Big numbers, little numbers

Here’s something to think about.

The average Internet user spends approx. 16.6 hrs per week online. Over a month this works out at just over 71 hours.

It’s not a small number and according to the same Nielsen data the average TV viewer spends around 12.2 hrs per week watch TV (FTA or STV)

But think about this. Facebook is currently the number 1 site in terms of engagement in AU … users spend around 2 hours, 49 minutes on the site per month. Next is MSN Messenger at 2 hours, 35 minutes per month.

So the number 1 site in terms of engagement only accounts for just under 4% of peoples times online. That seems low.

What’s more, there’s only 3 sites/networks in the top 10 sites where users spend over a 1 hour per month.

They are Facebook, ninemsn and ebay.

I can sense the use of the word ‘fragmentation’ coming on. But it’s okay – whilst the word has sort of lost all meaning it makes sense in this instance.

Yes, users are more engaged online when it comes to total hours spent … but it’s clear from this they are spreading their efforts pretty widely when online – looking at a helluva lot of different sites and spending only as much time as they really need to on each.

Begs the question – are our current creative formats relevant for this sort of transactional browsing? And what can we do in planning stages to accommodate this sort of hyper-consumption?


One response to “Big numbers, little numbers

  1. Can you really call MSN messenger a ‘site’ though? It’s a tool, right? As has facebook become one since their new twitter-esq look and feel.

    A little off topic, but I think we often forget that we may well be taking time away from not just ‘traditional media’ – but from other areas and should remember that those areas did not have the interuption of advertising – so should we really claim that real estate or expect someone to pay attention to advertising in time they did not do so before?

    Example: My own use of FB is a very quick way to share something that I used to send on email. IE, like those funny photos and attachments that used to go around, before spam filters and virus checkers put an end to it. I didnt expect to see advertising in ‘that time’ so why would I pay attention to adverts in it’s replacement?
    So – FB, took some time away from email methinks rather than a ‘site’ per se such as a content-rich environ such as Ffx D or News D, where our current models still work fine. I expect that the time on such sites has also remained the same and not gone down over the past few years as would be imagined.

    I would expect, that MSN messenger has taken time away from phone calls (and maybe the football field, the mall etc..) also. Kids are now speaking on MSN rather than activities that those of use with a rotary dial phone and not knowing if your friend was at home would partake in.

    Anyhoo – re, the engagment/formats thing… interruptive advertising on these ‘quick bytes’ would doom anyone that tries. So, complementary activities would be a thought. IE – “Premium Services” provided free of charge in return for watching/sampling/feedback etc..
    example (bad, as it’s late here in NYC): Twitter offers 300 characters for a week in return for watching a 90 second video advert. Facebook offers you the chance to wallpaper your profile like Twitter does… in return for X/X or X.

    One step further and avant guard would be one governing option that provides ‘usage credits’: “Complete this… get 1 months usage of Twitter, FB etc.. advertising free: We will even let you upload a picture of your dog into the banner placements, so you see him, instead of Smiley Central or”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s