Comments on: MSNBC responds to web rankings shift http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/ Where TV Finds the Future Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:37:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Lyle http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-367203 Lyle Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:22:24 +0000 http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-367203 Does anybody know who MSNBC all counts in their numbers? Or are they the only ones playing honestly? Does anybody know who MSNBC all counts in their numbers? Or are they the only ones playing honestly?

]]> By: ! http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-365707 ! Sun, 17 Jun 2007 22:39:52 +0000 http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-365707 hence the biting of the tongue, don. hence the biting of the tongue, don.

]]> By: Don Day http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-365692 Don Day Sun, 17 Jun 2007 22:26:01 +0000 http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-365692 The interesting thing to me is the simple fact that CNN rolls in all of the IB users, and still only beats MS by about 2.5% percent. The interesting thing to me is the simple fact that CNN rolls in all of the IB users, and still only beats MS by about 2.5% percent.

]]> By: ! http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-365666 ! Sun, 17 Jun 2007 22:07:50 +0000 http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-365666 btw- i'm really glad you chose a follow up on this one, cory. i was going to comment (but bit my tongue) on your initial post that: if cnn rolled ib visitors into their numbers (using the numbers at the link you provided) the total would have put them WAY out front of everybody. EVERYBODY. i know those numbers include the oo's, but still. if i were a betting man, i'd wager we're going to hear from everyone on that list before this is over. there is, afterall, alot riding on these numbers and how they are arrived @. btw-

i’m really glad you chose a follow up on this one, cory. i was going to comment (but bit my tongue) on your initial post that: if cnn rolled ib visitors into their numbers (using the numbers at the link you provided) the total would have put them WAY out front of everybody. EVERYBODY. i know those numbers include the oo’s, but still.

if i were a betting man, i’d wager we’re going to hear from everyone on that list before this is over.

there is, afterall, alot riding on these numbers and how they are arrived @.

]]> By: ! http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-365655 ! Sun, 17 Jun 2007 21:52:48 +0000 http://www.lostremote.com/2007/06/17/msnbc-responds-to-web-rankings-shift/#comment-365655 cnn has been trending lower all year on my stats graph so a deal like this makes good sense for them. i was wondering why we had a three-fold increase in the number of inquiries this past month (three-fold from a small base is only marginally huge). oddly the inquirers were neither of the companies at the center of this discussion though. i am beginning to think these deals are on their way to become the standard. cnn has been trending lower all year on my stats graph so a deal like this makes good sense for them.

i was wondering why we had a three-fold increase in the number of inquiries this past month (three-fold from a small base is only marginally huge). oddly the inquirers were neither of the companies at the center of this discussion though.

i am beginning to think these deals are on their way to become the standard.

]]>