Comments on: The Times vs Engadget who sends more traffic

By: AnnB

AnnB — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:01:52 +0000

You know I forgot to bookmark this post when I first read it and then couldn’t find it by Googling. I had to retrace all my steps.
Strange and ironic, given the subject of this blog.

By: sandossu

sandossu — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 08:04:52 +0000

This shows how interested are Engadget’s readers, in comparison with TheTimes, because I’m sure the times doesn’t have 10 times more traffic than Engadget.

By: Gav

Gav — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:03:16 +0000

My first thoughts were “oooh good spot” but also this might say something about Engadget’s users watching the embedded version, rather than clicking through.

The principle is a good one, though Patrick.

By: Geld Lenen

Geld Lenen — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 20:44:40 +0000

Could you please fix my link in my previous comment

There has to be an extra “n” in the URL, thanks!

By: Patrick Altoft

Patrick Altoft — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 18:41:02 +0000

Ooops. Good catch.

By: Geld Lenen

Geld Lenen — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 13:42:39 +0000

“Next time you see a post from Blogstorm.co.uk, don’t believe it right away”

When I click on the video embedded in the post at Engadget, I’m taken to another video:.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PRfVKzuUJ4 (blogpost Engadget)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOSk9TW7z-4 (your example, linked by the Times)

The 800 clicks from Engadget are probably from people that clicked to it when they viewed related video’s.

BTW: visitors from Engadget: 34,997.