In the bad old days as a Media Buyer for a large-ish brand I tended to get amazing results by looking up a site that had paid CommScore and then fining their direct competitors who had not, and buying spots for 30-50% less for what was essentially the same inventory. Good times.
I don't take any sides yet, as I don't know much about analytics business, but the first part of Linda's reply is confusing. She talks about how they measure people vs cookies, but:
1) when you're comparing websites, does it make any difference if an analytics system measures "people" (which is impossible to do precisely) vs "cookies" or unique IPs?
In my opinion, the latter is better for comparison, because it's more precise.
2) she didn't address the following point:
"The only problem was that Comscore's numbers were different than the SiteMeter traffic that Gawker and Weblogs Inc. were publishing at the time."
What is the reason for the difference between SiteMeter stats (unique IPs and cookies) and "people" as measured by Comscore?
Back in the "old days" you had, in my opinion, even worse issues with Media Metrix and Nielsen. They were the real gangsters - and it was really expensive. Comscore was the new kid on the block and tried harder to get good data out there. I don't recall any extortion from them.
When someone is running a business I think it's a good idea to focus on the business and not on various crusades. Whenever I see someone behaving like this I'm glad I'm not an investor with them. Watch what happens with Mahalo - all these shenanigans and the ceo's focus on angel investing tell me that the level of his interest in his startup isn't all that great.
Or he's magically talented and can do it all while building a great business.
Calacanis rubs me the wrong a lot of the time, but I disagree with your assessment. All else being equal, yes, personal crusades are a distraction, but he's only human. The type of commitment necessary to succeed in a startup isn't necessarily 80 hours a week with a laser focus. It's hard enough to keep most people focused for a solid 40 hours a week. And also, it's very easy to appear totally dedicated but actually be mentally spinning your wheels and not performing well for a variety of reasons. I mean, you maybe right, but I just think it's hard to judge by looking at outside indicators like what someone rants about.
it was a sort of a joke... I don't think anyone takes me seriously when it comes to the stock market--especially after I say I don't own any stocks! :-)
