Hi Danny
Yeah, that does make sense, and I do think it’s interesting that there could be patterns emerging. More data please, MCG! :-)
I’d imagine that the “is this virtual visit related to a physical one?” question is probably fairly heavily researched, and not actually as hard to unpick as one might initially assume. Just scanning through GA it looks like the top trafficked pages on some of the sites we help look after are the “where we are / when we’re open / what we cost” pages (about 50-60% of all traffic) and then the long tail eating up the remaining 40-50% of activity.
If I get a minute I’ll ask re. physical visits on these sites too, see whether anything interesting shows up..
cheers
Mike
_____________________________
Mike Ellis
We do nice web stuff: http://thirty8.co.uk (http://thirty8.co.uk/)
* My book: http://heritageweb.co.uk (http://heritageweb.co.uk/) *
On Tuesday, 7 January 2014 at 11:26, Birchall, Danny wrote:
> Hi Mike
>
> It isn't the most intelligent or useful question ever asked (probably too many mince pies for me), and it relates to some internal questions here more than any lessons for the sector, so my hands are held up to being both lazy and selfish.
>
> The more intelligent version of the question, I guess, would be to ask what proportion of your web visits are related to a satisfactory-in-itself engagement experience, compared to one that plans for a physical visit (of course you'd have to define, and define metrics for the former).
>
> You'd expect variety, but the examples so far on the list, suggest a strong cluster around a 2:1 ratio*, and so for me it's interesting to look at the outliers like the Horniman (1:1) and the V&A (5:1) -- and consider the factors that make them atypical (and thereby consider what the factors determining our own ratio are).
>
> Cheers
>
> Danny
>
>
> * actually, Melissa Terras's blog post from 2012 here suggests that there's more diversity, and that web:physical ratios might be generally be either falling or approaching 1:1 http://melissaterras.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/physical-versus-website-visitors-to.html
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mike Ellis
> Sent: 07 January 2014 10:13
> To: [log in to unmask] (mailto:[log in to unmask])
> Subject: Re: [MCG] web visits/footfall
>
> Hi Danny / all
>
> I can absolutely see the value in looking at the trends, and really interested in hearing people's experiences in this - but isn't the *ratio* of web visits / physical visits as a whole going to be entirely arbitrary?
>
> I may be missing something but I'd have thought that there would be so many variables at play - how long a site has been online, number of pages, SEO factors, changing content, social - that it'll vary hugely from site to site? Or have the mince pies done for me?
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> _____________________________
>
>
> Mike Ellis
>
> We do nice web stuff: http://thirty8.co.uk (http://thirty8.co.uk/)
>
> * My book: http://heritageweb.co.uk (http://heritageweb.co.uk/) *
>
>
> On Tuesday, 7 January 2014 at 09:55, Ivan Teage wrote:
>
> > The ratio for the NHM is about 2:1 for online and physical visitors over autumn 2012 to autumn 2013, and the ratio has grown a bit since then.
> > Obviously looking to increase both but would expect online to have much more potential to increase more rapidly.
> > Ivan
> >
> >
> > Ivan Teage | Digital Development Manager, ICT Natural History Museum,
> > Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD
> > t: +44 (0)20 7942 5821 | m: 07717693038 | e: [log in to unmask] (mailto:[log in to unmask])
> > (mailto:[log in to unmask])
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ****************************************************************
> > website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> > Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> > [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> > ****************************************************************
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ****************************************************************
> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> ****************************************************************
>
>
> This message has been scanned for viruses by Websense Hosted Email Security - www.websense.com (http://www.websense.com)
>
> ****************************************************************
> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> ****************************************************************
>
>
****************************************************************
website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
[un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
****************************************************************
|