4 ms·
99% sounded like a made-up statistic, so I looked it up [1]. What do you know, it's more like 60% combined. What's the purpose of throwing out numbers like thi
by ryanwaggoner 9y ago
99% sounded like a made-up statistic, so I looked it up [1].
What do you know, it's more like 60% combined. What's the purpose of throwing out numbers like this? It only hurts whatever point you're trying to make.
(Edited for tone)
1. http://www.adweek.com/digital/u-s-digital-advertising-will-make-83-billion-this-year-says-emarketer/ http://www.adweek.com/digital/u-s-digital-advertising-will-m...
- snarf21 9y agoI apologize, I misremembered the statistic from an article I read months ago. They only account for 99%+ of the growth in the last year, according to this article. [http://fortune.com/2017/04/26/google-facebook-digital-ads/ http://fortune.com/2017/04/26/google-facebook-digital-ads/]
- ryanwaggoner 9y agoEven that source is a real stretch to support your point. Yes, some analyst thinks it's close to 100%, but sounds like most experts don't agree.