What's a site REALLY worth?

Considering I put in some of my best money making domains and their calculations are WAY off, I would same those numbers are horribly wrong.

the site you are getting that info from is not even close on the sites I own and have entered

I love these sites!!!

PS all the numbers are way too low. Just sayin ;)

are u for real!? omfg.. :S

I'm not disagreeing with either of you at all. But all the sites in my OP (except MyFreeCams) are traffic sites -- not subscription sites.

For example, iFriends.net comes back at only $692 daily and $1.1Million total value. But that is ridiculously low. iFriends isn't what it once was, but those numbers are insanely off.
http://www.worthofweb.com/website-value/ifriends.net

SO... WorthOfWeb's algorithm/estimation has to be based almost solely on traffic values -- not subscription values.

Anyone who actually uses those types of sites is a total complete and utter retard.

It also goes without saying that anyone who has to ask....

Wasn't that blindingly obvious or did you not even look at the results you posted other than the total?

Yes it was blindingly obvious. But I was responding to the previous guys who were saying the numbers were way off. Based on their arguments, THEY were only looking at their own value numbers for their own sites and were not taking into account the traffic numbers -- not me. Read the fucking thread next time, douche.

If I hadn't read the thread I wouldn't have been able to pick out a bit of your post to quote, halfwit.

The multiplying factor is .69cents X daily visits. It is a 5th grade calculation at best to determine a sites worth per that site. It is absolutely 100% bullshit and should never, ever, be looked at again. /thread

I would strongly argue to the contrary. While the vast majority of these kinds of sites are supremely shitty, the one referenced above is better than most. They use comparative analytics based on traffic data, pageviews, etc. Is the data perfect? No. Are the conclusions perfect? No. But does it provide a quantifiable frame of reference in some cases -- when better, more accurate data is unavailable? Of course it does.

Is Alexa perfect? No way. Is it fairly useful from time to time? Of course it is.

So really... who is the retard?

More fun numbers

http://www.worthofweb.com/website-value/pornhub.com
http://www.worthofweb.com/website-value/brazzers.com

;))

Did anyone post tree fiddy yet

All those sites have a base algorithm saying something similar to
1 to 2 in 100 visitors will click a banner
each click is worth 1 cent (or whatever)
then takes estimated visitor numbers, divide by 100 and multiply by the amount per click

thereby they get an estimated daily revenue based on "normal" advertising. It is usually those numbers that are then presented.

I can see the site uses an algorithm based on impressions per user and total visits to estimate daily earnings and then comes up with a valuation that is largely based on the earnings with some adjustment for the quality of the traffic, or for the metrics the traffic provides. However it fails to take anything else into account. In essence it appears to assume that the only method of monetization for a website is CPM advertising, which is certainly not true.

so, just looking at Roalds last post, it sees Pornhub as a Juggernaut worth hundreds of millions because it has a huge amount of traffic and assumes that all sites make a similar CPM when we all know that CPM on adult traffic is much lower in adult than in mainstream, as instead of holding a credit card, the consumer is holding at least 1 penis, and needs the other hand to search for DP vids. Conversely it sees the relatively low amount of traffic that a site like Brazzers.com has with respect to Pornhub and assumes the value is again derived from that amount of traffic, when the revenue is mainly derived from a tiny portion of that traffic which becomes a member. In this case, the actual value is most likely quite low.

if we skip the reality that different businesses use vastly different monetization models, and assume that it is true that everyone just throws their site in a CPM network and lets those guys do all the selling, and we make the traffic all of equal value, we still miss many pieces of information that are equally important in certain situations. For example the intrinsic value in the name itself. 4 years ago pizza.com sold for $2.6 Million, if it were to sell now, it might sell for a fraction of that, but even it the revenue of the site was $0 and the total daily visits was 0, the domain name itself will still command for more than the $38,000 that worth of web claims it is worth.

http://www.worthofweb.com/website-value/pizza.com

now, if we forget about traffic, forget about sales, forget about the coolness of a name, there are still other issues, for example, the site says that california.com is worth about $6000, but I highly doubt the state/owner would sell it to me so I could put a Hooker Directory on it for that price.

anyways, nice to look at the numbers and pretend sites are worth billions.

gfy.com

WOW Score for gfy.com : 4.96 out of 5

Daily Visits: 325,771
Daily Pageviews: 1,498,548
Daily Revenue: $ 2,248

Monthly Visits: 9,773,140
Monthly Pageviews: 44,956,444
Monthly Revenue: $ 67,440

Yearly Visits: 117,277,679
Yearly Pageviews: 539,477,324
Annual Earnings: $ 809,280

Estimated website net worth: $ 6,649,305

You bastard! And I mean that in a good way. Just a bastard, is all...

that just made my day!





.

so right ...I very much doubt Leo would sell for $ 35 million unless its multiplied a considerable amount of times ....

A business, online or not, is worth whatever someone will pay for it. It doesn't matter how much your business is worth if no one is ever going to buy it from you.