Quoting site stats has got to go...

[Jamie French]

A good number is the one on your CCbill paycheck.
Conversions - conversions - conversions.... the only numbers that count. You're truly popular when people are willing to pay to hang out around your website, not just show up, take a quick look and move on down the road.

What is a good # for visits per month? I clicked her link and see that she does indeed not get the really high number of new visitors that she claims, but the number of visitors still seems pretty high, no?

I see her link says she had 29,288 vistors for march. I see for my site on google analytics that in the last 30 days, I have had a much higher amount of visitors to my site than 29K. I am assuming that my "hits" would look ridiculously high as well if I looked at that. Just trying to get an idea of what is actually a good number?

[AmyDaly]

Well yea, but new visitors does matter to some extent, right? You guys know more than I do about this stuff. I am not my own web master lol

[the_corner]

Jamie, no problems with you or Kim, but in all honesty, your comments are a bit misleading... you say " In 6 months you have had: 72,553 visits at an average of 192 seconds per visit.".... looking at awstats I can see that is not quite true.

72553, represents her number of visits for August alone.
Total number of visits is 1,123,460 in 6 months, a vastly different number to the one you claim... yet you somehow come here to talk about "facts".

Yes is true that a lot of that traffic is just people that look, and go away, total number or unique visitors (non subscribers) is 877,240, meaning that 78% of the traffic was people that looked once and did never came back.

Its also true that more than 80% of the traffic stayed less than 2 minutes.

Conversely its also true that roughly 6% of the traffic stayed 15 minutes or more on the site, thats a good 4300 visits coming from subscribers in 11 days of the month.... if the number is consistent with the visits over 6 months (which I can't tell for sure), that would imply a good 66+ thousand visits from subscribers in 6 months, which is not a bad number either. (Of course that means visits... and not number of subscribers... or income per subscriber).

In all honesty, AWStats is not the best gauge to measure a website, and should not be used as the ONLY tool to measure traffic, but it does have a function.

Still, going back to the "facts", not to defend anyone, but your so called facts are a little (in fact very) skewed.

[Jamie French]

Oops, you are correct. I typed one number while looking at another. Everything else you said was true too which still = pretty weak sauce, and nowhere near the 36 million he's claiming.

[SunshyneMonroe]

Jamie i tho u were a crossdresser to no?

[BigBlackMan]

I aint saying anything.

[MrsKellyPierce]

I think Google Analytics is more accurate than Alexa

[Jamie French]

I call myself no specific thing... I leave it up to the customer to come up with whatever title fit's their fantasy best.

As soon as I label myself then I'm stuck in a corner and I'm the type of person who likes to wear many hats.

Also, what does that have to do with inflated web stats?

Jamie i tho u were a crossdresser to no?

[BigBlackMan]

Keep it positive guys

[Jamie French]

I'd very much like to see the Google Analytics stats as well... Awstats looks like it's counting bot, spiders and web crawlers as unique visits as well while discounting hits, (other wise resulting in an astronomical hit count)

Google Analytics is much more concise and upfront with the numbers that matter most.