For me it didn't, especially when we were not prepared for it, and we know that we couldn't take the traffic if it happened.
What really killed me instead, was when our site was slowish or half-fucked during some events. And people still managed to use it harder and harder for the entire day. And we made unusual loads of money and new customers, with a crap site xD
There is of course a feeling of "how much did we miss out? that must be a lot considering how much we did get.", but it's less prominent than the feeling of "how the hell did all these people manage to pay us at all? and why the fuck did they keep using the site?". That does contradict every known blog and article out there about people just leaving.
-100ms of additional page load time cost 1% revenue (Amazon)
-400ms means -9% vistors (Yahoo)
-Showing 30 search results instead of 10 and therefore accepting 500ms of additional page load time means traffic goes back by 20% (Google)
-Every second of page load time reduces conversions by 7%
There are many more. There is a nice infographic summarizing a few more studies in a nice way [2].
In fact, I think the trend is quite the opposite: as devices and connections get better, people start to expect that websites are very responsive and load fast.
[1] http://www.baqend.com/product.html
[2] http://infographicjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/How...
Mobify (2016): For every 100ms decrease in homepage load speed, Mobify's customer base saw a 1.11% lift in session based conversion, amounting to an average annual revenue increase of $376,789. Similarly, for every 100ms decrease in checkout page load speed, Mobify's customers saw a 1.55% life in session based conversion, amounting to an average annual revenue increase of $526,147 [2].
Staples (2014): conversion increase per second [3].
Or the Obama campaign (2012): making the page 60% faster increased donations by 14% [4].
More new studies from recent years can be found at WPO stats [5].
[1] https://www.doubleclickbygoogle.com/articles/mobile-speed-ma...
[2] http://resources.mobify.com/2016-Q2-mobile-insights-benchmar...
[3] http://de.slideshare.net/cliffcrocker/velocity-ny-how-to-mea...
[4] http://kylerush.net/blog/meet-the-obama-campaigns-250-millio...
Well. 100% of web page needs more than 3 seconds to load on my mobile connection.
We'll both agree that I ain't a statistically fair sample. I join @icebraining on that we need information that is relevant to the mobile web.
[2] is behind a paywall.
[3] is quoting all the common worthless old studies. There are some graphs and stuff but lacking test methodologies and information. Graphs are showing a few percent of gains, and latencies going from 1s to 10s, which is a lot less effect than other studies.
[4] is out of topic and gives no data. (x% of what? absolute latency? before? after? well, they didn't test for latency and impact on revenue)
Long story short: Google makes money on ads, only shown on the top of the page.
Showing 1 page with 30 results is only 1 batch of ads. Showing 3 pages with 10 results is 3 batch of ads (well, on the people who go past the first page).
Of course loading 30 results is slower than 30. Some articles quickly turned the study into "500ms more will destroy 20% of your revenue" but the Google study was never about that.