Each week, I receive not only mine, but for some reason every one else’s junk mail. Some of it is very interesting and others are just not relevant to my responsibilities at eLocal Listing for marketing and/or quality.
As I rummaged through the mail, I found a brochure that said “THERE ARE OVER 34,000 SEARCHES A SECOND”. Well that caught my attention and I had to research those facts.
I found an article from Search Engine Land in February that substantiated the advertisement. It compared social networking updates vs. searches as follows:
- Facebook status updates: 700 per second
- Twitter tweets: 600 per second
Compared to searches
- Google: 34,000 searches per second
- Yahoo: 3,200 searches per second
Danny Sullivan went on to do the math based upon ComScore’s world wide estimates and came up with these figures*:
- Google: 34,000 searches per second (2 million per minute; 121 million per hour; 3 billion per day; 88 billion per month, figures rounded)
- Yahoo: 3,200 searches per second (194,000 per minute; 12 million per hour; 280 million per day; 9 billion per month, figures rounded)
- Bing: 927 searches per second (56,000 per minute; 3 million per hour; 80 million per day; 4 billion per month, figures rounded)
Now that is a lot of Searches and a great opportunity for SMBs and those who help them get online. While the article compares the number of social updates to the number of searches and they are still quite far apart, it should be noted that social media is still (in the scheme of things) relatively new and has seen incredible growth in the last year.
Also, when comparing the stats for the social networks, keep in mind that twitter counts all tweets and retweets, facebook only includes updates (not links, likes, and such). Finding substantiated meaningful data in this space is not the easiest task, but I am thankful for the brochure and the article, and will update elocallisting.com.
If asked how many searches and updates do I think will be reported in January 2011, I’d have to say “search me? … let’s wait and see”. (sorry, couldn’t resist using an idiom.)
*updated from original article.