| 9:29 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
How do they get their %'s.?
|More than half of users checked out only one result and more than 80% stopped after looking at three results." |
More than half .... bla bla bla. Surely that leaves a remainder of less than 50% ... not 80%?
| 9:38 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Stop rushing to make yet another post count and take time out to read the material.
I would take that to mean that more than 50% stopped at the one result, and more than 80% stopped at no more than 3 results. No blah, blah about it.
| 9:50 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Anyone seen the original publication?
I checked here but could not find it:
Related subject: What makes a good search engine? [stlcu.com] from Computeruser.com
The article mentions the "rate of abandonment" of Teoma and states that it went from 40 percent in December of 2002 to 19 percent in January 2003.
That is only 19% of the people clicking on one of the Search engine results actually came back to the search engine to check others.
I'm sure Google checks this stuff as well as a certain percentage of SERPS carry click throughs and they have the toolbar data.
from this thread: [webmasterworld.com...]
[edited by: vitaplease at 10:20 am (utc) on June 27, 2003]
| 9:55 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Kettle, Pot, Black comes to mind! At least you got another post count :) - I grew out of that some days ago ... but you're getting there :)
Okay, more than 50% stopped at the one result - they hit a link and never came back for the same search because they got the results they wanted.... and more than 80% stopped at no more than 3 results... this means that 80% either got the results they wanted on the first, second or third link.
Is that what it is meant to say?
Am I understanding the stats better?
| 10:11 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Surely this could be interpreted in two ways?
Either people are not bothering to look around for more sites and just clicking on whatever comes up in the first few, OR the search engine is matching the search well and the users are happy with the first few results.
I would suggest it is a mix of the two. AllTheWeb gives good results and will match most queries.
| 10:15 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I wonder what rank they hit first. It's not always number one that gets the most hits.
Lets say on the first instance, the searcher scanned the results based upon their description before clicking the link. That action reduces the number of unwanted sites.
Whereas, if the user hit number one first, because it is at the top, it may be more likely that it wasn't suitable for the searcher.
| 10:26 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Well I will take a moment and remember that ATW is used by different set of people. Many from WW use ATW and yes I just use it to check the competition and reciprocal link check. I might see the top 3 results just for the sake of inquisitiveness. I don't know any normal person(non-webmaster or SEO) who uses ATW. A great search engine mind you!
|"Niche search engines that focus on a narrow topic or search engines that cluster results by finding similarities and grouping them may be consumers' best bet for improving relevancy," |
That is a suggestion. But how do regular searchers go to such sites. Through search engines?
| 10:50 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Either people are not bothering to look around for more sites and just clicking on whatever comes up in the first few, OR the search engine is matching the search well and the users are happy with the first few results. |
I would suggest it is a mix of the two.
Where I work in schools for most of my time I have a unique perspective of watching everyday people search the web. The above is certainly true, however, I sway more to the "they found what they wanted" theory.
| 10:51 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
<< removed duplicate post >>
| 10:55 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think there are so many layers and factors, each dependent on which SE was used.
It is certainly a mix of the two suggested by Bobby_Davro but I would be interested in the actual positions of those selected.
It means the searcher 'shopped' around before hitting a link as opposed to hitting the first link.
| 11:17 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Its a nice press clipping to show potential clients and to enlighten them to the benefits of SEO
| 11:22 am on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It's probably still best to get as much traffic as possible, even if most users don't stay on the site.
| 6:16 pm on Jun 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Sadly, we need traffic with spenders. I'd rather have low traffic with a high percentage of spenders.
Okay, there is a margin of massive traffic with a small percentage of spenders being equal or better ... either way, we need spenders.
Traffic doesn't feed the family.
| 5:25 pm on Jul 2, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Sorry about some of the confusion in the press release. It was a lot of data and results to get across without the tables.
Once I get back from vacation, I will publish the article on my Web site, and post the URL.
| 1:01 pm on Jul 3, 2003 (gmt 0)|
That's just another confirmation of a known fact that only being in a TOP 10 can give you any noticeable promotion result. And no wonder that the number after TOP tends to decrease - it was quite a predictable tendency. The market is saturating. It's almost saturated, and SEO will soon be replaced with some other promo techniques...
What's the buzz? :)
| 1:10 pm on Jul 3, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It would seem to me from personal experience the stats are affected by the utility of the search. I often will do a search and then after seeing the quality of the results will refine the search. This would show as a new search in these stats.
| 8:41 am on Jul 4, 2003 (gmt 0)|
But IMHO the search utility taken as a sample gives a perfect behavior pattern for the most advanced users, thus it gives a good idea on what the tendencies are. Someday the majority of surfers will become as familiar with the ways SEs operate as the ones who do know about AlltheWeb. And from this moment on the tendency will turn into reality. So we all have a good chance to prepare beforehand :)
| 1:27 pm on Jul 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
For those that are interested in the complete data, the manuscript is posted at