How the new-look NZHerald.co.nz fared in Nielsen ratings
The Herald went public with its new-look website on Sunday evening.
I like it. It's cleaner, snappier to load and offers a nifty Quickread story summary when you hover your mouse over a photo.
And, for now, it's free from hyperactive site takeovers by advertisers.
The Herald has also been running a high-rotate ad campaign on TV, albeit heavily focused on its redesigned print edition.
So how did www.nzherald.co.nz do on Monday?
Surprisingly blah.
According to Nieslen Net Ratings, it had 269,000 domestic unique browsers, only a shade up on the previous three Mondays (263,000, 261,000 and 263,000).
Stuff.co.nz maintained its solid lead with 499,000 domestic unique browsers (also very close to its recent Monday traffic).
It is early days, of course.
And, more, it won't be until early next week that Nielsen releases its latest Herald vs Stuff figures based on data from its new Online Ratings panel.
The panel is made up of actual humans, not software cookies, and has a greater emphasis on metrics such as time-spent.
And it will be a little while before the first full panel data is released after the Herald redesign. For unlike the cookie-based Site Census and Market Intelligence, which offer daily and weekly stats, the panel is monthly only.
























Comments and questions5
Be interesting to see how the hardcopy circulation went. I'd have thought there'd be a bit of a curiosity rush to check it out. If so, that could explain "slightly blah" online performance.
Still, what you call slightly blah is an increase of 6-8 thousand, about 3%.
Enlighten us: what would NBR consider better than blah?
With a major advertising campaign one would expect a lift in online traffic. A 3% lift would be considered poor I would expect a lift of 10% at least.
Awesome photo!
On the related topic of website quality... it might also pay to fix up this article. You stuff.co.nz link above takes me stright to the Auckland Zoo website.
Mmm.