Glam to sign $1 billion ad deal — and draws critics

updated

glam.jpgIn an era when Web advertising networks are red hot, Glam lays claim to being one of the hottest.

Focused on gathering up female-oriented Web sites, and then selling advertising on their pages, Glam says it is the fastest growing property on the Web, and is about to sign a whopping $1 billion advertising deal.

But Glam is becoming a magnet for controversy. While investors appear ready to invest at high valuations (see our past coverage), Glam has also sparked ire from jealous competitors, who claim it is a sham. They say Glam is not a destination site, and just a network. Glam, meanwhile, says it never claimed to be a destination site — but spins the message differently: It says it has the largest “reach” among women on the Web.

To start with, Glam is now getting 20 million unique viewers, up from 782,000 about a year ago – a faster growth than even MySpace during the frenetic year before it was acquired by News Corp. Comscore, the traffic measurement company, backs up Glam’s claims. Now, Glam also is raising $200 million more in venture capital, and some insiders say Glam could be valued at $600 million or higher – something VentureBeat first reported earlier today. [See the full confidential memo here. Update: The memo is an early draft. We're told four banks are now on the deal, including Allen & Co., Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse.]

julytraffic.jpg
.

Tomorrow, Glam will announce a new deal with Google to provide Web results on Glam’s Web sites. Most significantly, however, Glam is about to close a $1 billion-plus advertising deal for its sites, VentureBeat has just learned. Glam will get between $500 million and $800 million in revenue from the deal over the next three years. We’re told negotiations are still under way, but that there have been at least two bids by major advertising companies.

All rosy, right?

samir.jpgWell, Glam has fierce critics. VentureBeat has spoken with at least three of its competitors. To them, Glam isn’t a Web property, so much as an ad network. Glam progress, they say, is driven by smooth, dapper chief executive Samir Arora, who tends toward ping-red shirts, Italian suits and French shoes — and has a riveting marketing spin. If you look at the sites Glam claims to “own,” they look very different from the sort of high-end professional female demographic Glam’s Arora likes to associate Glam with, these critics argue.

We obtained a copy of Glam’s Comscore breakdown of sites; it’s shown below. Note the sort of sites that show up prominently. Half of Glam’s page views, it turns out, come from MyYearbook, a social networking site. Some 6.5 percent come from Meez, an avatar site. There’s Dogster – a social network for dogs — and other questionable sites (see red arrows in graphic below). Take Free-Beauty-Tips.com, for example. At first glance, the site looks like a spam site. It features lists of links to articles loosely related to the theme of beauty and tips. The site’s name, together with links, allow it to feature highly within Google’s search results for “beauty tips”; it therefore draws all sort of traffic. Moreover, Glam has reportedly guaranteed sites such as Meez $200,000 a month in order to have its business. Says one critic, an anonymous competitor to Glam: “To me, Glam is Boo 2.0,” he says referring to Boo.com, the hyped fashion site of the late 1990s that crashed and burned after the Internet bubble burst.

glam-comscore.jpg
.

Competitor iVillage/NBC was until last month the largest woman-oriented network, until it was overtaken Glam, based on the number of unique visitors. IVillage executives say Glam’s claim that it enjoys $20-$30 CPM advertising rates on its core properties is bogus. Glam’s Arora, who says he can’t say much publicly these days because of his fund-raising mode (there are SEC regulations that govern what you can say) has insisted in past interviews that Glam is indeed getting those high rates.

Sugar Publishing and Federated Media Publishing (disclosure: Federated handles much of VentureBeat’s advertising), meanwhile, are about to announce the launch their own network to compete with Glam for its business, VentureBeat has learned. The network will be called the Sugar Network, and will be powered by FM, two inside sources said.

With Boo.com during the first Internet boom, there were clear signs of hype. The site itself was fraught with problems.

With Glam, however, it’s much harder to claim it’s a sham; it’s pulling in major revenue. One competitor begrudgingly conceded Glam appears to be doing a great job building a network. That’s what makes this an interesting story. A site network is a powerful concept, but also can be amorphous. If you turn a network into one like Google’s – where advertisers have an incentive to do business with you because you are the biggest, and offer the best targeting technology – then your lead can snowball. This is the so-called “network effect,” something that eBay perfected. However, right now, it’s too early to tell how vibrant Glam is. It doesn’t actually formally own the sites it has in the network. These sites can leave for other networks, usually with a notice of between a few months and a year. One site in its network, Kaboodle, for example, was just sold to Hearst, and so Glam will lose the right to sell ads exclusively for Kaboodle. Glam’s momentum, therefore, may be fleeting if it can’t convince sites in its network to stay.

One thing is clear. Glam’s Arora knows how to sell. He has founded and helped sell multiple businesses, including NetObjects. Arora’s message is slick. He’s offers sites a technology edge, with new search and advertising targeting technology, which we’ll get to in a minute. He also responds to critics of the sites in his network. MyYearbook, for example, features quizzes that produce highly valuable results for advertisers, he says. Quizzes engender a depth of engagement with readers that is core to Glam’s model, Arora says. He learned the value of quizzes from his time as a board member at Tickle, the dating site that was later sold to Monster. MyYearbook also is popular among young woman, part of the Glam’s targeted audience.

As for Free-Beauty-Tips.com, Arora says Glam bought it not for the links, but to acquire the skills of the site’s owner, a specialist in search engine optimization (SEO). Making the sites in Glam’s network more sophisticated about SEO is a service Glam wants to offer the sites, Arora said. Moreover, Free-Beauty-Tips is a recent acquisition, and Glam will be rolling out real content on that site by the end of the month (Glam showed us screenshots of the new design). Arora also insists the existing site is not a link farm, saying the links go to real articles. On Arora goes, down the list of questionable sites, explaining the logic behind why Glam has taken interest in each one of them (Meez, the avatar site, is desirable because it has young readers, and advertisers tell Glam they want to reach the “Y” generation, Arora explains). Finally, he makes no excuses about owning business of sites that may not be focused on woman. He plans to diversify Glam further in the future.

In most cases, Arora says, Glam has exclusive agreements in place to sell 100 percent of advertising on the sites in its network. The same isn’t true of competing sites like iVillage. IVillage claims it is the largest “destination” site for women, but that may not be true. IVillage lists Sugar Publishing as one of its sites, and Comscore counts Sugar’s traffic as belonging to iVillage. However iVillage neither owns Sugar nor runs 100 percent of its advertising. In fact, Sugar Publishing currently runs no advertising from iVillage. We contacted Brian Sugar, owner of Sugar Publishing for comment. IVillage ads will start showing up next month, he said, because the relationship with iVillage was agreed to only recently (last month). However, even then, Sugar’s sales staff will control major sponsorships, Sugar said – a strong indication that Sugar really shouldn’t be considered part of iVillage’s traffic. IVillage also appears to rely on Fastclick and Doubleclick to serve ads on some other sites. IVillage, reached for comment, said it controls 100 percent of the ad-sales on the sites (see partial list below). However, we’re told it does not control the business of Care2, BooksRags and TestCafe. Like Glam, IVillage has odd properties, such as Astrology.com, which makes up 2.5 million of its uniques; and iWin.com, a promotion/coupon site. Other promotion and questionnaire sites include Promotions.com (just bought by TheStreet, so iVillage will lose that property from its Comscore data), Smartsource.com, Webstakes, and TestCafe. IVillage, for its part, says these are all useful properties.

ivillage-dissected.jpg
.

Meanwhile, Glam’s Arora says Glam will succeed because it has a technology edge, stemming form its Silicon Valley roots. It has developed new ad-serving technology for its 350 sites, which allows advertisers to not merely target Glam’s multiple woman sites, but also to target sites depending on the depth of engagement. Entertainment sites, for example, will have less engagement than certain social networking sites, where woman are performing daily tasks. Moreover, Glam can tell a sporting advertiser which Glam sites are focused on sports. Finally, if ads aren’t performing very well (in other words, woman readers aren’t clicking on them), those ads will be retired, and be placed on better performing sites. While other networks talk about having such technology, Arora says no other network has the woman-focused Web properties Glam does. Finally, Glam is launching a search widget (see details here) for sites so that users can search for content related to that specific site. For example, if it’s a beauty site, Glam lets users search articles within Glam’s beauty channel of sites. It is partnering with Google to offer full Web search. Glam has said it has an average CPM of $8 to $15 on its network sites, and about $27.5 CPM on the sites it owns outright, or those on Glam.com.

Finally, Glam is winning a poaching war. Jennifer Salant left iVillage/NBC to lead Glam’s business development efforts. Glam also just hired Karin Marke, head of MySpace’s west coast sales, and also hired Myspace’s lead performer of East Coast sales. Glam has poached execs from IAC, three from iVillage, and others from AOL, Elle, CNET and Conde Nast.

Finally, below is the traffic for PopSugar, the site that is about to launch its own ad network in conjunction with FM Publishing.

popsugar-traffic.jpg
.

Mike Arrington at Techcrunch has just posted a critical piece about Glam, making many of the same points of the critics. Numbers are being thrown around that make this all a big game of smoke and mirrors, and every player is wrapped up in this. Note, for example, that Sugar claims 4.5 million unique visitors a month, as reported by Techcrunch. Brian Sugar tells us these numbers are based on Google analytics. However, Comscore, which is what advertisers rely on, shows a much lower number.

Other reading: See NYT tonight on iVillage challenges.

Next Story: Latest VentureBeat job board listings
Previous Story: Facebook roundup: Leaking code, growing up and solving copyright issues

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Photo of Matt Marshall

About the Author, Matt Marshall

Matt Marshall is editor and CEO of VentureBeat. Follow him on Twitter at @mmarshall, and follow VentureBeat on Twitter at @venturebeat.

  • scruple
    Matt,

    You did a nice job digging into lots information... not sure intentionally or unintentionally, you prefer to state it vaguely or make it remain vague at some critical information points. You quote "In most cases, Arora says, Glam has exclusive agreements in place to sell 100 percent of advertising on the sites in its network."

    Checking with employees of Glam who sign contracts with Bloggers, they can tell you that most of their contracts with bloggers ARE NOT exclusive to Glam. Clicking on Glam network blogger's websites you can also see many Non-Glam blog network's widgets on there. Arora as a sale's guy, known to have a compulsive self-aggrandizement syndrome? I would double check the truth by asking for the details of how many contracts are mutually exclusive and how many are not.

    In comparison with iVillage, the devil is in the detail of content owning percentage. iVillage might have some properties they don't own exclusively, but iVillage's core competence is content owner and hence majority of the ad sell is 100% revenue to iVillage. On the other hand, Glam is the other extreme of "land grabbing" biz model, majority of Glam's revenue is NOT 100% to Glam. The percentage dictates the earning potential of each company

    Second issue, if Glam claims to be the technology provider for ad targeting, what is the underpinning behavioral science behind Glam's "technology", does Glam possess any patent? How long has their technology been used and what are the results from advertisers? How does it compared to Behavioral Target Ad Networks such as Revenue Science, Double Click, and Microsoft's new ad targeting technology?

    You manage to be cleverly bias without being obvious.
  • Ara
    Concerning Google Analytics, it depends on which number he gave you. Google Analytics has a measure called "absolute unique visitors" wherein each unique for the period you're looking at is counted only once.
  • Thomas
    Glam = 2nd bubble Kibu.com?
    :D
  • As the 4th publisher to join the Glam Network, I've been dealing with Glam for close to two years and it's not been my experience that they have misrepresented themselves or their operations. It's probably due to their amazing success at building up a lucrative network of online publishers that is causing so much confusion & bringing out the critics bearing grudges, half-baked opinions & incorrect information.

    The fact is:
    - Glam has never claimed to be a destination but have always maintained they are a network of blogs, sites & online publishers
    - their 20 M reach is valid according to ComScore
    - all the Glam Network publishers have 100% of their traffic assigned to Glam
    - they sell ads across the Network (such as Google AdSense)
    - they offer services & technical help whenever it's requested, adding a personal touch other networks don't offer

    Because they've always been upfront about their operations and paid when they're supposed to etc., they've earned my trust in these areas.
  • Allison
    See my comment to Matt's post on TC- I guess it has been sending traffic to VB as it deserves.

    Something does not add up here- Investment Banks such as Allen and Bank of America have a solid reputation- these are not run of the mill banks. I looked on the web for more info and found posts on VentureBeat which says that PopSugar- one of TechCrunch’s investments is trying to launch a competitive service to Glam along with iVillage. Should this not have been mentioned in any financial reporting?

    If this is such a sham, why is iVillage/NBC reportedly - see NYT today scrambling to copy Glam’s model? I suspect it has to do with the revenue- the one thing that stood out in your post- real revenue growth that only the eBay or Google have experienced- and neither of them have any content or products - they power the little guy. This is what makes them much bigger than the likes of AOL, Yahoo or MSN. Sounds like Glam has discovered the same model for display advertising.

    Sure. I would suggest Michael take a look at it as well and add more than a link saying an alternative point of view to his post.

    Here is where I think he is stumbling - “They boast of faster growth than MySpace, and claim to be the no. 1 womens website on the Internet with 19.1 million unique monthly users” Michael main point about all this is the traffic nonsense with Glam seems to be claiming to be the “no. 1 women website” - after reading the quote the document actually says “#1 ranking web property”

    The confusion may be that comScore reports 3 types of media: single web sites domain names, web properties (with exclusive traffic assignments/ownership), and pure ad networks. Matt’s post explains that there is a difference between them. iVllage Network was no. 1 web Property- I did not realize that it is a network of many sites including ones it does not own, and Glam is now no. 1 - it is also a network but of more web sites. NYT today says that Glam is stealing away their advertisers. And this by powering the little guys & gals - I would think this is a good thing and kind of grassroots web like Doc Searle said would start to happen. @Srup- sounds like your information is not correct looking at the publisher posts on TC - Glam does sell their display advertising and makes them $'s

    Web Properties & Ad Networks seem hot- looking at the recent deals valued at 2B to 6B - much more than pure content or e-com plays like TheKnot or iVillage. Must imply that the scale that content companies get to 100M in revenue after 10 years like iVillage vs a new company like Google does in 4 years and Glam in 2 years. Nothing wrong with all this - Michael started this- now needs to follow through with some fact finding and additions to the story like Matt has.
  • Another Publisher
    Happy to see this thorough piece

    For day 1, GLAM has taken us to another level, offering premium advertisers on our little sites, in term pulling the eyes of other premium advertisers. Payment is always on time and the company has been so kind & transparent with us that we feel at home with their team. Publishers need to do what is right for them, and GLAM is right for our current flock of sites and any future site we launch. With GLAM, we are now able to bring in better talent - in turn offering better content for our readers. And I think that's what is about offering better content .

    I am GLAM happy.
  • It's interesting to see TWO differnt blogs carry almost the same information about Glam on the same day-- and to see that it's been twisted to present a certain perspective.



    I have been part of glam.com now for well over 3 years .. I just went solo on a blog with them (was previously part of a larger blog network that partnered with Glam) and Glam has been nothing but helpful in getting my blog to grow, offering marketing advice, helping me with ads and also getting me into some events where the connections were iffy on my own.. in other words, add GLAM into the equation and my entrance was guaranteed.

    Glam may have originally started out as a destination -- and I KNOW that because I was with them for a short time as a content provider-- however they realized that the web was changing and made a pro-active move to create a more blog-centric destination where you can see HUNDREDS of blogs and websites all in one location on a variety of topics.
    I have met bloggers in LA who are well known in their field and we all felt that Glam was the right move for us-- (and that includes celebrity, fashion, vintage, beauty, lifestyle, and lots of other topics).. and these aren't tiny blogs but ones that really are well known. I know that my traffic is assigned to Glam. It's right there in the fine print-- and it's not really tiny either. It's VERY CLEAR and someone discussed it with me on the phone at length.

    The agreement offered by Glam was a heck of a lot more generous than others offered to me who wanted to own my content, lock stock and email and I was to be paid a pittance for something that would generate the other companies a TON of revenue. I had people promising in writing to pay me 2K a month or 500 hundred a month but never came up with anything for me participating on their blog group. They are more transparent about what they do.. and they aren't using me as much as I am using them to promote me.

    I know that Glam.com recently co-promoted an event with Fashiontribes.com and Papierdoll.net for their second birthday party. If they are helping those two sites get noticed and get more attention in the media and the blogosphere, how is that bad?

    I know that the Glam ad network works because I know people who are able to live off the revenues driven by Glam ads and participation in events and promotions. Now tell me -- what is the point of capitalism if not to survive.
    As a person who has just gone solo with my blogs-- and I am a well-known quantity on the web-- I wouldn't go with just ANYONE. I get pitched all kinds of deals all the time. I look at each one carefully and evaluate what they are offering me. One fo the ones I have chosen to participate in for my blogs is GLAM.com-- because I trust them. They have helped me when I needed help -- when they didn't have to, because they knew that I would be a good addition to their network and they know the extent to what I cover in terms of topics can make a HUGE difference in traffic for them and for me.
    They PROMOTE me in a big way-- where the other blog network I used to be part of didn't.

    If I have a problem with my blog or with an ad or need some advice or guidance or suggestions, I know exactly who to call at Glam and they get back to me within a 24 hours -- sometimes less. I know that I wouldn't be part of Glam it is was all the BS that you say it is.

    Granted my solo blog isn't getting as much traffic as the previous blog location which had me buried-- (and that blog -- though closed-- is still generating 8-10k hits per month) . Glam's staff has been working with me on a marketing plan to make me more visibile and I am happy and appreciative to have that help -- and guess what, it's FREE.
    That's right boys and girls-- FREE.
    When was the last time you got free professional marketing strategy?

    So let's just say maybe there is a difference of opinion here--you have yours and I have mine and we can agree to disagree. But if you doubt me, I challenge you to go through the blogroll at Glam.com and contact them directly and ask them -- ask Papierdoll, Fashiontribes, Hollyscoop, Popbites, Debutante Clothing, California Style and so many more. There is a network of Glam Blogs that I participate with for a "blog carnivale"/group.

    Bottom line is what you want it to be-- you can criticize it all you want.. but until you actually talk to those IN GLAM.. you are merely using circumstantial facts (and not all of them) to support your case without doing all the digging necessary.


    FOR PURPOSES OF DISCLOSURE-- I posted this on techcrunch too.. just an fyi -- with a few minor tweaks to it.
  • I can see the bubble is going to pop soon :(
  • I'm not only a 13 year technology veteran and writer, but I'm also a fashion blogger who started with Glam from the beginning 2 years ago. I'm a completely happy and satisfied member. They nurtured me, my blog, and helped me grow to become one of the top 50 fashion blogs in the U.S. I'm not a blogger to make money, I just want to do do good content. Glam has helped me immensely in this arena. Aside from their own editors on staff, they help network me with other fashion bloggers as well. I am entirely grateful to what Glam is doing for the fashion world online. I wouldn't be where I am without them.
  • Listener
    No one has any doubt that Glam treats its publishers generously. Its Publishers got paid heavenly by Glam and want Glam to get the funding to be able to afford paying them in the future.

    Publishers praised Glam for the right and obvious reasons. But the discussions were not on Glam/publisher’s relationships, but on Glam’s aggressive financial projections and its business valuation.

    The only thing of issue here is how Glam.com has marketed themselves within the VC and media worlds. They claim to be a destination– they aren’t. They routinely say they’re #1 with women, but with MyYearBook.com being their largest source of traffic, that is questionable.
  • Allison
    See my post on TC

    “The only thing of issue here is how Glam.com has marketed themselves within the VC and media worlds. They claim to be a destination– they aren’t.”

    Michael made a grave mistake in his original post - after reading Matt’s article and the disclosure document, it is 100% clear that Glam - like iVillage - says it is a web property and not a destination!!! Repeating things over and over again don’t make them become the truth.

    iVillage has 50 web sites in their network- less than half owned based on Matt’s report - Glam has 360 sites. Apple to Apples both have good deep content sites, and some fun or games based on the audience of women or teens - that probably why comScore’s report says Glam is now no.1 ahead of iVillage.

    Looks like the publishers love Glam, and revenue seems to indicate advertisers too as they want this highly desriable reach to women from these reports. Whether TechCrunch is a friend or an investor doesn’t really matter- did Michael do his homework before writing what appears to be a flame blog post. Decide for yourself- read the VentureBeat article and others.

    I asked my stock buddy - here is what I found out - Yahoo is mostly content and supposed to generate 7B of revenue next year - with a market cap of 32B or 5 times revenue, Google with a network model will do 20B with a market cap of 160B or 8 times revenue. That would imply Glam at 150M in revenue would have a market cap of 600M - 1.2B today. WebMD at a mid cap is 6-7 times revenue and a similar model to Glam - network of sites has a 3B market cap 6-8 times revenue YouTube was 1.7B and non of the content was created by them or pretty - but has defined video on the web. I guess reach and revenue is what matters - I like this time the little guy wins unlike facebook where the suers build the content and the company keeps all the ad money. This is a good thing for the web and corporate america to face.
  • I have a website (http://fadedyouthblog.com) and I am a part of the Glam network.

    I would have to say that this story is entirely off base. Glam took my little blog on Blogger to a legitimate site.

    I have about 5 different ad networks on my website and the reveunue that I make from Glam is more than the other ad networks COMBINED!

    Furthermore, Glam is always expanding and offering members of its network more opportunities to grow and make more money.

    I really suggest the author of this article to do better research. You may sway a webmater’s decision when it comes to ad networks and affiliations.

    Anyway, to anyone reading this, Glam is the best thing that has happened to my site. The money is great. The ads are awesome. Makes everything look far more professional.

    Thanks!

    Arasto
    Faded Youth Blog
    http://fadedyouthblog.com
    (Bookmark my site -- you'll love it!)
  • In all fairness, Glam is not doing anything out of the ordinary here. Handing over your traffic numbers to a larger ad network, or site (that sells ads, as is the case of Glam) seems to be the continuing trend. I have heard that FM does this with a lot of their properties. They have the site owners sign over their traffic numbers, so that collectively the whole (FM) shows up in a high ranking position on Comscore - and therefore helps them get media buys.

    In my opinion, if a company doesn't own the sites, they should not be allowed to list them.

    UGO is probably another good example of an ad network that acts like they "own" the sites in their network when in reality it's just smoke and mirrors.

    I could be wrong, but don't be suprised if I am right.
  • Just wanted to add my two cents to this article about Glam.com. I have been a member in their network of blogs for over a year and I am very happy with them as a whole.

    The exposure our sites receive in their ad network is a great feature.. which means more traffic and readers. Glam makes sure that checks are sent out on time each month.

    As for displaying their ads on all three of my sites... I think it is a great thing and keeps my readers on top of what is available in beauty, fashion and even tv entertainment.

    I am a proud member of Glam blog network and I think they ROCK!
  • anonymous
    If Glam has to benchmark itself in the Blog Ad Network category, its performance becomes trivial and probably on the inferior list, because other Blog Ad Networks are profitable and no need to hunt for money.

    There are many Blog Ad Network innovated on business models way before Glam. This URL shows it all.

    http://blognetworklist.com/networksbyvalue.php

    Some of those blog networks created solid businesses without going to the town conducting fraudulent advertising on their traffic number and ranking.

    Talking about pulling a PR stunt, Glam seems to have needs for desperate PR stunt. It makes me think about O.J. Simpson wanting to publish his book and making PR stunt, and Fox channel even granted it a green light. But eventually it backfired.

    Glam’s overpaid "blog publishers" are defending Glam very hard, but Glam had stirred up a cocktail of bad emotions from very diverse groups of professionals. The aggregated 156 comments at TechCrunch show that Glam did not win the minds and hearts of neutral parties that outside of Glam Network bloggers. If it is a good practice, sometimes competitors even respect it, but this is not the case here.

    Part of the reason this controversy won’t die is that all along media seemed to be to so superficially covered Glam hype at its beginning stage and perpetuated a myth of “short-cut to traffic growth in light speed”, encouraged this new comer’s self-promotion without any examination. It seems like we are living in a time of “wild west and eyeballs-grabbing”.

    But it seems that in the court of opinions, justice is starting to do its job even though justice comes late.
  • J's Comment
    Site or network? Own or join?

    Be a network more than a site, that’s my advice.

    This is what Glam has done, creating an ad network across independent sites and growing hugely, bragging that it is the no. 1 women’s site (service, network?) with 19.1 monthly uniques, growing faster than MySpace and larger than iVillage, AOL Living, and all of Conde Nast combined.

    At TechCrunch, Mike Arrington ridicules Glam’s claims, saying: “A minimal amount of research into their business shows that the company is an ad network, not a content site.” With respect, I disagree

    I say that’s what makes Glam so smart. As the web becomes more and more distributed — more widgetized with tchotzkes of content and functionality spread everywhere — the idea of measuring size by just measuring a site becomes obsolete. And here’s the fringe benefit: it’s better and cheaper to take your content to the people rather than marketing to bring them to you. This is the essence of CBS’ audience network strategy.

    This is, dare I say it, the essence of 3.0: join and enable a network instead of trying to buy content and eyeballs on a site.

    WWGD. What would Google do? Google would network.

    http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/08/14/site-or-n...
  • Mark
    www.iWin.com isn't a coupon promotion site owned by iVillage. It's a private and independent casual game company.
  • ella bee
    I think that a lot of readers don't really care about Glam being an ad network or a destination site. Whatever it is, it's just for investiment/fianncial community. Readers are going to gravitate towards sites that have interesting content. Also, bear in mind that the original users may not like the big network type mentality that these companies posses. There are sites like Style hive, HerFabLife.com, She Finds etc that continue to grow and reach out to a certain market. Sometimes readers like smaller independent sites too.
  • Hi Matt!

    First let me say I’m a huge fan of VentureBeat and a daily (sometimes hourly!) reader. Thanks for always delivering such timely, thought-provoking articles :)

    I would also like to point out and correct an error in the iVillage stats you included in the chart above.

    Not sure where the data came from (comScore?), but as an employee of iWin I can assure you that our casual games website is definitely *not* owned by iVillage -- the only relationship we have with them is that they supply and serve the ads to our www.iwin.com site.

    Thanks!
  • I also heard that http://www.lamelime.com and myyearbook.com are up there in the 1 million dollar range!