I use SiteMeter and WordPress&#8217;s own system, which are more than sufficient for my purposes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lkcape</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/10/22/looking-for-reliable-site-traffic-data/comment-page-1/#comment-50976</link>
		<dc:creator>lkcape</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:44:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6518#comment-50976</guid>
		<description>Google Analytics.

Allows detail looks at a variety of of statistics.

If your web host has it, have him activate a Control Panel for you.  In that is a function called ASWSTATs which gives you another set of detailed usage data.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google Analytics.</p>
<p>Allows detail looks at a variety of of statistics.</p>
<p>If your web host has it, have him activate a Control Panel for you.  In that is a function called ASWSTATs which gives you another set of detailed usage data.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
