❝ Will Young, director of Zappos Labs, told Bloomberg that Pinterest users are far more likely to share a purchase than Twitter or Facebook users—but that shared items generate far less revenue than Twitter or Facebook. ❞

Rut ro...

Valuation-lowering comment from potential acquirer... tasty.

Still, the fundamental premise -- that Pinterest primes people to BROWSE not buy -- is a sound one.

Pinterest is designed for window shopping, not actual shopping.

I don't think it's accurate to say browse NOT buy - it's a funnel. Shopbots are typically at the right-hand side of the funnel, so the leads they pass are hot but, IMHO, of limited value - customer already knows what they want and how much they will pay (price comparison done).

Pinterest seems to be at the left-hand side of the funnel - Discovery. The leads they pass are warm, not hot - but they *could* be very valuable - as a retailer you can sway the customer still at this point. So if the retailer has enough sticky features to engage the customer, you might be able to get them into your purchase funnel really early, avoiding all the price comparison downstream.

All of which is to say it's not surprising their leads don't convert to sale immediately - I would rather look at those leads as higher potential value for the future if you have the right tools to engage/grab shoppers and eventually turn them into customers.

"Posts on Twitter brought in the most revenue -- an average of $33.66 an order -- while Facebook posts garnered $2.08 per order and sales from Pinterest were 75 cents on average."

Twitter posts are worth 50x Pinterest posts.

I didn't realize Zappos sells anything for 75 cents. What that says to me is that most people who click through from Pinterest don't buy.

Valuation is as valuation does.