Showing posts 11 - 15 of 15
ROI calculation
Job of the week
Featured threads
- How relevant do links need to be? 14 replies
- Tracking Online Response to Marketing/Communications Activities 8 replies
- Behavioural targeting software 4 replies
- Penalty avoidance on English-speaking foreign sites 5 replies
- 3 way linking - good or bad? 21 replies
Most viewed threads in last month
Most active threads in last month
- Entry level search function 0 replies
- Introduction 0 replies

Head Of E-Commerce at JWI Ltd
27 January 2007 22:52pm
The ROI in your example would be
=(5000-4000)/4000 = 25%
=============================
Sorry, that should be 3700% not 3500.
On 22:47:21 27 January 2007 AndrewSmith1 wrote:
na at na
28 January 2007 20:29pm
Thanks Andrew for clearing things up.
Woolly
CEO at SciVisum.co.uk
02 February 2007 18:26pm
the error you're getting there, is in the way Excel handles percentages.
When you select Percentage format for a cell, Excel understands that to mean that 1.0 represents 100%.
Whereas if you were doing %'s using your own formula, (multiplying by 100 as the last action in the formula), then your 1.0 means 1.0 percent.
Hence you can't just click on the percent format willy nilly.
Deri
On 15:07:47 27 January 2007 Woolly wrote:
CEO at SciVisum.co.uk
02 February 2007 18:46pm
bad and wrong. ROI is based on profit not revenue.
Example:
Mtg costs £500
Increased sales £10K
Sounds like a good numbers if you base 'ROI' on those
But - if your products are low margin - maybe the profit on the £10K sales was only £400.
So your business LOST money - £500 costs against £400 extra profits = £100 loss. Ouch.
Whereas if your £10K of sales was a high margin product - maybe you made £2K profit.
That's better: ROI is now clearly positive - 2K - 500 = 1500 net profit.
Same Mktg costs. Same revenue. Diferent results.
ROI must not use revenue, but profit (well direct margin is what the accountants might call it).
Wikipedia is your friend:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_on_Investment
Our clients get increased sales through using our services to find remove the invisible performance slow-downs and sporadic errors in their key shopping user Journeys - and if we only had to show that the increased sales revenue covered our User Journey performance testing costs, it would make sales pitches a no brainer.
But it's often not hard to show that recovering 0.5 or 1% of lost sales this way will give the client a higher ROI on our services than they'd get on CPC etc, so sensible for the Mktg and ad-buyers to be thinking about it.
And if you're our client Tesco with £1B per annum of online sales... every fraction of a percent is worth having...
Deri
On 11:10:02 27 January 2007 AndrewSmith1 wrote:
Head Of E-Commerce at JWI Ltd
02 February 2007 19:54pm
I think you'll find that I clearly state "Taking 3 times marketing costs" when defining ROI. This effectively means that you are working with an average markup, and receiving/turning over an amount which should reflect profit. This post was also a reflection on the way analytics displays ROI.
It is obvious that I am stating revenue figures and not profit figures. No company I know of makes a 3 and half thousand percent profit! lol
I remember reading that 6 in every 10 pound spent in the UK is spent with Tesco in some shape or form. This is a particularly pivotal example of ROI from marketing and is indeed directly related to cart abandonment and lost sales. 1% of sales clawed back for any business is progressive.
Good to read your take, but I'm confident in my explanation since It exemplifies the way ROI is displayed via Google Analytics.
On 18:46:50 2 February 2007 DeriJones wrote: