

Ask HN: How could FeedBurner be better? - jaxn

We are getting close to launching a new analytics tool for bloggers that measures attention to both web and feed attention (http://statzen.com).<p>I have heard quite a bit of griping about FeedBurner lately and I am curious about how the HN community thinks we might be able to better meet the needs of those who are dissatisfied.<p>Thanks in advance!
======
bjplink
I can think of two things, right off the top of my head, that FeedBurner could
do better:

#1. Accurately measure subscriptions. That seems obvious but FeedBurner is
actually terrible at one of their core features. It's not uncommon for your
subscriber count to bottom out to zero from one day to the next as their
system fails to work.

#2. Find a way to find and eliminate the cheaters. FeedBurner's subscribe-via-
email feature is a great way for people to scam the system and raise their
subscriber counts. All you have to do is make a bunch of dummy accounts, which
is trivial for anyone with any kind of decent hosting package, and then use
those accounts to subscribe to your feed.

\---

Subscriber counts are an important metric for both ego and site valuation. The
fact that FeedBurner has such a struggle with accurate counts hurts their
credibility too much.

~~~
jaxn
You hit the million dollar question.

The problem is that the "subscriber count" metric is bullshit.

First I will explain what that count is. Then I explain what we think people
want from the subscriber count and how we are working to address that need.

The subscribe count is based on the feed reading tool and the IP address (if
it is a desktop client like NetNewsWire or FeedDemon). FeedBurner has
explained a fair amount about this number and this post provides some good
background
([http://blogs.feedburner.com/feedburner/archives/2006/09/a_pe...](http://blogs.feedburner.com/feedburner/archives/2006/09/a_peek_inside_techcrunchs_100k.php)).

The problem is that "subscriber" is supposed to equate to "person", but it
does not. In email marketing this works because we have a person identifier
(the email address). There is no similar identifier for feed. What that means
is that out of TechCrunch's 100,000 subscribers, I as an individual represent
5+ subscribers (once on Google Reader, once on bloglines, once on NewsGator,
once with NetNewsWire at home, once at NetNewsWire at work). I am a pretty
typical TechCrunch subscriber so it is possible the number of "people" is
actually 20% of the number of "subscribers".

The converse is that many corporations and Universities have only 1 outgoing
IP address. So all FeedDemon subscribers at Belmont University here in
Nashville show up as 1 subscriber.

Why this is important is because of what people want the "subscriber count" to
be. They want it to be an apples to apples comparison to compare popularity
across blogs. It is just too inaccurate to be that measure.

We initially had this count and as we looked at the data we felt that it was
inaccurate at best and sometimes completely misleading. This was the driving
force in our decision to remove this feature. It is a risk, but I think it
represents an intellectual honesty that our customers will appreciate.

The other reason people like the "subscriber count" metric is to measure
growth and decline in their individual blog. This is why having the number
fluctuate so wildly in FeedBurner is so frustrating.

We have not solved the apples to apples comparison yet, but we have some
promising progress.

As for measuring growth, once you break that out as a goal it is easy to see
that there are other ways to answer this question.

As you said "The fact that FeedBurner has such a struggle with accurate counts
hurts their credibility". Hopefully our willingness to find a better way, even
if it may be perceived as a shortcoming in the short term, will help our
credibility.

What do you think about our strategy here? (I really appreciate the feedback
we are getting from HN. This is such a valuable resource!)

~~~
petercooper
_The problem is that "subscriber" is supposed to equate to "person", but it
does not. In email marketing this works because we have a person identifier
(the email address). There is no similar identifier for feed. What that means
is that out of TechCrunch's 100,000 subscribers, I as an individual represent
5+ subscribers (once on Google Reader, once on bloglines, once on NewsGator,
once with NetNewsWire at home, once at NetNewsWire at work). I am a pretty
typical TechCrunch subscriber so it is possible the number of "people" is
actually 20% of the number of "subscribers"._

Do typical TechCrunch subscribers subscribe using _five_ different feed
readers? I don't subscribe to it anymore (I do follow @techcrunch on Twitter
though - TC posts too often for my feed reading habits) but when I did I used,
well, _one_ feed reader. I assume that is pretty typical. Besides, your e-mail
example doesn't work either if someone has five e-mail addresses!

Going off of the stats on several of my feeds (ranging from 18,000
"subscribers" down to about 1000) I see that in most cases Google Reader
accounts for 50%-70% of subscribers. The numbers Google provide _should_ be
pretty accurate.. and so while there might be a slightly inaccurate swing in
the remaining 30%, if the Google Feedfetcher number is showing 10,000
subscribers, I am pretty much guaranteed that's 10,000 unique Google users.

As a publisher with a significant audience for my niche, I find the subscriber
count _very_ useful and it provides much of the reason why I've stayed with
FeedBurner despite the issues. It makes it easy for me to prove I'm the
biggest in my niche because the closest people have counts over 30% lower than
mine.. and I can't see the swing being that much considering how popular
Google Reader is now.

~~~
jaxn
I do expect that we will get some push back on this. Especially until we
provide a simple metric to show advertisers (which we are working on).

It is a pretty nuanced issue. For instance, do TC subscribers USE 5 readers?
No. But web-based readers that people quit using still report subscribers. I
don't use 5 readers either, but I have multiple readers reporting me as a
"subscriber". This comes from trying different web-based clients as well as
using multiple IPs in a single day with my desktop based client.

While you are absolutely correct that Google Reader is going to report
accurately how many people have subscribed to your feed using their system,
that doesn't give you any indication as to how many of them have read a single
item in the past 6 months. This is why FB started to add "reach". In the
article I referenced, TC had over 100k subscribers while "reach" was topping
out at about 25k.

So, all of that is to say, you are right. We are going to have to provide a
way for bloggers like yourself to easily convey the worth of ads on their
blog. Personally I believe everyone wins with accuracy.

------
mixmax
My blog (<http://www.maximise.dk/blog>) uses blogger, but they can't tell me
how many RSS subscribers I have. By asking Google I found out that I could get
this number by redirecting my feed to feedburner and back, and let them count
it.

I never figured out how to do it. There were two problems involved for me:

1) I couldn't tell whether it worked or not before I posted something on the
blog, thus sending a feed out in the ether.

2) I didn't try very hard.

I don't know that much about RSS feeds and how they work, and frankly I don't
care either. I just want it to work.

A straight and simple approach that doesn't require me to have any prior
knowledge would work wonders. I think there are many people like me that have
a blog, but don't really have the time or expertise to get acquainted with how
feeds work and what you can do with them.

Btw: I love this:

 _Can statzen handle a very high traffic blog?

We think so. Maybe. Hopefully. [write me]_

Hope you didn't post it anywhere else than HN where people will understand
that this is pre-launch :-)

~~~
jaxn
Max,

I know what you are saying is 110% true. RSS works best when it just works and
people don't need to know "how". We are trying to make the feed integration
part as easy as we can for each specific scenario.

Some people want to know how it works, so how would this work for you...

Simple step-by-step instructions that have no clutter to sift through, but a
"?" link at each step for people who may want more information.

Would that have reduced the barrier to installation?

And yes, this is only posted here. I am glad you got a kick out of my
placeholder copy :)

~~~
mixmax
Yes - depending on how well it's executed of course ;-)

I'm currently thinking about the exact same thing, links to small help-boxes
scattered around the place where users might have trouble, for my own project.

------
iamwil
The graphs for "All time" loads slower than before the move to google.com.

Often times, I find I just check which of my posts people like reading, and it
gives me a tingle bit of feel-good before I close it and go look at something
else. However, I often have to do 4 clicks to get there.

~~~
jaxn
Excellent feedback.

FYI, we have post specific attention data for both web and feed right on the
first page after logging in. screenshot:
<http://flickr.com/photos/jaxn/3121401122/> (blue is web, orange is feed)

It is our feeling that post-centric analytics is really what bloggers want. It
also allows us to do topical analytics as well.

Also, I don't currently include an "all time" view, but I am going to rethink
that decision.

Thanks!

~~~
lfittl
Out of interest, how do you know which posts in the feed get the most
attention?

Do you include an invisible 1x1 picture in each RSS item so you get that data?
(That would have been my first idea)

------
ComputerGuru
It's perfect if only it would work as advertised.

Or rather, it was perfect until Google bought it and then it tanked.

------
aj
I recently quit using Feedburner. Why? While it was a pretty good service, it
got bought over by Google.

Personally, I'm planning to get rid of Google in my life. Entirely. And
Feedburner was just the first step

~~~
ph0rque
> Personally, I'm planning to get rid of Google in my life. Entirely.

Please do keep an account of your efforts on a blog or something...

~~~
aj
Indeed I do intend to. Perhaps either to help others who wish to do the same
or just for those with academic interest.

