How are 606v2 doing?

I have just done some quick research on how well the alternative 606 sites are doing. The numbers are relevant to the number of topics/ threads created.

	606v2	ja606	not606	new-606
American Football	336	25	35	8
Boxing	2212	1000	78	9
Cricket	735	725	131	37
Football	1099	41,950	54,000	7,900
Golf	918	50	22	8
Horse Racing	248	325	995	6
Motor Sport	291	225	1175	11
Rugby Union	2943	175	56	35
Snooker	63	25	16	7
Tennis	841	200	74	19
Visits/ Day	1714	4761	12,855	286

606v2 comes out 3rd in terms of numbers but that is mainly down to the other two websites being football heavy. 606v2 comes out top in a number of sports particularly Rugby Union, Boxing, Golf and American Football.

With some of the more quieter sports such as Horse Racing (virtually non existent) and motor racing, many members from the BBC website have found their way to not606.

Where you are getting your stats on visits per day?
Cos that is way out.

I think really its better almost that we dont have all the football crowd on here, they ruined 606 at many times nad this site is also of a much better quality then those other sites with is why I joined 606v2 and not the others.

They paid me to join....

King Beer wrote:They paid me to join....

That cheque was supposed to bounce!

Y I Man wrote:

King Beer wrote:They paid me to join....

That cheque was supposed to bounce!

It did....

Y I Man wrote:Where you are getting your stats on visits per day?
Cos that is way out.

From w3spy.org. It says 'unique visitors per day' though. I'm not sure where they get that info from but most of their info is from alexa.com.

The rest of the info is straight from the respective websites.

YI,

Would that 2.5 million hits include people who manually refresh the front page etc?

All about quality not quantity

random that u decided to do the figures, but they make intresting reading.

sportsville wrote:

Y I Man wrote:Where you are getting your stats on visits per day?
Cos that is way out.

From w3spy.org. It says 'unique visitors per day' though. I'm not sure where they get that info from but most of their info is from alexa.com.

The rest of the info is straight from the respective websites.

Its wrong.
We have a Google Analytics account, and on Monday there were 4,264 unique visitors. (people who have not been on the site before)

Y I Man wrote:on Monday there were 4,264 unique visitors. (people who have not been on the site before)

Sorry that's not what it means. It is 4,264 unique IP addresses. So it would count everyone who viewed the site on Monday (not just people who hadn't been here before). It could also count the same person multiple times (for example from home and work)

You are correct though that the OP stats look hopelessly wrong

It could also be lower than actual as some people might share an IP address.

I'm surprised that JA606 is that busy!

King I heard you were given a reality cheque and that bounced too.

Taxi for Thomond!

cricketfan90 wrote:random that u decided to do the figures, but they make intresting reading.

I've been comparing the different sites since the BBC 606 closed. This is the first time I've posted it though. This site comes out very well in a number of sports.

King Beer wrote:I'm surprised that JA606 is that busy!

It is probably down to the football chat. Many of the other sports are very quiet.

One measure of involvement is number of people on the site at any one time. From the home page on this site I noticed a big change - for many months there was often 60 or 80 on line and it didn't seem to change all that much - then fairly recently it shot up so there is often 500 or so on the site at any time.

Don't know whether there has been some change in the way things are measured or maybe it's the very active rugby union page?

sportsville wrote:

cricketfan90 wrote:random that u decided to do the figures, but they make intresting reading.

I've been comparing the different sites since the BBC 606 closed. This is the first time I've posted it though. This site comes out very well in a number of sports.

dont get me wrong mate, i think its very good that you decided to do this