Gmail | Hotmail/Outlook.com | Yahoo! Mail | MSN | Facebook | Myspace | LinkedIn | Twitter | Deezer | YouTube | Vimeo | Dailymotion | Skype | PayPal | eBay | Amazon | Zeekly | Bing | Wikipedia | AOL | Pinterest | Flickr | Tumblr | Reddit | Instagram | Viadeo | Slideshare | Squidoo/HubPages | Meetup | Picasa | Twoo | Foursquare | Calameo | Online live TV worldwide | Webmaker | Medium | Airbnb | PIXLR | Netflix
If you find this site interesting or useful, do share it with your friends!
This page is now responsive (mobile-friendly).
Internet's Hall of Shame
(Updated on October 23, 2016)
Here is another site that deserves a place in Internet's Hall of Shame:
The above is from 2pagerank.com (screenshot taken on October 23, 2016)
Daily income of $73. REALLY? How can they say this when this site earns hardly US$1.23 a day? (see below). Did the rest of the money go to its pockets?
I often wondered why they wanted to do this (give highly-inflated figures of a site's earnings). The simple reason is that the very survival of such sites depends upon their getting webmasters to opt for their services - at a fee, of course! So they try to make it appear that one can make big money by having a blog or website - and they are there to help you do it. At a fee, of course!
How much money does this website REALLY make?
Don't believe everything that the 6 websites below say!
They are a real shame to internet by giving false information to the world!
1. http://botalizer.com/ (mentions $202 daily)
(The above site has since gone out of existence.)
2. http://clearwebstats.com (mentions $82 daily)
3. http://cutestat.com (mentions $62 daily)
(The above site now mentions $25 daily.)
4. http://www.blogevaluation.com (mentions $42 daily)
(The above site now mentions $29 daily.)
5. http://rankzzz.com (mentions $36 daily)
(The above site has since gone out of existence.)
6. http://www.netvaluator.com (mentions $29.39 daily)
(The above site now mentions $20.13 daily.)
when all that this site earns is not even US$1.25 a day (see below)!
There are certain costs that an amateur webmaster has to bear out of his own pocket in order to provide services to the world. These include a yearly payment to his webhosting server for making his personal website available in internet as well as a yearly fee for his domain name. As he doesn't charge anything for his services and is not paid by anybody, he hopes to recover these expenditures from advertising revenue. This source of revenue in the case of this website has been very slim, as the following table will show. (And even if it does make a lot of money, one visitor points out, is it anybody's business?)
Click to enlarge
As can be seen from the above table of this website's detailed advertising figures for June 2016, the average daily revenue amounts to €1.11 (about US$1.23 at today's rate). And yet some sites offering web analysis and SEO services would have you believe that this website is making US$29.39 or US$36 or US$42 or US$62 or US$82 or even US$202 a day!** That is adding insult to injury.
Take this website for instance: http://cutestat.com
It mentions that the website you are on now is earning $62 daily. Did the other $60 go to its pockets, eh? It didn't go to mine, anyway.
Or http://www.blogevaluation.com which mentions that this site has a daily income of $42.
Or this one: http://rankzzz.com which claims that this website earns a daily revenue of $36.
But it is this one that takes the cake: http://botalizer.com/
It mentions that the website you are on now is earning $202 a day (see screenshot below)! So, where did the other $200 go to every day? Hope they will be able to tell me so I can give them half of it! (Updated on July 17, 2016): This site has since gone out of existence - and rightly so! - for giving false information to the world and getting away with it. Such sites that feed the world with false information have no place in internet.
Then there is the last-mentioned site (netvaluator.com) which, while giving the lowest of the "imagined" daily earnings among the five sites (but which still exceeds the actual daily earnings by over US$28), mentions an amount (US$29.39) with such precision (to the nearest cent, that is) so as to give you the impression that it must have come from a reliable source, which is not the case at all. Although the above websites would try to justify the inexactitude of their figures by saying that they come from algorithms, the fact is that it is human programmers who write those algorithms so they should be held responsible for such misinformation.
|Screenshots that show the gross misinformation given by the discredited websites|
The above is from cutestat.com (screenshot taken on Feb. 01, 2015)
Daily income of $62. REALLY?
The above is from rankzzz.com (screenshot taken on Feb. 01, 2015)
Daily income of $36. REALLY?
The above is from botalizer.com (screenshot taken on Feb. 01, 2015)
Daily income of $202. REALLY?
The above is from blogevaluation.com (screenshot taken on Feb. 07, 2015)
Daily income of $42. REALLY?
The above is from netvaluator.com (screenshot taken on Feb. 07, 2015)
Daily income of $29.39. REALLY?
The above is from clearwebstats.com (screenshot taken on July 17, 2016)
Daily earning of $82. REALLY?
Pray, Mr. Smart Guy (or should I rather call you Mr. Bullshit?), do tell me where I can get the extra $80 so I can give you half of it!
So these websites have been listed in Internet's Hall of Shame for publishing misleading and false statistics about this website (and God knows of how many other websites*). If a newspaper were to publish a report saying that this website earns $100 daily when this is not the case it could be taken up to court and be prosecuted for publishing false information while such online sites as the ones mentioned are allowed free rein to publish whatever figures they like of a website's earnings and get away with it! They might try to justify it by saying that these are only estimated figures. But there is a world of difference between $2 and $202. No man in his right mind would agree that $202 is an estimated figure of $2. Or am I wrong?
Internet is a great place for spreading useful information but when a site doesn't care about the misinformation it provides in a world where many people still take what they read in internet as the gospel truth then they are doing a great disservice to the world and are tarnishing the good name of internet.
Thanks for reading to the end. - Webmaster
*though I suppose there might be some webmasters who are quite happy with the over-inflated figures as these would give a boost to the standing of their websites - and to hell with all the rest!
**I often wondered why they wanted to do this (give highly-inflated figures of a site's earnings). The simple reason is that the very survival of such sites depends upon their getting webmasters to opt for their services - at a fee, of course! So they try to make it appear that one can make big money by having a blog or website - and they are there to help you do it. At a fee, of course!
For those who want to know more about the subject
Apart from the highly irresponsible "anything goes" approach to daily earnings and the number of page views, the rest of the information the above websites provide might be true since such information from internet are easily available to anyone who wants to have details about a website. The sources of such information come from "Whois" (which every domain that is registered has to supply), Google (for the Page Rank), Alexa (for the world rank) and DMOZ (to see if a site is listed in its directory). So you see, even you and I can provide the information about any website by just typing the website's url in these sites:
1. For "Whois"
2. For Google Page Rank (which ceased to exist since the end of 2014)
3. For Alexa's world (global) rank
4. To see if a site is listed in DMOZ directory
But what you and I don't do - or will ever think of doing - is to say what a website earns simply based on certain assumptions eg. its popularity through its Google Page Rank or Alexa's world rank or simply based on the number of advertisements that appear in its pages. A popular website does not necessarily earn a great deal of money just as an honest and hardworking employee does not necessarily earn more money than someone who works only half as much.
I will be adding more such websites that deal with misinformation (or to put it bluntly, "bullshit") as I come across them. The screenshot below is taken from http://sortsites.com which gives the "Value per visitor" as $19. REALLY? Who says so?
From http://witi.co Daily income of $38. REALLY?
(Added on August 28, 2016) From http://2PageRank.com Daily income of $73. REALLY?