Archive for April, 2011

Back in February our newest partner Adam Greco waxed philosophical about Google offering a paid version of Google Analytics. He got a bunch of feedback and all-in-all the post raised some interesting questions about Google’s place in the web analytics marketplace. Now there is a new rumor — one far less substantiated than the so called “Enterprise” offering Adam discussed — but one with potentially more far reaching implications.

On a call today, we heard that Google may be considering charging everyone for the use of Google Analytics.

Everyone? Yep. Everyone.

The details were sparse and wholly unsubstantiated, but come from a source that we generally trust as reliable. And while we normally don’t deal with rumors here at Web Analytics Demystified, given Google’s footprint — conservatively estimated to be around 30,000 business sites around the world with perhaps an order (or two) more non-business sites being tracked today — the implications of this rumor are interesting for two reasons:

1. If Google were to charge a fee similar to other of their offerings, say $100 per year, to use Google Analytics, these fees may produce millions of dollars in annual revenue (and profits) for Google and their investors. Outside projections for Google Analytics installations range into the millions, which, given a reasonable retention rate (say, 10%) would produce substantial revenue. Given the changes Google is going through right now on their management team it’s hard to say how important “revenue” is, especially when the bandwidth and data storage costs for Google Analytics are likely to be significant given estimated volumes and at a time when Google is being criticized over their increasing operating costs. Given the constant criticism over the years of Google’s inability to generate profits outside of their advertising business perhaps this sort of obvious revenue is suddenly appealing.
2. If Google were to start forcing folks to pay, this might be a huge boon to the emerging “secondary” market of web and digital analytics vendors including Woopra, Chartbeat, Performable, Clicky, Kissmetrics, and a rapidly expanding set of web and mobile analytics vendors who largely charge tens to hundreds of dollars per month. Despite the odds given the footprint “traditional” web analytics vendors have within the Enterprise, combined with the hegemony Google has over entry-level businesses and small companies, in the last three years we have seen a surprising “second coming” of web analytics vendors gaining traction in a variety of niches. Be it real-time analytics for blogs (Chartbeat, Woopra), funnel analysis (Kissmetrics), heat-mapping and session recording (Robot Replay, ClickTale, Reinvigorate), or customer-focused analytics (Performable), these companies are, by-and-large small, agile, and somehow managing to gain adoption despite the presence of Google and “the bigs”.

This second implication is very interesting to me … the fact that against well-established, already deployed, and in Google’s case completely free competition, these start ups are able to grow and, at least in a few cases, thrive (see Clicktale, Robot Replay who was acquired by Foresee Results, Performable, etc.) Imagine the glee that founders and investors in these companies would experience if Google Analytics were to put up a real (albeit potentially small) barrier to entry. It likely wouldn’t be enough to stop companies, but it might be enough to make them think “Hmm, I wonder what else is out there?”

Given that most of these start-ups are focusing on ease-of-use and specific use cases, and in many instances are doing a pretty darn good job (my opinion), this pause might be exactly what these start-ups need. Heck, it might even help some of the bigs, given the trouble they have had selling against Google Analytics juxtaposed against the dramatic interface changes that some are poised to unleash. Don’t get me wrong — I’m not saying that Google charging $100 for analytics magically re-opens the door for traditional vendors with annual contracts in the tens of thousands of dollars. But every substantial change in the marketplace is an opportunity for great management teams, and Google suddenly charging anything would surely be a substantial change.

But I digress.

At the end of the day I personally consider it highly unlikely that Google would start to charge everyone just because they can — it just seems like an unnecessary and “evil” thing to do (despite the fact that we did the same thing earlier this year at Twitalyzer without any negative impact on our business.) Still, Google is held to a pretty high standard, and I suspect that the (relatively) small amount of revenue they would ultimately generate is hardly worth the negative press they would likely receive.

But I’m interested in what you folks think. Would you pay $100 per year for Google Analytics as it exists today? What if they offered more features or functionality? If the latter, what would they need to add to get you to pony up? Or would you immediately pull the code off your site if Google required any kind of payment? If so, why?

I welcome your comments and conversation.

While the voting period is mostly over I wanted to drop a quick note and offer up some thoughts on the candidates and process for the current Web Analytics Association elections. This year is clearly different thanks to a new process, one that has the membership voting on both a “slate” of candidates and two “at large” positions. While initially I didn’t understand the need to change the process, upon further explanation and a little reflection, I believe the new process makes sense and has the best interests of the Association and it’s membership at heart.

Before you go and Tweet “he’s lost his mind …” hear me out.

As the Web Analytics Association has grown the few board positions have become less of an obligation and more of an opportunity for people. In that, in recent years, we have seen an almost staggering number of people nominated into the election process. This, in my opinion, has created a problem in that A) most of the candidates, despite qualification, are relatively unknown to the web analytics community and B) because of the relatively low number of voters, a “popular vote” has become relatively easily gamed. I have certainly thrown my weight behind individual candidates in the past and, because my blog has tens of thousands of readers worldwide (many of whom do vote in WAA elections), I believe I have been able to help folks get elected.

Yeah for us and our friends, but boo for the process in general.

The popular vote has led to some truly great people participating in the WAA — folks (and my bias here) like John Lovett, June Dershewitz, Matt Langie, Dennis Mortensen, Ed Wu, and Peter Sanborn. But the popular vote has also led to some less-than-stellar participants in my humble opinion — people who either quit the board mid-stream or who served more as obstructionists than participants.

This new process, with what I believe to be a pretty well vetted board “slate” and list of “at large” candidates, has tremendous potential to do one very important thing: allow the Association to maintain the momentum they have today. From where I sit, in the past year the Association has:

• Hired a very qualified Executive Director in Mike Levin
• Started a very successful “local” event in the Symposium
• Launched a very important community initiative with the Code of Ethics
• Held a wonderful recognition event in the Emetrics/WAA Gala

and more. Plus, while I am not privy to any greater level of detail than anyone else, my general sense is that the current board is more productive and more collegial than many (or any) past boards and that bodes well for all of us.

So when it comes to the current election cycle, the “slate” has three returning Board members in Peter Sanborn (currently the Board President), Ed Wu, and Alex Yoder plus two new members who are, in my opinion, tremendously qualified to serve in Jodi McDermott and Shari Cleary. I have faith in Peter, Ed, and Alex based on their past work, Jodi has been a passionate contributor to WAA Standards and a number of other initiatives, and Shari is one of the most intelligent, level-headed people I know in life, much less web analytics.

The “at large” positions do create some problems, to be sure. The proposed group was whittled down from a larger group of folks, several of whom were qualified, passionate, and motivated, but my understanding is that the “secret selection committee” (which I offered to help with but asked too late) made decisions based on demonstrated commitment, involvement, and a willingness to work within the processes the Association has already established for the benefit of the membership. This strategy ends up recognizing folks like Chris Berry, a huge supporter of Research and Standards, Eric Feinberg and Lee Isensee, the “Laurel and Hardy” of the WAA and critical members of the membership committee, and Bob Page and Joe Megibow, two individuals who represent the level of leadership in web analytics that many (if not all) of us aspire to. In short, a brilliant group.

This list leaves off some pretty nice people as well, and this I think is what is creating some of the recent consternation in Twitter, but from where I sit the opportunity is clear: Participate in the WAA at the level that Chris, Eric, and Lee have, or build the reputation that Bob and Joe have, and you’re a shoe-in for the “at large” slots in the future.

For the record I am voting for Joe Megibow and Bob Page for the “at large” positions. Both are brilliant, both are passionate about measurement, and both serve as an excellent example of the kind of work we should all be doing. The Association needs more practitioners to represent the real needs of our industry and I cannot  think of two better people to fill that role.

Anyway, for what it’s worth, I too was confused about the “slate” process and this election, but hopefully like me you are willing to give the process a chance.

I welcome your comments.

UPDATE MAY 6, 2011: Under threat of litigation we have decided to postpone Demystified Days for the time being. You can read more about this decision here.

I am incredibly excited to let all of you know about something that Adam, John, and our friends at Keystone Solutions will be doing this coming September that builds on our long-standing commitment to local web analytics communities and our more recent efforts to support nonprofits around the world … something we are calling “Demystified Days!”

Check out the mini-site for Demystified Days right now!

For years we have been helping local web analytics communities around the globe connect with each other as part of Web Analytics Wednesday, and by every measure, Web Analytics Wednesday works. Thanks to current and past sponsors — great companies like I.Q. Workforce, Coremetrics (an IBM Company), SiteSpect, and hundreds of other companies who have hosted regional events — Web Analytics Demystified has brokered more personal introductions (and served more beers) than any other organization or group in our industry.

This past year we have been trying to leverage our connections in the industry to do something truly good and solve bigger problems. The result was, of course, the Analysis Exchange — the world’s only effort to provide free analytics support to nonprofits and nongovernmental organizations — which thanks to the efforts of great people like Wendy Greco, Emer Kirrane, Jason Thompson and our mentors and students has changed how people learn how to tells stories with data.

Now we are taking it to the next level, one city at a time.

Starting September 12th in San Francisco we will be bringing a day long educational and networking event to cities across the globe.  The format will be one you are all familiar with — great presentations in the morning and great conversations in the afternoon, of course followed by drinks and networking at Web Analytics Wednesdays in the evening.

We could easily do these events for free … but we aren’t going to. Instead we are going to find awesome sponsors to help us offset costs and ask everyone who participates to buy a $99 ticket to the event. Then, at the end of the day, we are going to add up all of the revenues, subtract out all of the costs, and donate every penny that is left to two local charities decided on by the event participants.

Our hope is to be able to donate a total of $50,000 to six charities in the United States. You can help us achieve that goal by doing three very easy things:

1. Helping us spread the word about Demystified Days within your social network. We have created a short URL http://bit.ly/demystifieddays and you can tag tweets about these events with #demystifieddays.
2. Joining us in San Francisco, Atlanta, and Boston. We are finalizing venues right now and will post ticket purchasing information in the next few weeks so watch for that!
3. Email us and let us know you are interested in Demystified Days. The mini-site has a form at the bottom that will let you indicate your interest. Fill out the form and we will keep you in the loop!

On behalf of the teams at Web Analytics Demystified and Keystone Solutions we sincerely hope you are excited about what Demystified Days can become. We welcome your questions in comments or directly via email.

Help spread the word!