Discovery Communications just bought eco-lifestyle blog TreeHugger.com, allegedly for $10 to $15 million. Then, TechCrunch published a recent study by the University of Texas (sponsored by Chitika) claiming that the top 50,000 blogs based on Technorati generated a total $500,000,000 in revenues for 2006 {download PDF here}.
Though this report does make the whole blogging industry look very lucrative, I feel that the study is just wrong on so many levels.
First, they based their sample size from the 12,000 Chitika Publishers and ranked them using Technorati. The sample size is so small and too narrow a demographic to represent the entire blogosphere (or even just the top 50,000).
Technorati, though the biggest dedicated blog search engine, only covers a small fraction of the entire (pro)blogging population.
Chitika is nowhere near the top revenue streams of bloggers. You have AdSense, YPN, TLA, PPP, Amazon, and so many other high-rollers that revenues from Chitika could not be near the 1/3 share it claimed to factor in the formula.
In contrast, Google AdSense Publishers took home $916 million in 2006. That figure includes all other websites and blogs.
I think this research/survey is more about Chitika doing another marketing stunt for themselves than really getting the accurate numbers. I just love it when people do unsubstantiated surveys.
You actually make it seem so easy together with your presentation however I in finding this matter to be actually something which I feel I’d never understand. It sort of feels too complicated and very extensive for me. I am having a look ahead on your subsequent publish, I’ll try to get the hold of it!
Hmmmm…..top 50,000 make US$50 million? If true, it re-emphasizes that blogging is not a viable commercial enterprise. Even for the top 1%, the rewards hardly seem commensurate with what such (presumably) hard-working super-star writers could earn from other endeavors.
cool! Better catch up on hitting the 50K mark. I’m currently at around 70K
Nice post!
Thanks,
GM Tristan
gmtristan.com
Dave, I think that “study” is giving false impressions of what’s really out there. These kind of publicity could very well burst the bubble.
I fully agree with your take on this one, Abe. Shame on the University of Texas for publishing such a so-called “study”. I don’t know why the world of the ‘net seems to cause otherwise educated people to suspend belief in otherwise well-known scientific process. Kind of reminds me of the University of Utah some years back where a researcher put some white liquid in a jar, made a light bulb glow and formally announced to the world that he had achieved cold fusion. In later weeks the university got black eye after black eye when the rest of the sceintifc world investigated the “investigator’s” claims and found it was all a mistake.
As a community we bloggers seem to be singularly naive, repeating every “fact” in blog after blog without any critical evaluation. Hat’s off for asking people to “think before swallowing”.