In the book “The Dip” Seth Godin talks about Zipfs Law. In my search for more on this I came across many typos of this as Zifs law, Ziffs law, etc… Anyway Harvard linguistic professor George Kingsley Zipf applied statistical and linguistic theories on human communication. He did all kinds of studys on word stuff… and rankings…
But the biggest thing he showed the world was that it is important to be #1
Zipf’s law states that in a tabulation of the occurrence of all words in a sufficiently comprehensive text, ranged by their frequency, will the product of rang number and frequency make up a constant. In addition will the number of different words in the vocabulary be equal to the frequency of the most common word (rank number 1).
So what does that mean? To be honest I dunno. Sounds like a bunch of mumbo jumbo to me but the one thing I do know is its good to be #1 for whatever you do. Often times I look at what I am doing with a project and ask myself the probability I can be #1. If the answer is absolutely no then its time to quit that project.
Many times businesses get customers simply because they are regarded as #1.
Do you hire the 2nd best person you interview for a job or the #1 ?
With Nextpimp we were #1 for several years and loved it. Then we lost passion and got quickly overtaken by competitors.
ShoeMoney.com is by far #1 as far as a blog that talks about making money from real experience. Sure that sounds cocky but its a fact. Am I lying? Advertisers always will go with #1 and they will pay more for the association with #1
The Elite Retreat is by far #1 for what it does.
AuctionAds despite having 8 compeditors before launching including eBay themselves quickly became #1 for eBay display Ads within only a few short months before we sold the company.
Do I always have #1’s? No. In fact I would say 90% of the time I quit a project or cut it lose because we just do not have the resources to become #1.
Is it possible for you to be #1 in what you do? If so are you willing to put in the time and work its going to take?
If so the rewards are massive!
Ricky Peterson (22) 
R Kumar (12) 
ZK @ Web Marketing Blog (11) 
Holly Mann (11) 
Gyutae Park (10) 
gurtey (9) 
Shanker Bakshi (9) 
Yisraeli Foods (8) 
Jacques Snyman | 3 Quotes (6) 
Stock Traders Blog (5) 
Michael Zhao (77) 
almir (76) 
fas (75) 
R Kumar (74) 
Rick Kats (68) 
Jay @ work from home (62) 
Dino (57) 
Find Affiliate Offers (54) 
Dick (624) 
Goran Website (495) 
Melvin (330) 
Ben Pei (329) 
Taris Janitens (274) 
meethere (269) 
Tushar Dhoot (265) 
Tushar (260) 
Andrew (259) 
My philosophy is similar to yours, if you are not aspiring to be #1, then why bother. You are only giving a half-a**ed effort. If you find yourself not desiring to be #1 in your chosen endeavor, then you should not be pursuing it. You should strive to find what it is you want to be #1 in, and focus on that. The reality is you may not make it to be #1, but you will not have any regrets, and you will have fun doing it.
I bought the dip for several friends of mine as christmas presents. It is a great book you can read in an afternoon
Great post. I think it is very important in marketing a product especially to promote it as the “authority” or #1 in its field.
People choose the BEST and when you are the best, you are number one.
I’m number…one? I’d like to see you delve into this subject Shoe, personally.
Not what Seth Godin thinks about…well…anything that he thinks about.
You, Shoemoney, talk to us. Give me something to get into and get juiced with.
Please and seriously.
Lol I don’t really understand whats going on here..
Woke up now……! ha…ha…ha
This is an interesting post, its true that being #1 in anything is a great thing and it will give you great results, Especially if you are ranked 1 for a good keyword on google it will give you great traffic results
Base on your own advice, when are you shutting down fighters.com.
Or you need to dump some more money for decent writers with insider MMA connections.
The current site is just not up to the Shoemoney standards.
alright already, I’m gonna buy the dip. sheesh. Just kiddin. I mean I’m gonna buy it, but I’m just giving you a hard time for the shill Shoe
just read and enjoy the articles………ehmm…..!
How can I agree more? My feeling is America has lost its competitive spirit. The pervasive attitude is that everyone deserves a ribbon, everyone is special, everyone is a winner. Look at our Olympics, we got whupped by the Chinese for gold medals. How did we rationalize it? If you look at total medal count… That is second place is OK mentality; everyone is a winner thinking.
From Glengarry Glen Ross- “As you all know, first prize is a Cadillac Eldorado. Anyone want to see second prize? Second prize’s a set of steak knives. Third prize is you’re fired. You get the picture? You’re laughing now?”
More reading to catch up on
Trying for number 1. Hope I am always doing that, which seems natural for entrepreneurs who are competitive and driven.
no the winner without the losser…….very natural no 1, no 2, no 3…..just enjoy……
Its always good to strive for number 1, if you try hard enough, eventually you will ge there
Shoemoney.com is #1 for a vaild reason. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you started this blog after you started making money online and its NOT BECAUSE of this blog, you made money online. This is why shoemoney is#1 … other people that blog about mmo are mmo because of their blogs…its kind of why they are not number one.
Plus some other bloggers that talk about mmo, lack the incorporation of personal touch in their blogs. shoemoney.com has a mix of mmo and other content, that gives readers a feeling of having something different to look at while they visit the blog daily, and learning something along the way.
–Also I think that if time and effort is put into something…something GREAT can be created from NOTHING. It is all about how much time one is willing to commit and the strategies that person follows through on. People these days are too cought up in $ and lack the motivation to do something because they have a passion for it.
I understand that people need income, but just for income, you cannot do certain things like create a blog and expect it to make you $$$ from the first year or two. New bloggers should always pursue blogging as a thing where even if they dont make a dime, ever, they are doing it because its fun for them and they want to do it.
This doesn’t go to say that people should stick to stuff that is not generating income for the rest of their lives, if it is meant to generate income. Only the owner of a business or anything else for that matter, can make the proper judgment of keeping something going or shutting it down.
This is a really sensible post. I like it. and…it’s ok to be cocky, when you are right.
umm….not exactly #1 yet……but trying to head that direction!
I am agree…..whm! try to be better….
When do I get to do this… tsk tsk
I have to agree with everything you just said except there is occasion when being second best is still worth staying in the game, but that’s only when the market you’re competing for is huge.
Warren Buffet makes a similar point re being number one when he chooses to buy a company. He puts it in terms of a company with a “moat” around it. Look for his MBA talk on Youtube to see where he talks more about this.
Warren Buffet often refers to the term “Best of Breed”.
Also when Warren Buffet refers to the “Moat” of a business he is really referring to “Francaise Value” or the spread between ROIC and WACC. (Return on Invested Capital / Weighted Average Cost of Capital).
Shoe, you make some great points about #1. I thought “The Dip” was a great read/listen. It pointed out the obvious, but an obvious fact that is often neglected in decision making.
The common mistake made came about in the 1970’s with the car rental ads..
“We are number two, which means we try harder”.
Fooey. People pick number one because it is number one.
They pick number one because they have market domination.
They pick number one because customers, like everyone else, likes a winner.
People don’t use number one because it i number one.
People choose the BEST and when you are the best, you are number one.
Just purchased the book using your affiliate link shoe and am listing to it now. If you are not trying to be number one then why are you trying? (if you reach for the stars, hopefully you’ll at least land on a cloud – kanye)
I agree. Being number one is where it’s at — Espeicially with Google. Just look at the distribution of clicks for the number one result in comparison with any of the other results. It will blow your mind!
I think it means that 99% of everything we say is BS.
Great post. I totally agree. I think we would have so many more #1s if people would start to discover there own passions, visions, goals, and strengths and run with it.
? You can’t have multiple number 1s.
Maybe he was referring to multiple #1s across multiple areas. Just Like Shoemoney.com and the AuctionAds example.
hanji
in wikipedia there is ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf%27s_law ) a long description about Zipf’s law. and its really interesting.
thanks for the link. Will be reading it tonight
no problem. i just show more knowledge about it.
you gotta look out for #1, before you step on #2
=P
Thanks Rodney. lol
haha words of wisdom?
wise man…..you are right bos
The most difficult part of the “Be #1 or Nothing” equation is that unfortunately it takes big time resources (usually monetary). I know that it’s a matter of finding creative ways to get there, but not having a huge budget is a big factor in not getting to #1 in your niche…at least that’s been my experience so far. It’s the old, you gotta have money to make money adage.
Perception is often reality, but its all in the eye of the person viewing. Some would say JohnChow is number one for making money online, just as some prefer a honda over a toyota or walmart over target. I believe those who “settle” at being number 2,3, or 4 will never ever be 1.
I believe .there’s no other better spot than #1
Honestly you are the best
I need to think about the Zipf’s law reference more. In his ranking of a set of words the most frequent is # 1 and that is usually some like “the” or “a”. The most descriptive terms would rank in frequency lower down the list. The part of his distribution that is interesting is the inverse relationship between the frequency and rank.
I guess I need to buy the book to really get the relationship to your article!
okso now that I get Jim’s explanation from above, I can say that being #2 in a massive industry doesn’t sound so bad to me
I would agree your blog is definitely top ranked, you can tell by your ad revenue alone. Advertisers go where the quality traffic is.
I like being #1 !? lol
Keep trying to be number 1
I am still trying……need extra effort….extra time….! extra money?
That’s sound advice. There’s no other better spot than #1. I would choose #1 over the others whenever I’m buying something or selecting something or reading something. Eventhough we all can’t be #1, we have to try our best.
“Is it possible for you to be #1 in what you do? If so are you willing to put in the time and work its going to take?”
….million dollar question…..
Hey, I guess as long as your eating at the end of the day, that’s all that matters. Do number fifteens eat? I would think so…
But your right, Zipf’s law is mingboggling
Such a great message – despite the fact that it comes off as harsh – I agree 100%. Love your site by theway – I have been checking it out for quite a while now
zesty
His law is right. When you are #1 in anything, even as small as search engine ranking for a good keyword you are raking it in. Not only is being #1 good but a lot of the time being “first” is just as good.
well, you can still do well even if your not 1st, 2nd or 3rd.
sometimes not possible to be the best… so be 2nd to overtake the 1st later on
Being #1 does not mean being the best. Bill Gates built an empire on by being number 1, not by being the best. Microsoft never created anything. Their big break was DOS, which they bought (not created) and licensed to IBM. They stole Windows from Apple and Xerox. Lotus, Word Perfect, and DBase they copied and bundled into Office. Hotmail they bought. IE came as a catch-up to Netscape. Live is playing catch-up to Yahoo and Google.
Yet, by not being innovators, not being the best products (Vista anyone? Or Bob?), but by being driven to be number one Gates is the richest man alive. Microsoft rules the universe, figuratively.
My other favorite example of the need for number 1- Who is the number 1 seller of hamburgers? McDonalds. Does McDonald’s have the best hamburger? Do they have the 5th best hamburger? 9th?
MacDonald’s may be #1 for now, but their products are reaklly disgusting, and movies like Supersize Me has done them no favours. Their establishments in my area has gone down hugely, with poor service levels, unfriendly stafff and scandals like food being spat on, etc.
#1 for how much longer is my question. On many levels MacDonalds is the metaphor of a bloated corporate culture that is on the verge of suffering cardiac arrest and dying.
Sometimes, number 1 can be all about “perception”.
But your post could bring up a good point of having the faith of being ABLE to be number 1…. vs. a wisdom/knowledge/reality of not having the chance. I think it’s a crap shoot of a little of both….and when the fallout occurs, hopefully you are as near the creme of the crop as can be.
Maybe I didn’t understand anything
but, how about the long tail? If you try to apply this idea in real life, then there will be only one manufacturer for any given product.
Why Pepsi still makes soda if it’s not number one?
Why GM still makes cars if Toyota is number one?
I think i don’t quite get your point…
@Martin – probably not a good idea to reference GM as justification for your standpoint, especially since they will likely go bankrupt or get bailed out in the near future.
As for Pepsi, they are an extremely old company that set out to be No. 1 and came damn close to attaining that status (and they continue to strive for it). They’re just a good example of that old sales ethic that states to set your goals extremely high, because even if you fall a little short, you’ll still be wildly successful. Being the second-largest cola in the world ain’t bad.
Good article!
Well put, Hugo! Whilst #1 will garner most of the spoils, there is sufficient scraqps left for #2, #3 and all the other pretenders to the throne. Com petition is what keeps from complacency and monopoly.
There’s a lot of money in #2 and #3, but there is so much more in #1. Coke sold 1.7billion cases vs. Pepsi’s 1.1b, it’s not 2x but considering the massive sums it’s still a pretty significant lead.
Long tail refers to going after the low traffic, low competition items and grabbing them all up in aggregate.
Very well put Jim.
I was about to mention the same issue – especially since this discussion is about and between Jeremy and Seth …. the latter who also knows a thing or two about the long tail
I wound counter that one can strive to be #1 in the #100 position… if that #100 position or niche happens to be lucrative. It’s important to differentiate between being #1 on an aggregate basis (Shoe is a #1 , arguably, leader for blogs on monetizing the ‘net… in English….) but consider the long tail – always!
Zipf’s law also states in a significant amount of text. In a Pepsi vs. Coke, there would be two ways to to look at it. One taking each one at a time. That is look at Coke and see that Classic Coke sells twice as much as Diet Coke which sell twice as much as Cherry Coke which sells twice as much as Coke Zero, etc. The other is the industry as a whole, that Coke sells twice as much as Pepsi which sell twice as much as Seven-up/RC Cola, which sells twice as much as Shasta, etc. Ultimately, you have to have enough of the pieces to show the distribution curve.
Your post is written proof that being #1 is something that starts within the organization Jeremy.
If you truly believe you CAN BE #1… you will make the efforts and take the actions to achieve!
Be the best , else it is good to quit..
It is this drive, that pushes you to the best.
#1 FTW
More importantly, the law states that #1 gets twice as many views as #2. #2 gets twice as many as #3, etc. etc. The statement above applied to words in a long text but the law applies, albeit empirically, to all data… including rankings in search, etc. It’s an interesting law, and based on data from the leaked AOL searches, seems supported by empirical search data.
ok so this is good explanation of the law and it’s applicability to websites
from that excerpt it sounds like it’s saying that #1 gets as many views as the number of firms in the market, ie. if there are 10 blogs on the internet, whoever is in the #1 spot will get 10 readers
Thanks for your clarification Jim. Stats don’t lie, and by collaborating AOL’s “leaked” search data with emperical search results it is proven to us how, and exponentially so, it benefits your offering to be #1
@jim – thanks for the insight! This appears to be true for a lot of the keywords we use, as well as other aspects of marketing. This is also why brands push so hard to embed their brand in our heads, so there is residual value as well.
yes you should always plane for best but be ready for worst (so you don’t have much expactations). Never settle for less.
It’s zipf’s law.
a google search of ziff’s law yields useless results and could be frustrating to others…
We know that it is zipf’s law because shoe stated that at the start of his blog post. I think it is funny that he stated the law and then competely talked about something else that really had nothing to do with the law