| Aielyn said: YOY works based on "first day of period to last day of period". In this case, for January, that's 1st of January to 31st of January. Or, if we're talking YTD, this would be up to 1st of February (last day we have data for). Using NPD data doesn't work, especially in this case, because NPD data from 2013 was 5 weeks, due to the "leap year" effect - they track 52 weeks, while a year is 52 weeks and 1 or 2 days (depending on whether it's a regular leap year), and so every five or six years, there has to be an extra week in one of the "months". Anybody who would base the YOY calculation on inconsistent "Year on Year" periods is either ignorant or intentionally misrepresenting things. |
idk how it would work, but how would you do the yoy npd jan 2013/2014 calculation ?
while it doesn't reflect the weekly numbers because of a 5week to 4week is the calculation of a yoy different ?
edit:
Jan 2013: 57k
Jan 2014: 49k
like yes 2013 sales weekwise was worse than 2014 weekwise, but overall the sales in 2014 are less (yes 1 week less)
but there are tables with yoy posted all over the place here. Wouldn't these tables say yoy its down x% ? but with an asterisk saying its a 5week against 4weeks
I would find it strange if those tables would say jan 2014 is yoy up compared to jan 2013 despite having lower number ...
