Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Blog Value

It's been a while since I checked on the value of this blog. Back in October it was worthless, and it remained that way for a while. Now it's apparently worth close to thirty grand. If my ideas are really worth that much...well, we won't go there.

UPDATE: Tyler Williams is now revelling in the fact that he's no longer worthless either -- and that he has surpassed me by leaps and bounds. How dare he?

As my friend Matt pointed out, these blog values are apparently based not on site visits, but on the number of sites which link to your blog. See the bottom of this page: $564.64/site seems to be the figure used. Then go to this page, type in your blog URL, and click on "search". You'll get a return of "X number of sites linking to [your blog]". If you multiply that number by $564.64, lo and behold, that's your blog worth.

But that doesn't wash entirely, because there have always been links to this blog, even back in the days when I was worthless. Well, in any case, the underlying assumption is rather amusing: that media companies would actually pay $564.64 per site that links to you.


My blog is worth $27,097.92.
How much is your blog worth?

3 Comments:

Blogger Chris Petersen said...

You're right,Loren. Something is amiss with this blog value. When I type in my url to see who is all linked it does not have some of the other sites that are linked with my blog including yours.

5/24/2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Technorati seems to miss many incoming links. I think they try to count only links from other blogs, so it may depend on how they're identifying what websites qualify as such.

The frequency of search updates may also play a role, as well as the setup of your blog - for instance, does your blog "ping" Technorati whenever it is updated with a new post? Instructions for doing so with Blogger are here:

http://www.technorati.com/developers/ping/blogger.html

5/24/2006  
Blogger Loren Rosson III said...

Mine has always "pinged", so I'm not sure what the problem is.

5/24/2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home