Neilsen Online: At what point are you embarrassed?

Actually, I’m not sure if I would be more embarrassed if I were Clickz or Neilsen at this point.

I visited the Clickz Web site this morning and clicked on the story Advertising Placements by Industry and Top Sponsored Links, February 2008.

I actually always get a good chuckle out of this. To be honest, all I did at a former company was make sure to keep purchasing media on Yahoo because it artificially inflated how much money our company was spending to potential advertisers. For some reason, the Neilsen panel skews to Yahoo users.

But, I’ve written about this before.

However, as I was scrolling through the running “commentary” this morning, I affixed my eyes on advertiser #10 in terms of sponsored links: TableForSix.

For those of your not familiar with <a href=””TableForSix, it’s a unique spin of non-direct online dating centered around a dinner party. It’s actually a good niche business. (I actually looked at the Wayback Machine and found out they launched in 1999.)

More importantly and to the point, both Quantcast and Compete have their uniques per month hovering about 45,000.

45,000 uniques.

Neilsen: 900,000,000 impressions

Does that seem plausible to you? No, not that TableForSix is a top 10 advertiser, but 900,000,000 impressions turning into at most 45,000 uniques, maybe 90,000 page views.

Quick data review for effect:

Neilsen: 900M impressions

Compete/Quantcast: @45K uniques



Visits ratio: 2 per unique (Quantcast)

Visits: 90,000

CTR: .1%

Clicks per linked impression spend only: 900,000

Best case scenario: Neilsen is 10x off

Again, I don’t know what I find more incredulous here:

– that Neilsen data is still treasured by marketers, especially brand marketers
– that Neilsen publishs and promotes data that doesn’t even pass a sanity check
– that Clickz promotes Neilsen data without sanity checking the data itself

There has been known to be issues with panel data for ever. However, that does not mean that both the industry and the companies promoting that data should sit idle.

A fair tradeoff here would be transparency in how Neilsen will improve this data over time. That should not be too much to ask.

And please Clickz, don’t prominently promote this data without a review, it does your web site, your brand, and your readers a disservice.


2 comments so far

  1. David on

    100% agree. Nielsen is too dumb to know that they are embarassing themselves here.

  2. […] Good we please get a thank you over at IMO for qa’ing your data Neilsen. Next time, you do the homework. Possibly related posts:Neilsen Online: At what point are you embarrassed? […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: