1. Welcome
• Understanding the choice, not to persuade
you, but we are recommending both markets.
• Please save questions until the end.

2. Characteristics of Projection
-Non-nuclear

3. Two trains/Two tracks
Site agnostic=may or may not happen within the confines of the site.
Discrete=quantized. Continual= range.

4. Site-specific can be estimated accurately, site-agnostic cannot. It seems like a
lot of our discussion has been in site-specific and none in site-agnostic.

5. Limits of site-specific
• Historical data, not specific to Fenorris. If you
used a projection like this for Google or
Facebook, it would predict 0 revenue. If you
used it for Windows Smartphone, it would be
too high.

6. Limits of Site-Specific
• Takes average, ignores total price (Fenoriss’
items are very high price.
So that means the site-agnostic data is very
important.

7. Why can’t site-agnostic be estimated
accurately?
• Because it is predicated by traffic, e-herd, like
stocks
And you can never guess what people will actually do until they do it, since there are too
many z variables, also known as “static.” Predicting in a non-linear dynamic system is like
predicting stocks or the weather, we don’t do it in revenue projections. But there are
other signs a stock is hot even if cannot be predicted. Even genius stock pickers are wrong
around 60% of the time but when they’re right, they’re really right, when they’re wrong
they’re only somewhat wrong. This is due to causal portrait modeling.

8. So why should I care about site-
agnostic aspects of the campaign if I
cant quantify the benefit?
• There are qualifiable not quantifiable benefits:
reach, network effect, valuation, community,
% chance sales, competitive adv, our authority

9. Targeted vs non targeted, the
projection never accounted for non-
targeted

10. Reach, targeted cpm

11. If corp climb was a
city
• Targeted
Non
targeted

12. Network
effect
• Info cascade, Private vs.
social signals, tipping
point, contagion model
“Social signals outweigh
private since the %
chance I am right is lower
than all those people
Being wrong”

13. Valuation
• Due to MOOC and crowdsourced features

14. Communi
ty
• Evangelical
• Research
• Partnerships

15. % chance/sales

16. competition

17. Our authority, Tour Italy, 5.4 mil profit.
3 yr.

18. Eagle One DS, 0.5 Mil profit

19. Lip Gloss Culture, 85k profit

20. Site-specific: We can lower the cash
reqs but we can’t change this trend
This is typical for longer term investments such as real
estate, if you don’t like this chart, you should not do
internet marketing.

21. Risk and MAPE, wrong way to think
about it

22. Healthy signs of risk reduction
Other healthy signs
are engagement,
social signals,
feedback from
people.

23. What is MAPE?
• The chance that this number will be wrong, it can be wrong by
$0.01 and still have 10% MAPE. It is not the chance that the
projection is wrong. This is because 1) There is a pos/neg skew.
2) This distribution is Gaussian. 3) There is a higher limit MAPE
distortion.

24. MAPE
5% MAPE = 2.5% positive skew, 2.5%
negative skew

25. Stdev MAPE
• When stdev occurs this is the probability
distribution. It is not all or nothing.
MAPE= Gaussian distribution because it deals with random events

26. MAPE negative distortion
• The 5% correlates to the 10% but the 10%
distorts the 5%

27. Distortion
Projection does
not account for
this

28. RVR
• The RVR is incredibly high which show very
limited risk.
• RVR of Apple Stock in Sep 2009: 1.4
• RVR of campaign: 4
• Caveat: RVRs oversimplify risk (does not
capture skewness or kurtosis)

29. Marketing campaigns
• Don’t fail or succeed in the blink of an eye. If
they are failing it becomes pretty clear from
the outset. We will poor social signals, traffic
numbers, feedback etc. That being said, never
invest in marketing unless you can handle
losing all of your money.

30. Testing
• Opinions are wrong, testing is right. If 500
people all get onto a site and say it’s a good
idea, then it is. If not, then it isn’t. This should
be done for US and India.

31. Real risks
• What are some of the real risks?
• Traffic is high, sales are low. This would mean
a longer period of time for recoup of principal.
• SEO is not a good traffic source, for w/e
reason. This would mean higher-cost
advertising.
• Electric is not reliable. This projection was not
specific to us however.

32. False risks
• I can spend 50K and see nothing.
• I am revenue negative for too long: If you
can’t be revenue negative for a year, internet
marketing is not for you. There is always the
chance that you won’t be but it cannot be
qualified.

33. India and US should both be done
• Projections were done with cross-transferring
utility assumption, which is why India looked
so good.
• Both markets are self-supporting.
• Jumping into the other market is easy.
• Testing will show where we can focus more of
our energy. Also, I already mentioned the
India projection is not even valid.

34. Computational Simulations
• Ran but am not happy with them yet, I had a
colleague look at them and he said they were
not good enough.
• Without live data, the simulations are just for
our own amusement, however. We should go
ahead and fund the tests now.