Internet RETAIL AUDIT · 2016-01-20 · tool, 9% use Adobe Analytics and 12% use either IBM Coremetrics, Quantcast, Webtrends or Yahoo Web Analytics. USAGE OF MORE THAN ONE WEB ANALYTICS

OBSERVEPOINT.COM [email protected] (855)878-8466

1HARLEY DAVIDSON | CASE STUDY

See how Internet Retailer Top 1-100 and 501-600 ranked companies manage their digital marketing technologies.

Internet RETAIL AUDIT


2DIGITAL MARKETING TECHNOLOGY REPORT

Executive SummaryAs the marketing technology landscape continues to expand, marketers have become burdened with managing complex implementations of many tools across many digital properties. When data quality suffers, the potential return on each technology is damaged. Data quality management is a growing responsibility for digital marketers, and especially web analysts. A new class of data quality management tools, such as those offered by ObservePoint, aim to systematically collect tagging data and proactively detect tag deployment errors that negatively impact downstream digital marketing activities. ObservePoint applied its auditing technology to the websites of companies listed by Internet Retailer in the 2014 Internet Retailer Top 500 and the 2013 Internet Retailer Second 500. Sites ranked 1-100 were compared to those ranked 501-600 to see what the top sites do differently. We found that in many areas, digital marketers all suffer from the same problems.

DATA QUALITY IN DIGITAL MARKETINGData quality as an afterthought in digital marketing is willful ignorance. While many digital marketers understand that data quality is frequently degraded through routine website updates, only the most mature of digital marketing practitioners apply processeses to monitor data quality. Before technologies such as automated tag auditing and tag management were available, digital

123,556 34% 56% 1,395Pages Audited Sites Using TMS Average Data Inflation Technologies Identified

marketers were left to manual and haphazard methods of managing tags. This is no longer the case. Leading brands and digital agencies are now leveraging data quality management systems to create tag databases and manage deployments. This provides quantifiable insight into data quality, and protects the ROI potential of all digital marketing tools.

METHODOLOGYObservePoint sampled pages on 401 websites listed 1-100 in the 2014 Internet Retailer Top 500, and 501-600 in the 2013 Internet Retailer Second 500 databases. Using ObservePoint’s patented auditing platform, each page and tag was measured, and these metrics were compiled from every site to create performance indexes. This exclusive data gives unprecedented insight into the world’s top Internet retailers’ digital marketing technology stacks.

This report shines a light on the most common tag deployment issues experienced across (even) the most successful Internet retailers, as ranked by Internet Retailer. We also compare the top 100 retailers to those ranked between 500-600 to understand the differences and similarities between how top retailers and 500-600 ranked companies manage their digital marketing

DIGITAL MARKETING TECHNOLOGY REPORT

Internet Retailer 1-100 Vs 501-600



TOP 100 COMPANIES DEPLOY 26% MORE MARKETING TECHNOLOGIES THAN THE SECOND 500FindingsIn our audit of over 123,000 pages spanning some 400 websites owned by Internet Retailer ranked companies, we discovered which tools are the most popular among the two groups, which companies use more than one web analytics system, and which companies use tag management systems. We also measured the total and average number of technologies deployed on websites.

Our audits revealed several data quality issues that seemed to surface over and over again. Among these issues are incomplete tag deployments, or the instance of critical tags missing from website pages; data inflation, or the instance of critical tags being placed multiple times on pages; data consistency problems that are caused by timing; ordering issues that cause tags to fire at inconsistent intervals; long page load times; and JavaScript errors.

Finally, we analyzed the deployment and popularity of tag management systems. We ranked the popularity of TMS’ and determined the effect that tag management systems are having on data quality.

DEPLOYED DIGITAL MARKETING TECHNOLOGIES

On average, 1-100 ranked companies deploy 26% more marketing technologies on their websites than 501-600 ranked companies do. Marketing technologies commonly consist of a primary web analytics system of record and a secondary web analytics tool, tags for audience targeting and measurement, search marketing, advertising, personalization, recommendations, and Tag Management.

In the top 100, the most tags on one site is 39.

29.7% of top 100 websites deploy at least 20 tags and 15% deploy less than 6 tags, and 8 websites deploy only one tag. On average, top 100 websites deploys 13-14 tags.

In sites of companies ranked 501-600, the most tags on one site is 29.

10% of sites deploy at least 20 tags, 26% deploy less than 6 tags, and 3 websites deploy only one tag. On average, 501-600 ranked sites deploy 10-11 tags.

“In the top 100, the most tags on one site is 39.”

PRIMARY WEB ANALYTICS SYSTEM OF RECORD

The primary web analytics system of record is the tool a website’s analysts use most often for routine reporting and data analysis.

When more than one web analytics tool is found on the website, the primary analytics tool is determined empirically by comparing which tool is present on a higher percentage of pages. When Google Analytics is found present on the site along with another tool, Google Analytics is deemed as the secondary web analytics tool.

54% of top 100 websites use Adobe Analytics as a primary web analytics tool, 22% use either Google Analytics or Google Universal Analytics, 16% use IBM Coremetrics and 8% use either Quantcast or comScore.

79% of 501-600 websites use either Google Analytics or

Number of Tags

Perc

ent o

f W

eb S

ites

5 10 15 20 25 30

10

20

30

Tags Deployed on Web Sites Ranked 1-100 vs 501-600



47% OF TOP RETAILERS USE MORE THAN ONE WEB ANALYTICS TOOLGoogle Universal Analytics as a primary web analytics tool, 9% use Adobe Analytics and 12% use either IBM Coremetrics, Quantcast, Webtrends or Yahoo Web Analytics.

USAGE OF MORE THAN ONE WEB ANALYTICS TOOL

36% of top 100 websites use Google Analytics or Google Universal Analytics as a secondary web analytics tool. IBM Analytics is used 11% of the time.

501-600 sites use a secondary tool much less often, with 20% using Google Analytics.

In the top 100, 51% of Adobe Analytics deployments are accompanied by a secondary analytics tool - either Google Analytics, Google Universal Analytics, IBM Analytics or Webtrends.

Surprisingly, every time a 501-600 site has deployed Adobe Analytics, Google Analytics is also deployed.

THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF TAG DEPLOYMENT

In order for tag-dependent tools, such as web analytics, to collect and report the most accurate data on each page, four conditions must be met.

First, each page must render one (and only one) instance of a given tag1.

Second, each tag must be set up to send data to the correct reporting account, sometimes referred to in vendor-specific language such as UA number, Account or Report Suite ID.

Third, variable parameters and values must be configured correctly. Particulars of variable configuration varies by vendor, but generally the page name, namespace, and custom variable data must be configured.

Fourth, tags must execute without error and with consistent timing across all browsers, network connection types, devices, and geographic locations.

DATA QUALITY TRAPS

Comparing reports from multiple web analytics platforms

has become a common practice. 47% of 1-100 sites and 26% of 501-600 sites have deployed at least two web analytics tools. Perceived benefits of this tactic include having a “back-up” data set, confirming data in one tool with data from a second tool, providing access to more people, etc.

In theory, the benefits of measuring twice seem almost intuitive, but when the data quality of these systems is unquantified, the risks start to outweigh the benefits.

Users who compare digital marketing data from multiple systems tend to have frustrating experiences when their metrics don’t match up. Users should be aware that inherent differences in the meaning and collection method of common metrics, such as page views, visits, and sessions, vary by vendor.

Collection models or definitions for these metrics are not standardized. Each vendor has unique data collection mechanisms and data from different tools should not be expected to match-up.

Every website has issues that negatively impact data quality.”

Recognition of these differences does not resolve all cross-vendor reporting issues, however. In our analysis, every website has technical issues that negatively impact data quality.

Our data indicates that in any group of 30 pages, at least one page will be missing a tag from one web analytics system. Without a tag, no data is collected. The metrics in this report each have an impact on data quality. Ulti-mately, comparing two flawed sets of data in the pursuit of gaining clarity is unrewarding.

Comparing two flawed data sources is counterproductive. Instead of removing bias and providing facts for decision-making, flawed data introduces new bias and supports false conclusions. It’s much better to have one set of nearly perfect data than two sets of flawed data.

Companies that require strong data alignment across

1. Some digital marketing tools, such as advertising and social media widgets may be deployed multiple times on one page.



their entire marketing technology stack are advised to deploy a data layer through an enterprise-class tag management system.

Web Analytics Tag Deployment RatesWhen it comes to data quality, comprehensive web analytics tag deployment is paramount. Tag presence is the percentage of pages in an entire audit which have a given tool’s tag. For example, if 450 of 500 pages in an audit have an Adobe Analytics tag, the deployment rate is 90%. For a web analytics system to collect any data on a particuar page, the page must have a tag.

Placing tags and maintaining tag deployment, whether for web analytics, testing, personalization, or tag management, is a top challenge for digital marketers.


We measured the number of working tags for each vendor on each page of every website. Tag presence - the instances of working tags on pages - continues to be a challenge. Top 100 and 501-600 sites have more in common here than not.

For companies listed 1-100, an average of 2.8% of pages have no tag for their primary web analytics system of record. 7% of these websites are missing their primary web analytics tag on more than 10% of pages. One website, belonging to a big-box electronics retailer, has deployed Adobe Analytics on fewer than 75% of pages.

501-600 ranked websites have only slightly better coverage – missing tags on just under 2% of pages. 2% of 501-600 websites are missing the primary web analytics tag on more than 10% of pages. One particular website has Google Analytics tags on fewer than 75% of pages.

SECONDARY WEB ANALYTICS TOOL Secondary web analytics tools are plagued by the same problem. In the top 100 sites, secondary analytics tools are missing on 2.3% of pages; in the 501-600, tags are missing on 1.5% of pages.

Data InflationData Inflation occurs when page view data is double-counted (or more) due to the presence of more than one web analytics tag on a single page. As each tag

fires, tracking code is sent to the vendor’s server. When more than one tag for a given vendor fires on a single page, some or all of the data is duplicated with each subsequent tag fire.

Data inflation can also be caused by an incorrect deployment of a tag management system. Upon deployment of TMS, if individual tags are not manually removed from the page code, tags end up firing twice - once from the remaining tags, and once from the TMS.

Many web analytics systems have variable costs for server calls. Multiple server calls caused by duplicated tags increases the cost of ownership while simultaneously degrading data quality. In many ways, data inflation is worse than missing data because not only is the data flawed, but also there is an increase in server calls and, consequently, tool costs as well.


Top 1-100 sites have an average of 146% data inflation. 3% of these websites had between 1000% and 1800% inflation in their web analytics system of record. 22% of websites have over 100% data inflation. 51% of top 100 sites had less than 10% data inflation, and the majority of those had no inflation.

About half of websites with data inflation issues use a tag management system.

501-600 ranked websites have an average of 42% data inflation. 15% of sites have inflation greater than 100%, but the site with the most inflation has 400%. 66% of 501-600 ranked sites have less than 10% inflation, a majority of those having no inflation at all.

Percent of Pages Tagged with Primary Web Analytics System of Record

Perc

ent o

f W

eb S

ites

75 80 85 90 95 100

1

10

100

Tag Presence on Web Sites Ranked 1-100 vs 501-600



“Top 1-100 sites have an average of 146% inflation. 3% of these websites had between 1000% and 1800% inflation in their web analytics system of record.”

SECONDARY WEB ANALYTICS TOOL

Top 100 ranked sites with a secondary web analytics tool (about 48% of sites), have an average of 190% data inflation.

23% of 501-600 ranked sites with a secondary web analytics tool have 48% inflation.

ComplexityComplexity in digital marketing technology deployment is measured by the number of user-configured variables each tag has. Out of the box, each vendor uses default variables such as page name, domain, screen size, color depth, character set, etc.

The real power in a premium web analytics tool is its ability to capture custom variables, which are custom data points that are important to business objectives.

Complexity is expressed as the average number of variables observed. Purely out-of-the-box deployments average 20 variables.

IN TOP 1-100 SITES

Top 100 sites use 79 variables on average, which is 49 more variables than a typical out-of-the-box implementation. One site uses 2041 variables, and 21% of top 100 sites are using more than 100 variables. 17% of sites are using very few custom variables. All but a handful of companies who are using a premium web analytics systems are using custom variables.

IN 501-600 SITES

In contrast, 501-600-ranked sites use an average of 24 variables and the most complex deployment uses 89 variables. About 50% of sites use more than the standard variables.

ConsistencyConsistency measures the position in the network stack in which server requests (such as calls to digital marketing technology servers) are initiated.

Engineers have the ability to control the timing of various tags. In a TMS environment, this can be set up within the system. In a non-TMS environment, placing tags in the header, body, or footer or a page affects the timing.

Ideally, the firing position of all tags belonging to a vendor would fire either in the top or bottom of the network stack. This timing promotes data collection on each page at a consistent point in time during each page view. When it can be proven that tracking code is executed within the first .25 seconds of a page load, it can be assumed that the data is more consistent and complete than if the tags fire at inconsistent times between pages (some quickly and some after 3 seconds) .

Some vendors recommend placing tags in the footer of a page. This helps visible elements to render first, which optimizes user experience. However, on slow loading pages, visitors may navigate away from the page before



“50% of top 100 company sites have deployed a tag management system.”

the tag is fired. Still, consistently placing tags on the bottom of all pages is better than scattering about the page.

In our audits, we measured the percentage of tags which fire in the top, bottom, and middle third of the network stack.

PRIMARY WEB ANALYTICS SYSTEM OF RECORD IN TOP 1-100 SITES

On average, 61% of image requests happen in the bottom third of pages. This results in artificially low page views on pages with long load times.

“23% of websites have an even distribution of tag placement... This produces the least consistent data.”

32% of image requests happen in the middle third of pages. Tags in the middle of the page create less consistent data, since pages vary wildly in total load time.

7% of image requests execute in the top third of pages. This tends to produce the highest count rate for page views, even though user experience may be slightly impacted by invisible elements loading before visible elements.

23% of websites had an even distribution of tag placement across the top, middle, and bottom of pages. This produces inconsistent data because the tags will fire at different times on each page.

PRIMARY WEB ANALYTICS SYSTEM OF RECORD IN 501-600 SITES

On average, 66% of image requests happen in the bottom third of pages.

28% of image requests happen in the middle third of pages. 5% of image requests execute in the top third of pages. 20% of websites had an even distribution of tag

placement across the top, middle, and bottom of pages.

Site PerformanceSite performance impacts the quality of digital marketing data. For example, JavaScript errors on pages can prevent the execution of tags used for web analytics, personalization, advertising, tag management - in actuality any type of tag, beacon, or script.

LONG PAGE LOAD TIMES

Studies have found that people begin to be impatient with pages loading anywhere from 250ms to 2 seconds after clicking a link or entering a web address. Significantly longer load times affect the way people interact with a website. When a load time is too long, visitors will bounce from a page more often, convert less, and return less often.

When tags are placed toward the bottom, the tags are less likely to execute because the visitor is more likely to leave the page too soon.

In top 1-100 Sites

The average page load time across all top 1-100 Internet retail websites is 3.98 seconds.

The fastest 10% of sites’ pages load in an average of 1.4 seconds. The slowest 10% of sites’ pages load in an average of 8.4 seconds. 2% websites have an average page load time of between 10 and 16 seconds.

Average Page Load Time in Seconds

Perc

ent o

f Web

Site

s

3 5 7 9 11+

10

20

30

Load Times on Web Sites Ranked 1-100 vs 501-600

1



In 501-600 Sites

The average page load time across all 501-600 websites is 4.85 seconds.

The fastest 10% of site’s pages load in an average of 1.92 seconds. The slowest 10% of sites’ pages load in an average of 10.2 seconds. 2% of websites have an average page load time of between 12 and 17 seconds.

JAVASCRIPT ERRORS

The majority of digital marketing technologies depend on JavaScript. Since digital marketing technologies often do not noticeably change the appearance of the website. It can be difficult to detect the instance of JavaScript errors and the effect those errors have on tags. We, at ObservePoint, collect information about the number of JavaScript errors found on web pages. Here they are expressed as a percentage, 0% indicates no errors; 100% indicates that every page that was audited had JavaScript errors.

In Top 1-100 Sites

In the top 100, JavaScript errors were found on an average of 24% of web pages. 11% of sites had JavaScript errors on more than 90% of pages, 58% of sites had JavaScript errors on less than 10% of pages.

In 501-600 Sites

In the top 501-600, JavaScript errors were found on an average of 62% of web pages. 19% of sites had JavaScript errors on more than 90% of pages, 47% had less JavaScript errors on less than 10% of pages.

CONNECTIVITY

When pages fail to load completely, user experience is degraded. In turn, this skews digital marketing measurement. In some cases, pages may render visually, but tags fail to fire due to web server capacity, network errors, vendor server issues, web browser problems, etc.

When we audit a website, we attempt to load such pages multiple times in order to correctly fire tags. Higher numbers of attempts indicate some sort of network connectivity issue during the time of our audit. On a site-by-site level, identifying persistent connectivity issues and tracking down their causes requires multiple tests.

In Top 1-100 Sites

In the top 100 sites, 93.26% of pages loaded on the first

attempt without any issue. 1.11% of pages required a second attempt to completely load. 5.63% required three attempts.

In 501-600 Sites

In 501-600 sites, 96.14% of pages completely loaded on the first attempt,1.25% of pages required a second attempt to completely load and 3.06% required three attempts.

Tag management systems50% of top 100 company sites deploy tags through a tag management system. 501-600 companies lag behind with 18% of sites having a tag management system in place.

In the top 100, Signal (formerly BrightTag) has the most marketshare, with a presence on 16.5% of sites. Tealium, Ensighten, Adobe and Google also have substantial presence in the top 100.

In 501-600 sites, Google Tag Manager is the most commonly used tag manager. Signal and Adobe Dynamic Tag Manager are deployed on 3% of sites.

Correlation of TMS with Primary Analytics Systems of Record

In the top 100 sites, 60% of Adobe Analytics tags are deployed through a TMS.

27% of sites with Adobe Analytics tag have deployed through Signal TMS. 23% deploy through an Adobe TMS (either Tag Manager or DTM, formerly Satellite); 20% use Tealium, 17% use Ensighten, 12% use Google Tag Manager and 1% use Qubit OpenTag.

49% of Google Analytics tags are deployed through a TMS.

Perc

ent o

f Web

Site

s

10

20

Marketshare of Tag Management SystemsRanked 1-100 vs 501-600

(Dynamic Tag Manager)

(Tag Manager) (BrightTag)



Every additional tag deployed adds a level of complexity and risk to data quality63% of sites with Google Analytics tags have deployed through Signal TMS. 13% deploy through Google Tag Manager; 10% deploy through Tealium; 2% deploy through Adobe DTM (Satellite), and 1% deploy each through Ensighten and Adobe TagManager.

“In the top 100 sites, 60% of Adobe Analytics tags are deployed through a TMS.”

30% of sites with IBM Analytics are deployed through a TMS. 66% of those deployments are through Tealium; 26% through Signal, and 1% through Google Tag Manager.

In 501-600 sites, 76% of tag management deployments are Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics. Adobe Analytics and Signal are deployed once through Signal, and IBM Analytics is deployed once through Adobe DTM (Satellite).

TAG MANAGEMENT DEPLOYMENT RATE

Tag management systems require the deployment of their own tag, just like any other digital marketing technology. Tag management systems are only able to manage tags on web pages where the TMS tag is deployed.

In top 1-100 sites, TMS tags are missing on 4.1% of pages. 26% of sites which deploy a tag management system are missing TMS tags on more than 5% of pages.

Data quality in primary web analytics system of record in TMS vs Non-TMS websites

Top 100 sites that have a deployed TMS experience an average deployment rate of 97.325% in their primary web analytics system of record, and the average TMS deployment rate is 95.88% in the group.

This indicates that some websites are deploying their primary web analytics system of record outside of their TMS. Without the benefit of TMS, websites manage to deploy tags on 97.06% of pages.

Websites with tag management systems tend to have more customized variable tracking, with an average of 178 custom variables, vs. only 76 for non-TMS sites.

AUDIT SCORE

During an audit, each website is evaluated and scored against ObservePoint’s best practices. ObservePoint’s Audit Score considers page load-times, tag deployment rates, data duplication rates, JavaScript errors, and tag syntax errors. Higher scores are better, and perfect scores are rare.

In top 100 sites, the average audit score is 74.26; the average audit score in 501-600 sites is 81.77.

Although the total number of tags on a site is not a component of the audit score, there is a statistically significant correlation between the score and the number of tags on a site. Statistically, for every tag added onto a site, the website’s overall score drops by 0.68 points.

Each additional tag that’s deployed adds a layer of complexity and risk to data quality. Simply put, this risk is that the new tags will be integrated incorrectly, conflict with other technologies, increase load time, sap attention away from maintaining existing technologies, or have a number of other adverse effects on data quality.

When tags do not fire correctly, the website’s overall score suffers. The tag count in particular can explain 24% of the variation between individual website scores. When it comes to the number of tags on a page, less is more. When more is necessary, tag audits can keep things in check.

ContributorsMatthew Todd Miller

Matthew is a digital marketing technologist and a subject matter expert in digital marketing data quality assurance. He is a frequent presenter at industry events, and contributes to the extensive body of knowledge held by ObservePoint.

He holds an MBA from the John Sperling School of Business, and

is a member of the American Marketing Association and Digital Analytics Association.

Megan Regina ChipmanMegan is a passionate runner and marketing wunderkind. She has a background in statistics, digital analytics, social media, and content marketing.

Megan is currently a degree candidate at the BYU Marriot School of Management.



ConclusionAutomated digital marketing technology auditing, as offered by ObservePoint, provides data quality analytics to digital marketers. Organizations which experience challenges with site performance, data inflation, pollution, and inconsistency are unable to employ data-driven decision-making processes. The adoption of robust data governance and quality assurance processes, including appropriate tools such as tag management and tag auditing, measurably improves the reliability of digital marketing data.

Websites across the entire spectrum of Internet Retailer rankings suffer from the same fundamental problems with their digital marketing. Pages missing tags, duplicated tags, or privacy problems are present in each of the top 100 and 501-600 ranked websites.

Companies that show effort to better manage tags tend to fare better, but tag management is not a panacea. Tag auditing is essential to identifying weakenesses in data collection.

About ObservePointBased in Provo, Utah, ObservePoint is the leader in web tag auditing – a critical practice in digital marketing technology management. Auditing protects the ROI of digital marketing technology and resolves significant obstacles in marketing data analysis and data-driven decision-making. ObservePoint employs patented methods of simulating network traffic at a speed and scale unparalleled in the industry to detect errors in digital marketing technology deployments.

For more information about ObservePoint, visit www.observepoint.com



APPENDIX

Amazon.com Inc.Apple Inc.Staples Inc.Walmart.comSears Holdings Corp.Liberty Interactive Corp.Netflix Inc.Macy’s Inc.Office Depot Inc.Dell Inc.CDW Corp.OfficeMax Inc.W.W. Grainger Inc.Costco Wholesale Corp.Best Buy Co. Inc.The Home Depot Inc.Newegg Inc.Target Corp.Gap Inc.Sony Electronics Inc.Williams-Sonoma Inc.Symantec Corp.Kohl’s Corp.Nordstrom Inc.L Brands Inc.HSN Inc.Google PlayBarnesandNoble.comSystemax Inc.Etsy Inc.Overstock.com Inc.L.L. Bean Inc.Vistaprint NVToys ‘R’ Us Inc.HP Home & Home Office StoreLowe’s Cos. Inc.J.C. Penney Co. Inc.Saks DirectAmwayMSC Industrial SupplyNeiman MarcusFanatics Inc.Walgreen Co.Groupon GoodsWayfair LLCRakuten.com ShoppingPC Connection Inc.Urban Outfitters Inc.Avon Products Inc.Shutterfly Inc.

Cabela’s Inc.Abercrombie & Fitch Co.Foot Locker Inc.GameStop Corp.zulily Inc.Musician’s Friend Inc.Market AmericaRalph Lauren MediaGilt GroupeJ. Crew Group Inc.Peapod LLCBluestem Brands Inc.Ancestry.com Inc.Nike Inc.1-800-Flowers.com Inc.American EagleEstee LauderWeight WatchersREIAdobe Systems Inc.Restoration HardwareDick’s Sporting GoodsPCM Inc.Hulu LLCDeluxe Corp.Follett Higher EducationCrate and BarrelBlue Nile Inc.Build.com Inc.FreshDirect LLCRueLaLa.comChico’s FAS Inc.1-800 Contacts Inc.Disney Store USA LLCCoach Inc.Ascena Retail GroupAdvance Auto Parts Inc.Keurig Green MountainVitacost.com Inc.Interline Brands Inc.Hayneedle Inc.Microsoft Corp.Oriental Trading Co.Ann Inc.NoMoreRack.com Inc.Express Inc.Scholastic Inc.Bass ProOne Kings LaneShoebuy.com Inc.

Appliance ZoneCat5 CommerceGemvara.comeHobbies.comEnvelopes.com3balls.com Inc.GourmetGiftBaskets.comSneakpeeq Inc.ShopJimmy.com LLCRoots Canada Ltd.CableOrganizer.com Inc. Heels.comFire Mountain Gems and BeadsBrickHouseSecurity.comRealTruck.comAirSplat.comMack’s Prairie Wings Inc.LovelySkin.comMyJewelryBox.com DanskinDexclusive.comBurtoneCommerce OutdoorsOriginal Honey Baked Ham CoTrollandToad.comHamGo Corp.Dungarees.netScentiments.comBag Borrow or Steal Inc.Positive Promotions Inc.Prep SportswearBCBG Max AzriaNorthShore Care SupplyRoyalDiscount.comJack’s Small Engine & GeneratorRitzPix.comBatteries.com Inc.Summit SportsCoolibar Inc.Bulbs.comCookies by Design Inc.Conns.comGolfballs.com Inc.WisteriaGump’s Inc.Children’s Wear Digest Inc.U.S. Toy Co. Inc.Tea CollectionCookiesKids.comSteals.com

Tupperware Brands Corp.Boston Green Goods Inc. AdiamorReal Real Inc.MagnetStreetfirstSTREETPlanet ShoesTrunkClub.comAutohaus Arizona Inc.Baker’s Footwear Group Inc.Clickstop Inc.Redbox Automated Retail LLCUlla PopkenWorld Wrestling Entertainment Inc.Batteries Plus LLCTeavana Corp. Working Persons Enterprises Inc.Novica.com123Greetings.com Inc.Toolfetch.com LLCIsland Co.SensationalBeginnings.comHomeCenter.comCyberweldBuild-A-Bear Workshop Inc.USCutter Inc.Birthday Direct Inc.HobbyTron.com OverstockDeals LLCQueensboro.comDiet Direct Inc.BikesDirect.comCarrot Ink LLCBurlington Coat FactoryWhiteflashBatteryJunction.comVictoryStore.comKitchenSource.com Everything2go.com LLC MaxFurniture.comFifthroom.comBetty Mills Co., The VivreUncommonGoods LLCIgigi Inc.ToolBarn.com Inc.Standard Tools and Equipment Co.Abe’s of MaineCuisinartTaunton Press Inc., The

Source Lists2014 Internet Retail Top 500 (Companies ranked 1-100)

2013 Internet Retail Second 500 (Companies ranked 501-600)


12HARLEY DAVIDSON | CASE STUDY

Documents

Internet RETAIL AUDIT · 2016-01-20 · tool, 9% use Adobe Analytics and 12% use either IBM Coremetrics, Quantcast, Webtrends or Yahoo Web Analytics. USAGE OF MORE THAN ONE WEB ANALYTICS