Can any of the bright minds here shed some light on this? 100ms doesn't seem at all enough to have that big an impact. (especially for something like amazon - where there is likely some level of intent and definate trust that the site is valuable). I just can't see how a .1sec delay could affect so many sales?
Now whenever I shop at Amazon, I browse around for a bit. It's not that a more sluggish site would cause me to abandon a purchase midway in the purchasing process, but it's rather that I might get annoyed at the sluggishness while browsing and postpone my purchase or take it elsewhere, where I can browse the available products at my leisure.
I think that is what they mean, but if the number is just based on assumptions about who intends to make a purchase, that also means the number is highly disputable. However, I think Amazon has enough data available to simply correlate response times with sales rates over a statistically signifcant period and statistically signifcant amount of sales. In that case, the number is pretty undisputable: if anyone has this kind of data, it's Amazon.
But - if anyone has the metrics to prove a figure like that - it would be amazon.
It reminds me of a joke business plan developed over some beers: Provide free electric heaters for old people to run in winter, which were actually PCs connected to a phoneline doing data-intensive grid computing :-)
I wonder how that compares to the CO2 cost of driving to the library to look up the same bit of information for the average person?
I would guess that the 1% figure is the average loss for each 100ms of latency. So if it took 5 seconds longer to load each page, 50% less people would ultimately make a purchase.
Which is still a very high number, and makes me wonder if most of Amazon's customers are impulse shoppers, or whether these numbers were just fabricated to help sell AWS.
Either way, it's not a very meaningful without knowing the context and overall probability distribution of lost sales vs. latency.
EDIT: Doesn't work unless you have the correct Referer...