ANSWER QUESTION BELOW IN BOLD!

Specifically, the data sponsor company uses network card data capture devices to track event log Facebook messages with a brand mention that a panelist sees in his/her newsfeeds, timeline/wall, ticker, and others' timelines/walls. In addition, the company used in-home purchase scanners to record the purchase value of participating households. The company also tracked whether an in-store promotion was applied at the time of purchase. The household purchase records, Facebook Fan Page messages, and in-store promotions are integrated into a single-source data set. Different from prior media research that focuses mostly on the aggregate-level economic value of media advertising, our data enable us to account for the critical phenomena occurring at the individual household level. These niche data enable us to explore a household's buying behavior in relation to earned and owned social media exposures at a highly disaggregate level across households and within time.

In our study, we use "social media exposure tie" to specifically indicate that a household has been exposed to at least one social media message about a brand. Hence, our unit of analysis is social media exposure ties between six brands and household panelists, and we track the level of social media exposure of the ties over 52 weekly periods in 2011. For a given week, we could observe how many Facebook messages about a brand were shown to each household panelist. Using social media activities for brands at the weekly level allows us to overcome the sparseness of social media activity in our analysis because social media exposures for brands tend to be spaced out and rarely occur on multiple days in the same week, as would be expected for almost all FMCG companies, brands, or entities except for very high-profile ones.

In our data, there are 2,463 unique social media exposure ties between the six brands and 1,558 household panelists, and we tracked the level of social media exposures and the amount purchased offline of each tie over 52 week periods in 2011. Hence, the total number of weekly observations of 2,463 social media exposure ties over 52 week periods was 128,076. Among the observations, purchases occurred in 2,208 weekly observations. With respect to household panelists, 41 percent of the household panelists in our data have purchased at least one of the six brands and 32 percent of the social media ties in our data have resulted in at least one purchasing occurrence, given the exposure of Facebook brand messages (see Table 3 for details). Hence, the proportion of households that have purchased in the data is significant, although the weekly event of purchase is not very frequent in our data over a span of 52 week periods.

Table 3. Brands, Household Panelists, Social Media Exposure Ties, and Brand Purchases

Total number of brands	6
Total number of household panelists	1,558
Total number of unique social media exposure ties	2,463
Total number of Facebook brand messages	29,395
Average number of brands associated with a household panelist	1.58
Number of household panelists that have purchased	639 (41%)
Number of unique social media exposure ties that made purchases	788 (32%)

How many individuals were in the study (total number)?

What is the amount of Facebook brand messages?

Assuming all individuals who did purchase product did so monthly,How many individuals purchased?

How many actual social media views occurred?

Let's assume that these brands achieved referrals from social media to their website, with users wanting to research more before buying. Assume 49,000 referrals per year. What is this translated to monthly averages?

How many purchases were tied to social media exposure?