Efficacy Data
Collecting data is an important part of my online life - I've already written about keeping records of earnings right down to the last penny and I use this information to tell me what is working, and what is not. I also keep very detailed records about my websites and webpages to show HOW they earn money for me. It's all about getting top-notch results for any given situation.
Don't listen to the experts, listen to yourself
I've been seeing more and more examples of bloggers positioning themselves as experts and it's gotten to the stage where I am thinking that maybe I should start calling myself an expert. Though I ain't sure what subject I could be classed as an expert in. I'm more of a "jack of all trades" which suits me just fine.
Take the example on the 45n5 blog where Mark states that everyone should be filling up their webpages with Adsense Link Units - he has only 20 days worth of data to back-up his claims. How on earth anyone can give advice based on such a small amount of data is, to me, quite laughable. You would be insane to follow advice such as this - at least not without keeping your own detailed records.
Moving on…
Today, I launched my latest product which is a desktop tool designed to make a certain style of webpage. It's pretty basic, but does the job that I need it to do.
As it is for public sale, I wanted to have enough data to show people that the style of website it builds can be very successful - so I have 365 days worth of data to show such a websites earnings.
I wonder what other Internet Marketers have a whole years worth of data in order to backup a product?
Of course, a year's worth of data is very extreme (especially for online stuff), in most cases I would suggest that a minimum of 2 to 3 months worth of data should be analysed before making drastic announcements or changes to your working style.
Backtracking
Going back to the idea about adding more adsense blocks. Here's my findings based on 4 years of being a Adsense Publisher; the more ad blocks you add to your pages, the more dilute your earnings become.
Why not try a split test?
Split testing is basically taking two opposing viewpoints and seeing which is best for any given situation. If you think of a lightbulb, it can be either OFF or ON. In other words, there is no in-between - this is what you need to do to split-test…
In the past I have used a small piece of PHP to sometimes show 1 page, and sometimes show another. 1 page would have LOTS of Adsense, the other would have 1 Adsense Block. Obviously you mileage will vary, you might be testing 2 ad blocks and 3 link units. Or 1 adblock and 1 clickbank item.
Conclusion
Just remember that without testing and analysing YOUR OWN results, you could be jumping from the frying pan into the fire. Take the advice of ANY expert or "expert" with a pinch of salt. Belief in yourself and your methods in ten times more valuable than any advice that any expert can give. Keep detailed records and learn from your own mistakes and successes.

Comment by 45n5 — July 2, 2007 @ 4:48 pm
1. I'm not positioning myself as an expert
2. You say 20 days of efficacy data is laughable but fail to say how many days would suit your fancy
3. I'm also a fan of split testing:
http://www.45n5.com/permalink/how-to-split-test-your-adsense-for-higher-earnings.html
Comment by Will — July 2, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
It's an interesting debate. Just how much data is enough? If analysis from data is accurately representative from early on then is it any less valuable than the same analysis after 12-months?
It seems logical that people should feel like they can trust analysis based upon a larger sample simply because it normalises any freak variances.
I compiled AdSense click data for over 12-months (generating over $15K in revenue) before I started selling the raw data and results of my analysis of which ads were the most effective for me and where they should be placed.
The trends that I saw continued to earn $K's more so I was pretty happy that there was a high probability that what I found was accurate for the sites that I'd built.
Comment by Gary — July 4, 2007 @ 1:04 pm
Will, I think you have it spot-on. The longer you have analysed ata, the more normalised it is going to be.