I love facts. Facts and measurement give real answers, but often they’re either incomplete or inaccurate - leaving us with false or half baked answers.
I say this because I’ve decided to not to emphasize statistical evidence on this blog.
While I will rely on facts and figures, I will even critically question them from time to time.
The goal of this blog is to talk about where we think business on the Internet is headed. And we don’t need 100% of the facts to have a successful conversation.
I believe statistical information can lie, tell a different story, or lie. Having worked as a consultant for the government for many years, I’ve seen plenty of this and the spin that statistical info can help deliver certain agendas.
I bet you’ve seen unbelievable and questionable numbers in the press too.
Take estimated losses from computer viruses for instance. CRN Channel Web reported “Computer viruses have wreaked an estimated $10.7 billion in clean-up costs and lost productivity worldwide so far this year, according to a report released Friday by Computer Economics.”
Later, Trend Micro reported “It is estimated that PC Viruses cost businesses approximately $55 Billion in damages in 2003.” Where do they get these numbers?
It’s not they have a team of forensic accountants go around to every business to audit and ledger the numbers – as if the loss could even be measured.
Then Information Week reported “U.S. consumers lost $7 billion over the last two years to viruses, spyware, and phishing schemes, according to Consumer Report’s latest State of the Net survey.” A questionable number from a questionable survey to begin with. More important, the number doesn’t jibe with other estimates.
Why even publish this gibberish… other than for simple entertainment?
Even insurance companies seem to have wildly different numbers according to IBM and Dataquest “according to a Dataquest survey and spokesmen for several different insurance companies, a virus spreading among several PC’s in a company costs (on average) several thousands of dollars in down-time and data lossage; one company interviewed by Dataquest reported a $2 million dollar loss due to a single incident. At least one insurer offers a $100,000/year policy for damage due to computer virus infection.”
Something better but still questionable in exactness are Internet user population numbers. These give estimates like InternetWorldStats.com’s 360,985,492 Internet user count back in 2000, and 1,463,632,361 today. While they pull data from “reliable” sources like Nielsen//NetRatings, the numbers could still be questionable if you looked close enough. In any case they give a rough sense for comparison between world regions. This is good as long as the numbers aren’t wildly fake. Quite often, these estimates are guesses at best.
While we won’t examine belly lint here, we will talk about the obvious. And perhaps the not so obvious but reasonable and provable.
We don’t need stats to tell us the iPod is wildly popular today. But if you wanted more info to support the assertion, you could go to eBay to how hot it is – by comparison to other things like competing MP3 players. Or you can even use third party tools like HammerTap DeepAnalysis, Andale Research or Terapeak ResearchComplete to look into the iPod popularity on eBay. Ultimately, you can often get real numbers on real people buying real stuff at a micro level.
With that, let’s move onward and talk about Internet business trends…









