|
Overall the figures quoted here don't look too bad and in any case, the least useful value of the raw stats is in helping make decisions about the value of FHG's per se.
You start with confidence in your product (in this case your site(s)) and then work on the basis that all exposure is worth having. Apart from sales which come directly from FHG's (and bear in mind when looking at the raw stats that you cannot easily determine if someone bought after visiting one, six or a dozen of your galleries: although it might be interesting to try), you also have to figure that if surfers get a generally positive reaction to your galleries, then each one they see is enhancing your brand recognition and making an eventual sale more likely. Each gallery they see of yours, is also denying exposure to your competitors.
The real value of these stats would be helping you identify which niches/models/designs to focus on in future. Incidentally, now that more sponsors are being persuaded to provide descriptions for galleries, perhaps we can start getting them to provide niche identification for their galleries too? Yes - shock, horror - this might make life still easier for the "lazy" webmasters, but the real point is that it provides the sponsor with more control and sponsors should know best (from experience and from analysis of their stats) whether their teen galleries (for example) are best promoted as teens, hardcore, movies, or whatever. Far better to encourage webmasters to categorize galleries in the way that works best, than leave it to them to get it right. Or wrong...
|