<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"While we don't have access to the internal financial documents of companies in the local/group coupon-buying space \u2014 one of the hottest verticals to emerge in 2010 \u2014 we can tell by looking at site traffic that Groupon exponentially outstrips its nearest competitors, LivingSocial and BuyWithMe.\nThese companies have spent a fair amount of time in the headlines lately, especially given recent rumors of a Google acquisition of Groupon. And LivingSocial just picked up a huge round of funding from Amazon, as well.\nBut according to traffic stats \u2014 and admittedly, there's not an exact correlation between traffic and traditional factors of profitability \u2014 LivingSocial saw a boost over the summer that never turned into the hockey stick graph most companies like to see as an indicator of early, rapid growth. Rather, traffic briefly held steady then began to dwindle. Currently, LivingSocial sees about as much traffic as Groupon did this time one year ago.\nGroupon, on the other hand, saw a dip in traffic in September, but it's otherwise been on a steep incline since the beginning of 2010.\n\nLivingSocial reports a userbase of 10 million to Groupon's 12 million; by that metric, the companies aren't that far apart. But again, startup-reported user metrics can create a deliberately hazy view of a company's overall health.\nA Google acquisition for Groupon could spell further trouble for LivingSocial, too. The former company's ad spend would decrease by about $1 million per month, as its Google-placed ads would be free.\nStill, there's room for LivingSocial, BuyWithMe and other such startups in the market. As a smaller (in terms of traffic and users) company, it has the willingness and ability to work with small and medium-sized businesses in a way that Groupon may not any longer.\nWhat do you make of these traffic numbers? We'd love to get your opinions in the comments."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://mashable.com/2010/12/02/groupon-livingsocial/>