Uncategorized

Not On Google+? It’s Growing Faster Than Early Facebook Did [CHART]

image from www.google.com

Adding another social network to your day can feel like the straw that broke the camel's back.  But more and more stats are suggesting that you ignore Google+ at your peril. It took Facebook almost a year to reach a million users and 4 years to reach 100 million. But according to Business Insider, it took Google+ just 2 weeks to reach 10 million, and less than 1 year to reach 100 million. The Chart:

image from static7.businessinsider.com

Share on:

12 Comments

  1. Google+ didn’t have to make a name for itself like Facebook had to at the beginning. It was already attached to Google’s brand.

  2. That, and the fact that everyone with a Google/Gmail account was automatically given a Google+ account as well. Keep it real, no one uses G+.

  3. Retarded article – in addition to John’s comment, Facebook was exclusive to college students, starting with only one college, then a few, then many more. That is also considered the major contributing factor to Facebook’s strong foundations, putting the network on top.

  4. Social networks didn’t have the same reach when Facebook was starting. Most of the migration to Facebook happened from Myspace, which was a completely different demographic. If the same proportion of Facebook members took a Google+ account, it would be a way bigger deal.
    Google+ is seeing the fruit of the social media explosion. Businesses, brands, bands, artists and whoever are already well aware of the power of social. They weren’t when Facebook was in its infancy.
    Also, a lot of people have signed up to Google+. That doesn’t mean they’re using it in any where near the same capacity as they use Facebook. Ignoring it might be a bad option but putting a load of energy into marketing for G+ is probably better spent on Facebook.
    Yeah, it’s interesting to compare the two but they’re completely different cases.

  5. I’d like to see if either company can really create a niche and differentiate itself from the other. I think it’s always easier to follow a path that has already been blazed by someone else. G+ really doesn’t have my interest.

  6. But of course it is. Hardly anyone hyped up early-Facebook like they’ve hyped up Google+. If you’re in Silicon Valley, you should be on Google+. If you’re not, you’re going to find it to be a very boring, quiet place.

  7. Google+ have a lot of visitors who have never signed up for the service. Properly less than 10% has actually signed up and tried to make a post.
    I dont believe in G+ as it is now, but if they hook it up more intelligent on Youtube and Android they can still have huge success… But not as it is now

  8. Engagement is the metric that Google needs to follow. I saw a talk with a developer at Google and he couldn’t reveal stats about actual engagement (because those are under lock and key). So just because a high percentage of people sign in to Google products (with an integration between Gmail, Google+, search, and other applications), that doesn’t mean they’re using Google+. The comparison to Facebook growth is also a moot point because they are two completely different scenarios.

Comments are closed.