What Alexa says about Bonus Ball web traffic

watchez

watchez

What time is it?
Silver Member
You don't need to be the administrator

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wpbl.tv


Statistics Summary for wpbl.tv
Wpbl.tv's three-month global Alexa traffic rank is 17,824,700.

Alexa Traffic Rank Reputation
17,824,700

Sites Linking In
(No reviews yet)

Estimated percentage of global internet users who visit wpbl.tv:
Reach % Change
3 month 0.000002%

Or basically immeasurable

Now lets compare to say AZBilliards -

News, articles, interviews, money list, and TV Reminder servers.
Statistics Summary for azbilliards.com
AzBilliards.com's three-month global Alexa traffic rank is 87,097. The site has a relatively good traffic rank in the cities of Missoula (#126) and Sampaloc (#1,363). This site's visitors view an... Show More


Alexa Traffic Rank Reputation
87,097
Global Rank
23,988
Sites Linking In
(No reviews yet)

Estimated percentage of global internet users who visit azbilliards.com:
Reach % Change
7 day 0.0012% +7%
1 month 0.00123% +6%
3 month 0.00124% +15%


Now if anyone wants to still wager there were 10,000 viewers - 240,000 views on the www.wpbl.tv website or 500,000 views (as I have been told both of these numbers have been stated, please contact me.
 
watchez said:
You don't need to be the administrator

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wpbl.tv


Statistics Summary for wpbl.tv
Wpbl.tv's three-month global Alexa traffic rank is 17,824,700.

Alexa Traffic RankReputation
17,824,700

Sites Linking In
(No reviews yet)

Estimated percentage of global internet users who visit wpbl.tv:
Reach %Change
3 month0.000002%

Or basically immeasurable

Now lets compare to say AZBilliards -

News, articles, interviews, money list, and TV Reminder servers.
Statistics Summary for azbilliards.com
AzBilliards.com's three-month global Alexa traffic rank is 87,097. The site has a relatively good traffic rank in the cities of Missoula (#126) and Sampaloc (#1,363). This site's visitors view an... Show More


Alexa Traffic RankReputation
87,097
Global Rank
23,988
Sites Linking In
(No reviews yet)

Estimated percentage of global internet users who visit azbilliards.com:
Reach %Change
7 day0.0012% +7%
1 month0.00123% +6%
3 month0.00124% +15%


Now if anyone wants to still wager there were 10,000 viewers - 240,000 views on the www.wpbl.tv website or 500,000 views (as I have been told both of these numbers have been stated, please contact me.
Click to expand...

Alexa would not measure the amount of people trying to acess the stream. You would need the daily logs.

But forget it, you know there isnt going to be any sort of bet even if the 10k number is accurate.

BB will play out their hand because the chips are already all in. All we can do is sit back and enjoy the show whatever it happens to end up being.

Lets hope for the best. BB works out millions flock to poolrooms and leagues grow.
 
JB - take the streaming out of it. they are telling the players and potential or what they think there are as potential sponsors that their website is getting 240,000 (or as much as 500,000 views) a day.

Want another comparision


Statistics Summary for theactionreport.com

Theactionreport.com's three-month global Alexa traffic rank is 1,643,347. The site has a bounce rate of roughly 8% (i.e., 8% of visits consist of only one pageview). Visitors to the site spend... Show More
.

Alexa Traffic Rank

Reputation



Global 1,643,347

Global Rank

Estimated percentage of global internet users who visit theactionreport.com:

Reach % Change

3 month
0.00006%


Hey JCIN - you must be getting 1.5 million views a day for that time of traffic.


And JB - one more just for you. You rank right up there with Bonus Ball. Damn son, you are doing better than Bonus Ball. You must be getting 600,000 views a day. Better hire some more leather workers cause the orders are going to be flooding in.


Statistics Summary for jbcases.com

Jbcases.com's three-month global Alexa traffic rank is 16,442,440.
.

Alexa Traffic Rank

Reputation



Global 16,442,440

Global Rank
Estimated percentage of global internet users who visit jbcases.com:

Reach % Change

3 month
0.000004%
 
I thought it only fair to check the www.wpbl.tv website ranking after the huge weekend of success surely to see a big spike in their overall ranking/viewership across the web.

Statistics Summary for wpbl.tv
Wpbl.tv's three-month global Alexa traffic rank is 17,915,139

Somehow it lost 90,439 spots.
 
Alexa rankings depend on people having the Alexa toolbar installed on the browsers they use. MOST people on the internet do not have the toolbar installed.

The internet is so vast that it's impossible to take a tiny percentage of users and extrapolate that to the whole internet and say that x-site is the 75,000th most popular site on the whole internet.

And it's easy to game the Alexa system by the very simple method of getting a lot of people you know to get the tool bar and visit the site often. In China I could easily get thousands of people to do it and their traffic would appear to be coming from different areas of the world.

I do understand where you are coming from though and to claim 10,000 attempted viewers or 500,000 uniques in one day is a tall claim for an obscure site. However it's not unheard of that a site can have such a spike. For example the fact that BB was in the news could drive more traffic there. No one knows what Facebook is worth because referrals from FB aren't tracked yet as far as I know.

Rather than Alexa - I rely on my own site logs to tell me what my traffic is and where it's coming from. Hostgator's logs are very detailed and helpful.

Here you can read some of the discussions around Alexa's accuracy https://www.google.com/search?q=acc...s=chrome.0.57.9459j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
 
Last edited:
JB Cases said:
Alexa rankings depend on people having the Alexa toolbar installed on the browsers they use. MOST people on the internet do not have the toolbar installed.

The internet is so vast that it's impossible to take a tiny percentage of users and extrapolate that to the whole internet and say that x-site is the 75,000th most popular site on the whole internet.

And it's easy to game the Alexa system by the very simple method of getting a lot of people you know to get the tool bar and visit the site often. In China I could easily get thousands of people to do it and their traffic would appear to be coming from different areas of the world.

I do understand where you are coming from though and to claim 10,000 attempted viewers or 500,000 uniques in one day is a tall claim for an obscure site. However it's not unheard of that a site can have such a spike. For example the fact that BB was in the news could drive more traffic there. No one knows what Facebook is worth because referrals from FB aren't tracked yet as far as I know.

Rather than Alexa - I rely on my own site logs to tell me what my traffic is and where it's coming from. Hostgator's logs are very detailed and helpful.

Here you can read some of the discussions around Alexa's accuracy https://www.google.com/search?q=acc...s=chrome.0.57.9459j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Click to expand...

That's exactly how focus groups, marketing analysis, pharmaceutical drug clinical trials, and just about every poll known to man including national election polls do it, they take the results of a relatively small percentage of known participants (sample group) and use the resulting percentages to calculate the probable results of the larger or target group. It's not infallible, and the larger and more accurate the sample group the more reliable the results, but that's exactly the way it is done. It is generally impossible, impractical, and unnecessary to poll the entire world when a reasonably sized sampling is all that is required.

While what you state in the second outlined paragraph is generally correct, I don't understand your point. If a firm was to manipulate the poll as you suggest, the purpose and numbers would be higher/better than normal, not lower as these indicate.

I'm sorry to say that If I had to give an opinion at this stage, I would have to say that I find that BB has little, if any, credibility.

J
 
watchez said:
I thought it only fair to check the www.wpbl.tv website ranking after the huge weekend of success surely to see a big spike in their overall ranking/viewership across the web.

Statistics Summary for wpbl.tv
Wpbl.tv's three-month global Alexa traffic rank is 17,915,139

Somehow it lost 90,439 spots.
Click to expand...

The Website is www.wpbltv.com The address changed months ago....
 
jimmyg said:
That's exactly how focus groups, marketing analysis, pharmaceutical drug clinical trials, and just about every poll known to man including national election polls do it, they take the results of a relatively small percentage of known participants (sample group) and use the resulting percentages to calculate the probable results of the larger or target group. It's not infallible, and the larger and more accurate the sample group the more reliable the results, but that's exactly the way it is done. It is generally impossible, impractical, and unnecessary to poll the entire world when a reasonably sized sampling is all that is required.

While what you state in the second outlined paragraph is generally correct, I don't understand your point. If a firm was to manipulate the poll as you suggest, the purpose and numbers would be higher/better than normal, not lower as these indicate.

I'm sorry to say that If I had to give an opinion at this stage, I would have to say that I find that BB has little, if any, credibility.

J
Click to expand...

I am saying that BB did NOT manipulate Alexa. I am sure that Alexa rank is the farthest thing from their mind and probably never entered their mind at all. As some people have said in many many discussions around the web Alexa rankings are ONLY really good for trying to sell the site or trying to sell advertising on the site to people who don't know any better. Otherwise it's totally meaningless.

I guarantee you I can push any site in the world way up on Alexa rankings for not much money.

The rankings MAY have some relevance to some popular mainstream sites who do get a lot of traffic but when you are talking about niche sites like the bonus ball one with a young URL the stats are going to be meaningless. I just think using Alexa to bust Bonus Ball's chops is not a very reliable tool/weapon.

If anyone wants to bet me $5000 I bet I can improve a ramdom site's Alexa rating dramatically in one month. I will take a screen shot of where they are now and the date and then where they are in one month from now. I will pick one with a similar rank as Bonus Ball but I won't reveal the name I chose because I don't want anyone to report the gaming to Alexa and have them sandbox the site.

I will spend $4000 on the campaign and use the other $1000 to buy a nice big tv to watch Bonus Ball on :-)

Also Alexa themselves say that their rankings are volatile for sites ranked less than the top 100,000. http://www.alexa.com/help/traffic-learn-more
 
Last edited:
meximan2469 said:
The Website is www.wpbltv.com The address changed months ago....
Click to expand...

They have multiple domains, playbonusball.com, wpbl.tv, and wpbltv.com ... maybe some other 'just in case' ones. I dunno if multiple domains might screw up the alexa stats. I suspect they're not that meaningful, I see lots of gripes on various sites about the inaccuracy of alexa numbers. I wouldn't look at Alexa numbers and try to say "BAM! See! Raging success!" or "BAM! See! Told you it would fail!"

Once BB runs out of foot-shooting ammo, and finally launches properly,
we should be able to pretty quickly gauge how many viewers consistently watch each week.
 
I watched the Archer Klatt match, and it was OK .... pretty enjoyable actually. Totally different strategies needed. Can't understand all the hate of BB from lots of people who constantly say they wish well for the sport.

Will it be the Texas Holdem of the pool world ? Probably not, but I can see it catching on in bar leagues. People are pretty bored with 8 and 9 ball here in PA.

REV
 
Originally Posted by jimmyg View Post:
That's exactly how focus groups, marketing analysis, pharmaceutical drug clinical trials, and just about every poll known to man including national election polls do it, they take the results of a relatively small percentage of known participants (sample group) and use the resulting percentages to calculate the probable results of the larger or target group. It's not infallible, and the larger and more accurate the sample group the more reliable the results, but that's exactly the way it is done. It is generally impossible, impractical, and unnecessary to poll the entire world when a reasonably sized sampling is all that is required.

While what you state in the second outlined paragraph is generally correct, I don't understand your point. If a firm was to manipulate the poll as you suggest, the purpose and numbers would be higher/better than normal, not lower as these indicate.

I'm sorry to say that If I had to give an opinion at this stage, I would have to say that I find that BB has little, if any, credibility. J [End Quote]
Click to expand...
JB Cases said:
I am saying that BB did NOT manipulate Alexa. I am sure that Alexa rank is the farthest thing from their mind and probably never entered their mind at all. As some people have said in many many discussions around the web Alexa rankings are ONLY really good for trying to sell the site or trying to sell advertising on the site to people who don't know any better. Otherwise it's totally meaningless.

I guarantee you I can push any site in the world way up on Alexa rankings for not much money.

The rankings MAY have some relevance to some popular mainstream sites who do get a lot of traffic but when you are talking about niche sites like the bonus ball one with a young URL the stats are going to be meaningless. I just think using Alexa to bust Bonus Ball's chops is not a very reliable tool/weapon.

If anyone wants to bet me $5000 I bet I can improve a ramdom site's Alexa rating dramatically in one month. I will take a screen shot of where they are now and the date and then where they are in one month from now. I will pick one with a similar rank as Bonus Ball but I won't reveal the name I chose because I don't want anyone to report the gaming to Alexa and have them sandbox the site.

I will spend $4000 on the campaign and use the other $1000 to buy a nice big tv to watch Bonus Ball on :-)

Also Alexa themselves say that their rankings are volatile for sites ranked less than the top 100,000. http://www.alexa.com/help/traffic-learn-more
Click to expand...

Let's stay focused and save all the wager talk for another time.

If I understand you correctly, in a nutshell, you claim that Alexa's numbers are irrelevant and I disagree. Okay.

Well let's argue the relevance of those numbers: We're only dealing with numbers here, so all it's really about is probability, accuracy, and keeping comparisons equal. The "sampling" size is fairly immaterial, although I've already mentioned that the larger the number the more accurate the results are likely to be. More important than size, is the selection of the sampling group (for example: a test done on humans for a human treatment is more relevant and accurate than a test done on pigs), well here we have a factual measure of subjects that actually logged into the site(s) which is the best and most accurate sampling there can be, bar none. The third important factor is making "like" and "equal" comparisons, that is comparing the same "factors" within the same test and sampling group, which is exactly what we have here; total number of "viewers" measured equally by the same standards and equipment used by "Alexa". It's really quite simple.

As far as the Alexa numbers being able to be "manipulated", we both agree that, in this case, they weren't. Can they be? Probably, but then the intent would be to make the numbers higher, not lower. :smile:

All the spin in the solar system cannot change facts. :cool:

J
Click to expand...
 
Yes you can buy Facebook Followers - Twitter Followers. Literally by the 1000s

My point of contention is that BB is telling us and potential sponsors:

10,000 viewers for their live stream in one single evening

240,000 to 500,000 views to their website in ONE DAY.

JB wants to change the subject and wager on something that is not even relative to the original post in this thread. Deflection ignored. I want to keep it friendly and wager $1 on the under vs the over on any of the numbers posted above.

I would be the first to say I was wrong about BB, and buy a year subscription to their PPV to show support if their numbers were correct and they were overly successful as is what is attempted to be portrayed. But it seems like are taking a chapter out of the Charlie Williams book of marketing and it is simply lost on me.

Want another comparision to how strong 500,000 views to a website would be - this fall go to www.cbssports.com and watch the gametracker page for the football games. Millions of people play fantasy football and are interested in the real time stats for this. At most, there will be 45,000 viewers listed for any of the games at any time. It shows you the number right on their site.
 
watchez said:
Yes you can buy Facebook Followers - Twitter Followers. Literally by the 1000s

My point of contention is that BB is telling us and potential sponsors:

10,000 viewers for their live stream in one single evening

240,000 to 500,000 views to their website in ONE DAY.

JB wants to change the subject and wager on something that is not even relative to the original post in this thread. Deflection ignored. I want to keep it friendly and wager $1 on the under vs the over on any of the numbers posted above.

I would be the first to say I was wrong about BB, and buy a year subscription to their PPV to show support if their numbers were correct and they were overly successful as is what is attempted to be portrayed. But it seems like are taking a chapter out of the Charlie Williams book of marketing and it is simply lost on me.

Want another comparision to how strong 500,000 views to a website would be - this fall go to www.cbssports.com and watch the gametracker page for the football games. Millions of people play fantasy football and are interested in the real time stats for this. At most, there will be 45,000 viewers listed for any of the games at any time. It shows you the number right on their site.
Click to expand...

No I don't want to change the subject I just think that Alexa is a very POOR tool to beat someone up with when trying to lambast them about their traffic claims.

Remember Digg?

Anytime a thread on Digg got hot then it would often crash the site that the story linked to from so many people clicking on it. So you had relatively obscure sites getting hammered just because a link to the site was included in a story on Digg.

So I am NOT saying that Bonus Ball's self-reported numbers are legit but I am saying that such numbers are not unprecedented as a spike.
 
jimmyg said:
Originally Posted by jimmyg View Post:
That's exactly how focus groups, marketing analysis, pharmaceutical drug clinical trials, and just about every poll known to man including national election polls do it, they take the results of a relatively small percentage of known participants (sample group) and use the resulting percentages to calculate the probable results of the larger or target group. It's not infallible, and the larger and more accurate the sample group the more reliable the results, but that's exactly the way it is done. It is generally impossible, impractical, and unnecessary to poll the entire world when a reasonably sized sampling is all that is required.

While what you state in the second outlined paragraph is generally correct, I don't understand your point. If a firm was to manipulate the poll as you suggest, the purpose and numbers would be higher/better than normal, not lower as these indicate.

I'm sorry to say that If I had to give an opinion at this stage, I would have to say that I find that BB has little, if any, credibility. J [End Quote]
Click to expand...
Let's stay focused and save all the wager talk for another time.

If I understand you correctly, in a nutshell, you claim that Alexa's numbers are irrelevant and I disagree. Okay.

Well let's argue the relevance of those numbers: We're only dealing with numbers here, so all it's really about is probability, accuracy, and keeping comparisons equal. The "sampling" size is fairly immaterial, although I've already mentioned that the larger the number the more accurate the results are likely to be. More important than size, is the selection of the sampling group (for example: a test done on humans for a human treatment is more relevant and accurate than a test done on pigs), well here we have a factual measure of subjects that actually logged into the site(s) which is the best and most accurate sampling there can be, bar none. The third important factor is making "like" and "equal" comparisons, that is comparing the same "factors" within the same test and sampling group, which is exactly what we have here; total number of "viewers" measured equally by the same standards and equipment used by "Alexa". It's really quite simple.

As far as the Alexa numbers being able to be "manipulated", we both agree that, in this case, they weren't. Can they be? Probably, but then the intent would be to make the numbers higher, not lower. :smile:

All the spin in the solar system cannot change facts. :cool:

J
Click to expand...

That's right all the spin can't change the facts. And the facts are that even Alexa says that sites under the 100,000 rank can be widely off the true ranking.

This is like being on one side of town and asking people what the best restaurant is and nearly everyone gives answers for spots on that side of town that they go to all the time, meanwhile clear across town is a restaurant with a waiting list a mile long every night that very few people on the first side ever heard of. In that situation the results would be skewed towards the spots on the first side. So the stat would read the majority of people asked say that JoeBob's is the best place.

Meanwhile BillyJoes on the other side CRUSHES JoeBobs in numbers.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top