4 ms·
There's a lot of information that's missing here. There are many steps involved in making a sale, and we are only presented with numbers for the first and last
by randomwalker 17y ago
There's a lot of information that's missing here. There are many steps involved in making a sale, and we are only presented with numbers for the first and last ones.
How many hits did the website get? Did he have free samples of his music? Was there an annoying login process to get through? Did the user have to enter their credit card information into a sketchy-looking form? What was the CD priced at? There are so many places where he could have screwed up and failed to make a conversion. It is entirely possible that 1% of the audience did intend to buy his CD, but he made it not worth their effort. Based on the post, we have no way to tell.
Similar concerns were raised by commenters on previous posts by Sivers, and I believe his response was that he heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend and so he didn't have the details. Sivers: since you're probably reading this, your posts are certainly thought-provoking as they are, but they would be a lot more useful if you included the details.
- kristiandupont 17y agoBut the point was not to give details about a specific case and analyze it, it was to show the fallacy that some people seem to consider 1% to be "conservative estimate" no matter what. Guy Kawasaki says something similar and I think it is because he has heard that a lot, being a VC..