I am leaning towards agreeing that the user should not be counted as a
unique visitor on both sites. I also agree with you that oodle should
definitely count any conversions that take place and going a step further, I
believe they should be able to count the pageviews that occur. Technically
the visitor is on oodle's site (albeit branded for Walmart).
This could get very complicated because how can you have a conversion or
pageviews without a visitor?
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 6:37 PM, vabeachkevin <
> The way I'm looking at it, it is all about intentions. Using the
> Walmart/Oodle example, the visitor to walmart.com intended to go to
> walmart.com, not oodle.com. Walmart worked with Oodle to brand that
> classified's page as being a page of Walmart. They intended it to have
> the same look and feel as the rest of the Walmart site, not the Oodle
> site. I thing Walmert gets full credit for this visitor and their
> visit, and everything associated with it. Oodle should still track
> that page, but Oodle should not get credit for another visitor to
> oodle.com, since that was not the visitors intention to visit
> oodle.com. Oodle should get credit for any associated conversions on
> that page for it's customers, since those customers signed up with
> Oodle and just wants the conversion, regardless of where it comes
> from, but Oodle is the original facilitator of that
> lead/sale/conversion. If you go full screen in your browser you would
> never even know you were on a subdomain of Oodle, and you would still
> think you are on the Walmart domain. That was the intention of each
> I think it is wrong for 2 different sites to claim a sungle unique
> visitor on a single page. I have a lot of co-workers who think we need
> to call that our vistor but I feel it will artifically inflate our
> true visitor numbers to our site. Our marketers do not promote that
> powered subdomain, so should not get credit for that extra traffic
> that they want. I think it is just lying to yourself about your true
> traffic. What say you?
> Kevin Rogers
> --- In email@example.com <webanalytics%40yahoogroups.com>,
> Thomas Bosilevac <bosilevac@...>
> > Great question. This question also comes up in the form of:
> > 1) My shopping cart is on another site what do I do?
> > 2) Do I track the Downloads I have on other sites?
> > 3) What do I count that Video Play event as?
> > While the answer may be as easy as "count" or "don't". The problem
> gets a
> > little stickier if you happen to be measuring that with a tag-based
> > solution. I also believe that all the social applications and pages
> on "the
> > cloud" will increase this issue.
> > In any case, the long-term fix of all this is to create an
> Enterprise Event
> > Model. This company excersize allows you to take an inventory of your
> > assets, categorize them, and determine what is being tracked in your web
> > analytics applications and what is not. You can find my blog post here:
> > Cheers!
> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 7:42 AM, vabeachkevin <
> > kevin.rogers@...> wrote:
> > > Do you count traffic to sites you power content for as your
> > > visit/visitor? Example, if I go to www.walmart.com I am now walmart's
> > > visitor. If I go to their classified site, which is powered by
> > > oodle.com, it is now a subdomain of oodle but still branded as
> > > walmart. The url is walmart.oodle.com. Should visitors to that site be
> > > counted as visitors for oodle or for walmart? i am involved in a very
> > > similar situation, and people here want to count that traffic to the
> > > powered subdomain (walmart.oodle.com) as traffic to the site powering
> > > it (oodle.com), but I disagree. The visitor never intended to go to
> > > oodle, it is branded as walmart and should be counted as walmarts
> > > visitor. What does everyone think?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > --------------------------------------
> > Thomas Bosilevac
> > Independent Web Analytics Consultant
> > Phone: (503) 701-9514
> > Email: Bosilevac@...
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/webmetrics
> > -------------------------------------
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]