From: Michael Potts <>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:29:24 -0700

miivi is a good name, and it's obviously caught on a bit, bad press or not, it's still demonstrating an interest. However, you certainly do not need to stick to miivi, relaunching with another name, after knowing that site is getting indexed, you can redirect the site url to the new one, or just link to the new one from a page that was the old url. That will allow for some possibility to carrying through the successful indexing by google. I would think that there is still a strong likelihood that even a new url will build out a similar indexing result in google. Just a few thoughts for you. I hope that's helpful. Thanks.
- Michael

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Randy Saaf []
        Sent: Wed 7/11/2007 5:18 PM
        To: Michael Potts
        Cc: Jay Mairs; Ben Grodsky; Octavio Herrera
        Subject: RE:

        Another talking point here in the office is if we should keep
        There are now 1,000,000 pages returned for miivi on Google. Most of it
        is the bad press from the bull shit rumor started by some bit torrent
        sites. However, is there something to be said for having a substantial
        presence on google, as we hope that videos posted on Miivi will get
        indexed by google.
        We are leaning toward dumping the URL and just re-launching with a new
        URL? Are we being too hasty because you can't buy 1,000,000 pages
        linking to you in Google returns. Our next launch will have a
        considerable more PR thought put into it. Since the original negative
        story was a complete fabrication, we are going to address it head on. A
        ton of these tech blog reporters who contacted me are dying to know what
        miivi really was, so this sets us up for a good publicized launch. What
        do you think?
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Michael Potts []
        Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 4:47 PM
        To: Randy Saaf
        Cc: Jay Mairs; Ben Grodsky
        Subject: RE:
        The recent numbers I've seen for Break have it at about 3.6mm uniques US
        & 5.8mm uniques Worldwide. That's in comparison to our site which is
        2.2mm uniques US and 5.6mm uniques Worldwide. That's our site only and
        not the network. I see the discrepancy between Alexa and Quantcast.
        Alexa is too high and Quantcast is too low. The real numbers are more
        than likely somehow in the middle. I compared the traffic score in
        Alexa to some other sites that I can see the numbers for in comScore and
        they list Break as being higher in Alexa than some of those sites, which
        are actually much higher in comScore. Also, has some other
        properties that could be getting factored in Alexa, although they
        shouldn't be. I hope this helps. Thanks.
        - Michael
                -----Original Message-----
                From: Randy Saaf []
                Sent: Wed 7/11/2007 4:22 PM
                To: Michael Potts
                Cc: Jay Mairs; Ben Grodsky
                Can you pull the traffic numbers from for Let me
        know how they look relative to We have a meeting with
        them next week. I have looked at quantcast and alexa and they both give
        opposite answers to the traffic. Thanks.

Received on Fri Sep 14 2007 - 10:56:02 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Sep 16 2007 - 22:19:47 BST