Table of Contents (hide)
That great sucking sound you hear isn’t H. Ross Perot’s NAFTA-inspired nightmares1, it’s my life. Traffic is down, gross revenue is way down, and my cat was eaten by something. While I have other reasons to keep living, they aren’t especially important-seeming at the moment.
Looking back at August we see that traffic is back to where we were in March. Compared with previous years that’s a shitload of traffic. The number of people finding the site from search engines is back up to 80%, which is remarkable considering how badly we’re doing in the SEO wars. Oh, wait, only half as many people have been arriving to the site directly via bookmarks or something. Either regular visitors to the forum all went on vacation last month, or making the Crazy Talk forum a kinder, gentler place was far more unpopular than I imagined.
As I wrote last month, people who find Crazy Meds by way of a search engine or a link from another site usually land on a wiki page, while people who arrive here because they have the place bookmarked usually go directly to the forum; and people who land on the wiki are more likely to click on ads than those who arrive on the forum2. While traffic is steadily climbing, revenue is steadily dropping as the number of people arriving at Crazy Meds from search engines similarly declines from being 85% of all traffic to 65%. Another thing that’s really killing me is a third of the people who use Crazy Meds do so on a phone or similar small device. I don’t have the same opportunities to
bombard them with ads enhance their browsing experience in the same way as I can for dinosaurs traditionalists who use desktops. Suckers Early adopters with tablets can get either the practically ad-free limited-feature version or the ad-saturated content-rich version depending on if the server is on the rag numerous factors. You’re free to select the display theme you like the most.3 I go into more detail about what it all means on the page on how you can help support Crazy Meds.
Google Analytics’ numbers, which directly counts only those people with java enabled browsers - and estimates the numbers for those with java turned off - who visit wiki and forum-related pages. Feel free to sort this table by any column that appeals to you:
|Month||Visits||Daily Avg||Unique Visitors||Daily Avg||Pageviews||Daily Avg||Pages/Visit||Avg Stay||AdSense Pages||Impressions|
If you look at the stats AwStats has been collecting, so you can see the actual number of people who visit this site, including those who do nothing more than grab PI sheets and other documents without looking at a single ad-rich page, and spammers who attempt to register 20 (or more) accounts on the forum, almost4 all of which are banned before a single validation e-mail is sent out.
Here’s Alexa’s take on our traffic and how it compares with other sites:
“Traffic rank” being where we stand among the however many active websites on the freaking Internet. The consensus of best guesses puts that at around half a billion (500,000,000). So if the number on the button is below 50,000, that places us in the top 0.01% of sites as far as traffic is concerned. When I phrase it that way, the ~18K people a day Alexa manages to count seems far more impressive than it is. If you check out the Alexa page for Crazy Meds you can see where we rank for US sites - no idea how many of those there are - along with other traffic stats. Alexa is the closest thing to a standard for measuring traffic and other statistical information about websites. As long as you include their code. Their numbers are now lining up with Google’s.
Another indicator of relative popularity is something you normally need to have installed in your browser to see, the Google Page Rank:
The above is, fortunately, the Page Rank for the home page, and not this page. For those of you who give a rat’s ass about such things (i.e. you earn a living off of your website or pretend to know how to help people make money off teh InterGoogles) let Google explain how it works:
PageRank works by counting the number and quality of links to a page to determine a rough estimate of how important the website is. The underlying assumption is that more important websites are likely to receive more links from other websites.
If you want to see the complicated math behind it, see this Wikipedia page.
At the top and bottom of each page there are buttons to share or like it via Facebook, Google plus, and every other social media/bookmarking/whatever service there is via AddThis. It would really, really help if you flag every page you’ve found helpful and/or entertaining with a G+ and/or a Facebook share. I realize there is a hell of a lot of stigma attached to having brain cooties, and a share on Google+ and Facebook, unlike those in AA, is fairly public, whereas a like is much less so. Which is why I have both options available. If you don’t have, or don’t wish to use either one of those accounts, perhaps you can use another social bookmarking service. I cover the differences between share and like, and go into more detail about all the different services on the support page.
The most interesting way of looking at a site’s popularity that I’ve come across is Web Empires. They like visual and statistical metaphors and analogies, along the lines of, “If you lined up all the empty bottles of all the meds I’ve taken end to end they would reach…”5 So when they look at Crazy Meds they see:
- If Crazymeds.us were a country, we would have a population larger than British Virgin Islands’, and just a little shy of San Marino’s.
- 1 in every 59,172 internet users visit Crazymeds.us daily
- We’d be almost 50% larger than the largest Universal Life Church6 mass wedding.
I now have data about links from enough sources to go into more detail about them.
|SEOmoz open site explorer||4,812|
Trying to get an accurate count of the number of links in is akin to getting the average half-life of Lamictal, everyone has a different number and I don’t like any of them. Why the huge differences? My guesses:
- Alexa and Bing aren’t counting links to crazymeds.org or crazymeds.com. They count them, they just don’t count them as links to crazymeds.us, even though links to those domain resolve to crazymeds.us
- Bing searches for “crazymeds.us” in the text of web sites, which doesn’t always translate to an actual link7.
- Google does a “link:” search, which is utterly useless. I know there are far more than 28 freaking links. The same results are returned, give or take a few, for link:crazymeds.com, link:crazymeds.org, as well as for specific URLs.
- 70% of the links Webmaster Tools (WT) has are from Treato, which is nothing but a healthcare forum aggregator. As there are over 130,000 posts on the forum, there is a lot of crap to aggregate.
- WT also counts the same link every time it shows up on a site, so a very busy blog with Crazy Meds on the blog roll, or a large forum with a link to us that is going to show up with every topic you read, can generate hundreds of, even a thousand or more links.
- I have no idea how SEOmoz and Majestic SEO go about determining links.
In addition to our Health on the Net accreditation, Crazy Meds meets a few other standards. It’s far easier to get high scores on these than not, but looking at these sites will show you we don’t have any computer cooties.
Unless you own, or work for, a website, you may not be aware of sites that attempt to place monetary value on other people’s websites. They’re trying to make money through advertising, helping you sell your site, or selling their services as search engine optimization (SEO) wizards. The ones that are the most wrong usually fall into that last category, and claim to have all sorts of ideas as to how you can increase your revenue, visibility on search engines, etc. Accurate numbers for traffic are equally difficult when you don’t own the site or don’t have access to all the tools I have. I’m damn confident that 19–20 thousand people a day are looking at something, even if it’s only the paper about the messy, painful surgery required to take care of Viagra-induced priapism. Anyone getting their numbers from Compete (W3 Snoop, e.g.) or Quantcast is an idiot. Especially those using Compete to estimate traffic. When I had the Quantcast code installed it was picking up only about a third of the traffic Alexa was. Compete was even worse. I’d like to know where some of them get their data for how much I make from AdSense. A random number generator is my best guess.
So these sites are often hilarious examples of the adage “Garbage in, garbage out.” While some manage to get fairly accurate traffic and revenue data, that doesn’t always translate to anything close to what a website - especially when it’s yours - is worth. I’ve highlighted the truly egregious numbers in red, and emphasized the numbers that are close to accurate in bold. There are dozens more such sites. This should be enough to give you an idea of how little value website evaluators have. These numbers are subject to change, so are probably different if you look at them now8. I’ve throw together an HTML page just for their stupid widgets & badges. Not all of them update automagically. Especially not Check Website Price’s, which has the so-called value hardcoded in the fucking HTML. It takes real balls to double down on incompetence like that. Their guesstimate is utterly useless and nobody there can code worth shit, so they’re going stand by that worthless evaluation permenately! And they have the temerity to question the validity of a Google Page Rank of 5?
It makes me feel a little bit better, finding so many sites that suck so much, much more than I ever could.
|Site Evaluator||US$ Value||Daily Visitors||Source||US$ Daily Revenue||Other/Comment||Cred|
|Go Site Value||226,080.00||26,139||Alexa?||314.00||DMOZ Domain Authority: 45||1|
|1Page Rank||177,840.00||20,579||Alexa?||247.00||Crazymed.us domain registration expired. They got a lot more right than most other sites.||2|
|Website Outlook||67,612.60||N/A||Alexa?||92.62||Daily Pageviews: 30,206||3|
|Website Looker||39,974.00||29,164||Alexa?||88.83||Alexa Rank: 38,135||4|
|ValueSite||213,120.00||24,636||Alexa?||296.00||Daily Pageviews: 147,816||5|
|Web$ite is Worth||225,360.00||26,097||Alexa?||313.00||Daily Pageviews: 156,582||6|
|WebStatLogr||73,184.00||14,138||Alexa||N/A||Yet they display the correct Alexa traffic graph.||7|
|Site Price||96,600.00||11,000||Random number generator||33.00||Facebook Likes: 347||8|
|Webuka||203,136.00||10,834||They asked the Matrix||N/A||Monthly Ad Revenue: $ 8,125||9|
|Check Website Price||64,511.00||3,992||The slot machine on that annoying casino ad||88.00||“Google Page Rank of 5 appears to be genuine”||10|
|Website Value Calculator||50,358.00||N/A||Alexa + incompetence||70.00||Daily Pageviews: 73,623||11|
|Get Website Worth||23,218.00||N/A||32.00||Alexa plus stupidity||Daily Pageviews: 10,631||12|
|Your Website Value||14,937.00||N/A||Alexa minus 3 years||N/A||Depth Potential9: Low||13|
|4seohunt||7,646.53||5,003||Alexa plus extreme stupidity10.||16.66||They did notice our content is adults-only.||14|
|RankQuote||9,940.00||4,732||Alexa minus understanding how Alexa works||14.00||Daily Pageviews: 10,788||15|
|W3 Snoop||3,795.00||2,385||Compete||10.00||Google Page Rank: 0/10||16|
|StuffGate||77,028.00||N/A||N/A||N/A||We have “the potential to earn $11,004″ a year||17|
|Worth of Web11||661,600.00||43,458||Compete’s stats are monthly12, not daily||651.00||WoW Rank: Captain13||18|
|DigSiteValue||12,961||1,980||Alexa plus lots of pot||17.00||Sites similar to Crazy Meds: 11890.ie and AccuPOS||19|
|URL Appraisal||50.00||N/A||Compete||N/A||Unique Monthly Visitors: 156,072||20|
|How Much is my Website Worth||383,034.00||N/A||N/A||N/A||94% of websites are worth less14 than crazymeds.us||21|
|Evaluate Any Website||8,148.00||N/A||Alexa minus 3 years||0.0015||Alexa Traffic Ranking: 253,830||22|
|Desi89.com||270.3888||792||Compete||9.01296||Their precision is matched only by their legibility.||23|
|DooWebRank||917,248.00||N/A||I hope they share whatever they’re smoking||N/A||This site actually uses a random number generator! Enter google.com. Then enter it again. And again. Three different, yet equally ridiculous amounts for their value and traffic rank, right? Hmmm, who thinks Google is worth half a million dollars?||24|
Source is for daily visitors, and is either what they have on the page or my best guess16. You’ll notice how a lot are indicated “Alexa?” In my experience Alexa consistently lowballs the numbers by 30–50% - more if you don’t have their code everywhere - so that indicates I’m guessing they are extrapolating from that. Credibility is an entirely subjective ranking that I use in order to sort these from the most to least accurate.
|Keep Crazy Meds on the air. Donate some spare electronic currency you have floating around The Cloud|
If I'm lucky 1 person in 100 who visits the wiki will click on an ad. Seriously. If more 1% of the people who read a page click on an ad I'm doing really well. Let me rephrase that. Up through March 2012 the average rate people were clicking on ads was slightly more than 1%. In 2004 - 2006 the rate was 1.5% - 2.0%. From 2007 through March 2012 it was slightly over 1%. Today it's just under 0.5%, with a little better than 1 person in 150 who is reading the wiki clicking on an ad, while on the forum it's barely 1 person in 300 who does so. To everyone using ad blocking software: Why do you think so many sites that used to have all of their content available for free, and are still in business, are now charging money if you want to read them? If everything is supposed to be free, how come I need to pay for groceries and my meds?
3 Just call me Dibbler, because I'm cutting my own throat to keep you people happy.
4 Sometimes we're one of the first site a new spamhole hits, so Invision's spam service isn't familiar with their IP addresses. That's about the only time they get through these days.
5 The sad thing is: I could actually do that.
6 AKA Moonies
7 If somebody writes something on their blog or posts something on a forum and writes "crazymeds.us" (or whichever TLD they use, with or without the www), and does it in a way that doesn't generate a link because they don't know how, I'm fine with that. I don't expect everyone to know how to use all the software on teh Interwebs. What really pisses me off are sites that don't allow links to anywhere else on the big, scary Internet. What is the point of having a website if you don't allow links to other websites? Did your site, or your experience in 'cyberspace,' begin on AOL or Compuserve or GEnie or some similar place over 20 years ago before the September That Never Ended? (Just google the term) Did you run across an offensive site and ask AOL to take it down? Or is it a desperate ploy at search engine optimization? I make a living off of Crazy Meds. I don't have any investors. Over 95% of the money comes from ads, and over 95% of the people who click on the ads are those who found the place via a search engine. I'm the one who needs every desperate SEO ploy in the book, but I don't stoop that low.
8 Especially DooWebRank. Their numbers change wildly every time you visit. On the same day. Or if you switch between www.domain.com and domain.com and back to www.domain.com
9 Whatever the fuck "Depth Potential" is.
10 Check out their About page. It reads like it was run through Google's translation tool. Their name is different on different pages, with the copyright notice having the only consistent one. Which is seeohunt.
11 I'd kill for that sort of traffic and revenue this joker thinks I have. If I had a serious offer for $600K, Crazy Meds would have a new owner in a matter of days. Unless I was actually making over $600 a day.
12 Which just goes to show you how ludicrous Compete's numbers are.
13 Best useless statistic ever. If this is for SEO Stratego, count me in.
14 A far more accurate way to read that would be: "94% of websites are worthless." I'll leave it up to you to decide where Crazy Meds fits in that 94/6 divide. This site has nothing visible except their guess about Crazy Meds' value. The only reason I have them here is for this footnote. And that $400K is the most reasonable number I've seen regarding Crazy Meds' current worth. So why so far now the credibility scale? Because they don't publish the data that went into their guess.
15 They write that I can make up to $16 a month with AdSense! Man, those guys must make millions. They offer great SEO tips, like link exchanges, buying links, and other things Google frowns upon.
16 If they're going to guess what my traffic is, I may as well return the favor.
Crazy Meds’ Site Statistics & Certifications by Jerod Poore is copyright © 2012 Jerod Poore
Page Author: Jerod Poore Date created: 4 September 2012 Last edited by: JerodPoore on 2013–12–08
All drug names are the trademarks of someone else. Look on the appropriate PI sheets or ask Google who the owners are. The way pharmaceutical companies buy each other and swap products like Monopoly™ real estate, the ownership of any trademarks may have changed without my noticing.
Page design and explanatory material by Jerod Poore, copyright © 2004 - 2013. All rights reserved.
Support Crazy Meds by
joining my doubleplusgood circle jerk adding me to your Google+ circle.
Almost all of the material on this site is by Jerod Poore and is copyright © 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 Jerod Poore. Except, of course, the PI sheets - those are the property of the drug companies who developed the drugs the sheets are about - and any documents that are written by other people which may be posted to this site will remain the property of the original authors. You cannot reproduce this page or any other material on this site outside of the boundaries of fair use copying without the express permission of the copyright holder. That’s usually me, so just ask first. That means if want to print out a few pages to take to your doctor, therapist, counselor, support group, non-understanding family members or something like that - then that’s OK to just do. Go for it! Please. As long as you include this copyright notice and the following disclaimer, I’m usually cool with it.
All rights reserved. No warranty is expressed or implied in this information. Consult one or more doctors and/or pharmacists before taking, or changing how you take any neurological and/or psychiatric medication. Your mileage may vary. What happened to us won’t necessarily happen to you. If you still have questions about a medication or condition that were not answered on any of the pages you read, please ask them on the Crazy Meds Forum.
The information on Crazy Meds pertains to and is intended for adults. While some information about children and adolescents is occasionally presented (e.g. US FDA approvals), pediatric-specific data such as dosages, side effects, off-label applications, etc. are rarely included in the articles on drugs or discussed on the forum. If you are looking for information regarding meds for children you’ll have to go somewhere else.
Know your sources!
Nobody on this site is a doctor, a therapist, or a pharmacist. We don’t portray them either here or on TV. Only doctors can diagnose and treat an illness. While it’s not as bad as it used to be, some doctors still get pissed off by patients who know too much about medications, so tread lightly when and where appropriate. Diagnosing yourself from a website is like defending yourself in court, you suddenly have a fool for a doctor. Don’t be a cyberchondriac, thinking you have every disease you see a website about, or that you’ll get every side effect from every medication1. Self-prescribing is as dangerous as buying meds from fraudulent online pharmacies that promise you medications without prescriptions.
All information on this site has been obtained through our personal experience and the experiences family, friends, what people have reported on various reputable sites all over teh intergoogles, the medications’ product information / summary of product characteristic (PI/SPC) sheets, and from sources that are referenced throughout the site. As such the information presented here is not intended as a substitute for real medical advice from your real doctor, just a compliment to it. You should never, ever, replace what a real doctor tells you with something from a website on the Internet. The farthest you should ever take it is getting a second opinion from another real doctor. Educate yourself - always read the PI/SPC sheet or patient information leaflet (PIL) that comes with your medications and never ever throw them away.
Crazy Meds is not responsible for the content of sites we provide links to. We like them, or they’re paid advertisements, or they’re something else we think you should read to help you make an informed decision about a particular med. Sometimes they’re more than one of those things. But what’s on those sites is their business, not ours.
All brand names of the drugs listed in this site are the trademarks of the companies named on the PI/SPC sheet associated with the medication, sometimes on the pages about the drugs, even though those companies may have been acquired by other companies who may or may not be listed in this site by the time you read this. Or the rights to the drug were sold to another company. And any or all of the companies involved may have changed their names.
Crazy Meds is optimized for the browser you’re not using on the platform you wish you had. Between you and me, it all looks a lot cleaner using Safari or Chrome, although more than half of the visitors to this site use either Safari or Internet Explorer, so I’m doing my best to make things look nice for IE as well. I’m using Firefox and running Windows 72. On a computer that sits on top of my desk. With a 23 inch monitor. Hey, at least you can make the text larger or smaller by clicking on the + or - buttons in the upper right hand corner. If you have Java enabled. Like 99% of the websites on the planet, Crazy Meds is hosted on domain running an open source operating system with a variety of open source applications, including the software used to display what you’ve been reading. As such Crazy Meds is not responsible for whatever weird shit your browser does or does not do when you read this site3.
No neurologists, psychiatrists, therapists or pharmacists were harmed in the production of this website. Use only as directed. Void where prohibited. Contains nuts. Certain restrictions may apply. All data are subject to availability. Not available on all mobile devices, in the 12 Galaxies Guiltied to a Zegnatronic Rocket Society, or in all dimensions of reality.
‘Everything is true, nothing is permitted.’ - Jerod Poore
1 While there are plenty of books to help you with hypochondria, for some reason there’s not much in the way of websites. Then again, staying off of the Internet is a large part of curing/managing the disorder.
2 Remember kids, Microsloth operating systems are like TOS Star Trek movies with in that every other one sucks way, way more. With TOS Star Trek movies you don’t want to bother watching the odd-numbered ones. With Microsloth OS you don’t want to buy and install the even-numbered ones. Anyone who remembers ME and Vista knows what I mean.
3 Have I mentioned how open source operating systems for commercial applications is one of the dumbest ideas in the history of dumb ideas?
[begin rant] I rent a dedicated server for Crazy Meds. It’s sitting on a rack somewhere in Southern California along with a bunch of other servers that other people have rented. The hardware is identical, but no two machines have exactly the same operating systems. I don’t even need to see what is on any of the others to know this. If somebody got their server at the exact same time, with the exact same features as I did, I’m confident that there would be noticeable differences in some aspects of the operating systems. So what does this mean? For one thing it means that no two computers in the same office of a single company have the same operating system, and the techs can spend hours figuring out what the fuck the problem could be based on that alone. It also means that application software like IP board that runs the forum here has to have so many fucking user-configurable bells and whistles that even when I read the manual I can’t find every setting, or every location that every flag needs to be set in order for a feature to run the way I want it to run. And in the real world it means you can get an MBA not only with an emphasis on resource planning, but with an emphasis on using SAP - a piece of software so complex there are now college programs on how to use it. You might think, “But don’t people learn how to use Photoshop or Adobe Illustrator in college?” Sure, in order to create stuff. And in a way you’re creating stuff with SAP. But do you get a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree with an emphasis on Photoshop?
Back in the Big Iron Age the operating systems were proprietary, and every computer that took up an entire room with a raised floor and HVAC system, and had less storage and processing power than an iPhone, had the same operating system as every other one, give or take a release level. But when a company bought application software like SAP, they also got the source code, which was usually documented and written in a way to make it easy to modify the hell out of it. Why? Because accounting principles may be the same the world over, and tax laws the same across each country and state, but no two companies have the same format for their reports, invoices, purchase orders and so forth. Standards existed and were universally ignored. If something went wrong it went wrong the same way for everyone, and was easy to track down. People didn’t need to take a college course to learn how to use a piece of software.
I’m not against the open source concept entirely. Back then all the programmers read the same magazines, so we all had the same homebrew utilities. We even had a forerunner of QR Code to scan the longer source code. Software vendors and computer manufacturers sponsored conventions so we could, among other things, swap recipes for such add-ons and utilities. While those things would make our lives easier, they had nothing to do with critical functions of the operating system. Unless badly implemented they would rarely cause key application software to crash and burn. Whereas today, with open source everything, who the hell knows what could be responsible some part of a system failing. [/end rant]