Best daily deals

Links on Android Authority may earn us a commission. Learn more.

The latest social share numbers are in and Google+ isn't doing so well

With the latest share numbers in, Google+ doesn't seem to be doing so well. They come in last or second to last on both e-commerce and media metrics.
July 19, 2013
The latest social share numbers are in and things aren’t nearly what any loyal Google+ user expected them to be. Despite the fact that many of us see the people in our circles share things nearly constantly, the numbers overall doesn’t seem to agree with the experiences that most of us have had.

In a study done by Gigya, it shows that overall, Google+ is responsible for a measly 2% of social shares in Q2 (April through June) of 2013. Overall, as you can see from the graphic above, they get beat out by LinkedIn, Pinterest, Twitter, Facebook, and even the vague and mysterious “Other” category. Literally last place.

As Marketingland points out, the two biggest disappointments are in e-commerce and media/publishing sharing, where Google+ takes 2% respectively. According to the Gigya blog, this trend continues with Consumer Brands (2%), Travel/Hospitality (1%), and Education/Non-Profit (2%). So, all in all, not a lot of sharing going on from Google+ users and that’s truly a mind scratcher.


Why is Google+ so low?

It definitely makes one stop to wonder why this is. After all, if you have a healthy number of people in your circles, you see content re-shared all day long. Our guess is that once a Google+ user sees the content, they’re more likely to re-share the post they found it on rather than re-share the site itself.

Keep in mind that this is only conjecture. We are smartphone geeks, not social media marketing experts. Still, though, we’d like to see the numbers for sharing within the social network. We have seen articles that only get a few shares on a website but get a thousand shares from a Google+ post. So there is definitely something there to think about.

We want to hear what you think. Do these numbers seem accurate and do you think they’re counting the wrong things here? Let us know your thoughts in the comments!