Here are some 2013 statistics just for my iSteve.blogspot.com site -- i.e., not counting outside articles, reprints of my blog, or old iSteve.com writings.
What about RSS feeds? Does Google Analytics count those? No. So, the following are underestimates, but they are still pretty interesting.
1,389 posts = 3.8 per day (365 days per year)
What about RSS feeds? Does Google Analytics count those? No. So, the following are underestimates, but they are still pretty interesting.
1,389 posts = 3.8 per day (365 days per year)
Pageviews: 6,635,426 (18,179 per day)
All Visits: 3,831,881 (10,498 per day)
Pageviews by Old Users: ~5,700,000
Pageviews by Old Users: ~5,700,000
Avg. Visit Duration - All Users: 3:32
Avg. Visit Duration - New Users: 2:02
Minutes spent on iSteve: 13,526,540
Man-Years (24/7) spent reading iSteve in 2013: 25.7
Man-Years (40 hour week) spent reading iSteve in 2013: 90.7
Avg. Visit Duration - New Users: 2:02
Minutes spent on iSteve: 13,526,540
Man-Years (24/7) spent reading iSteve in 2013: 25.7
Man-Years (40 hour week) spent reading iSteve in 2013: 90.7
New Users: 936,550
This nearly a million "New Users" number in 2013 seems big, but it is less impressive than it looks, since the conversion rate of new visitors into regular readers is low.
I appreciate it when you regular readers say that if only ol' Steve got noticed the whole world would beat a path to his door, but you guys are biased.
The reality is that web searches bring a lot of people to individual postings I've written and then ... it doesn't make much impression on them. They presumably stare blankly for awhile and then they're on their way.
I suspect that my combination of highbrow content without highbrow affectation is a turnoff for the vast majority of random visitors. They can't quite follow what I'm talking about -- I keep drawing analogies they've never heard before, and I keep shifting perspectives and tones and it's hard to tell if I'm being serious or satirical -- but whatever it is, I'm talking about it in this plain Dave Barry-type style, so they figure the reason my ideas aren't recognizable to them as old ideas they are comfortable with must be because I'm stupid.
I mean, what other explanation could there be?
In general:
There's a huge market for non-highbrow content in a non-highbrow style.
There's a large market for non-highbrow content in a highbrow style.
There's a small market for highbrow content in a highbrow style.
And there's a tiny market for highbrow content in a non-highbrow style.
The good news is that for smart people comfortable in their own skulls, that unpopular fourth quadrant offers a high bandwidth.
Having a decent share of a tiny market adds up to some fairly large numbers.
The Google Analytics system isn't set up to deliver the most useful numbers, but after poking around for awhile I'd say that my blog seems to average in recent months a little under 5,000 individuals as daily (or more frequent) readers, while a little under 10,000 are weekly (or more frequent) readers.
Thus, the top 10,000 iSteve readers average perhaps 275 visits and 550 pages per year (many of those pages being the main page, which has multiple postings).
Overall, 13.5 million minutes were spent viewing this blog last year, or 25.7 round-the-clock man-years. (In other words, at any moment, there are an average of 26 people currently reading iSteve.) Working 40 hours per week, it would take a staff of 91 to do all that reading. (Of course, in the real world, they'd have to spend 20 hours per week in diversity sensitivity self-criticism sessions, so make that a staff of 182.) At 91 full-time-equivalents, I'm probably using up $5 or $10 million per year of your time.
Uh-oh. The old marketing man in me says I should probably rephrase that ...
Okay, let's try: Reading iSteve is worth $5 or $10 million per year.
That's better!
Thanks.