Central Perk

vineri, 12 iulie 2013

Go Behind the Scenes This Week

Featured

This week, the First Lady hosted the second Annual Kids' State Dinner, while the President laid out his vision for building a better, smarter, faster government. He also awarded the 2012 National Medals of Arts and Humanities, met with the Congressional Black and Congressional Hispanic Caucuses, and honored the Washington Kastles and the 1963 Ramblers.

Click here to watch the latest installment of "West Wing Week."

Why You Might Be Losing Rankings to Pages with Fewer Links, Worse Targeting, and Poor Content

Posted: 11 Jul 2013 07:12 PM PDT

Posted by randfish

Most of us have a pretty good sense for the best ways to improve our search rankings, including earning links, targeting the people who search for us, and making sure our sites contain high-quality content. Sometimes, though, we get outranked by sites that clearly have work to do in these areas. In today's Whiteboard Friday, Rand explains some of the reasons why that might happen to you.

For reference, here's a still image of this week's whiteboard:

Video Transcription

Howdy Moz fans, and welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. This week, I want to address a question that comes up all the time. I get so much email about this. So many people asking in Q&A, the Moz Q&A, about:

"Why am I losing rankings to a site or page that has fewer links, worse keyword targeting, and/or poor content?" It's usually some combination of these. A lot of times it's fewer links and poor content, or they're not targeting a keyword at all, and their content's terrible. "Why are they outranking me?"

I want to try and address why that might be happening for you, because it's such a common theme. I think, as SEOs and marketers, we're trained to look at the data. We look at who's ranking for chicken coops, and we see these three results, and we go and check. Okay, how many links does this site have? How many links does the page have? What's the page authority? What's the domain authority? What does the anchor text look like? Is it an exact match domain, and maybe it's getting some domain biasing from that, or those kind of things. And then, when we don't see one of those patterns that we're accustomed to, we go, "Why is that happening? What's going on there? I don't understand why I'm seeing this page outrank my page." So I'm going to try and address those.

First off, let's understand the basics of what's going on in rankings, because there are multiple things. First off, domain based features. So it could be that MNN, which I think is Mother Nature Network maybe it has a very powerful domain, or not as powerful a domain, in terms of domain authority and trust and those kind of things.

There are page based features. This is like the content of the page and the keywords that it's targeting and how it's doing that, as well as the content experience on the page and the links that are coming to the page. The individual URL, not the domain broadly.

Then there are listing based features, meaning: Have they done a good job of making this a very compelling thing for a user to click? We've certainly seen examples of where making a more compelling snippet has actually boosted people's rankings as more people click it, and Google is seeing that searcher behavior, and now they're saying, "Oh well, if so many people like this result and they're scrolling down to find it, then we should probably be bumping it up."

Of course, there are secondary benefits to that, which is the more people who click your listing, the more people you get exposed to, and the more links you can earn, and all those kinds of second order benefits.

But it's not just these things, or it is these things, but it's also a bunch of different inputs that can be affecting these, and so I'm going to walk you through some of those.

What I really like asking is, "When we're being outranked, where do we have weaknesses that the other listings have strengths?" I think this is a common way of going about this, but it's not always numeric. It's not always quantitative. Sometimes it's qualitative, and sometimes you have to ask yourself tough questions.

Do I have a poor listing or a poor snippet? Is this something where, out of all the listings on here, someone would want to click mine more than anything else? That's a copywriting challenge, it's a creativity challenge, and it's a empathy challenge. We want to be inside people's heads. If we were to go and get a room full of a hundred people who performed a search for chicken coops, and we asked them, "What would make you click on a listing? What would inspire you to say, 'Wow, that's what I want to see.'"
A lot of time it might be something like this.

If you're being outranked in this search result by Mother Nature Network, and you're going, "But I actually sell chicken coops, they don't," think about how compelling it is to say, "Oh eight awesome urban chicken coops."

Well, given population trends and how chicken coops are rising, it's very possible that lots of people who live in cities and dense urban areas are searching for chicken coops right now. So this kind of an article, that's inspiring and interesting to them, might be better than what I've got, which is chicken coop designs or backyard chicken coops, those kinds of things. Maybe that's what's going on, and we need to have a real conversation about who those people are, what they're searching for, and whether we're providing something that's really compelling for them to click on.

Likewise the brand and domain. People have a hard time hearing this, and for any of you out there who are consultants, or agencies, or are a marketer who joined an organization, you know that there's nothing harder than going to your boss, or your board, or the client and saying, "Your baby is just ugly. Nobody likes your brand, and people don't enjoy interacting with it, and they don't have a positive association with it. We're going to have to change that if we want to move the needle on any of these other tactics."

This is true in social. It's true in content creation, and content marketing. It's true in SEO for sure, and remember that brand bias is one of the strongest signals. A lot of people say, when surveyed and when they do tests, that the domain name, the brand is what biases their click, and they might click on something lower if it has a better brand association for them.

Likewise user experience and design. One of the most fascinating case studies, and unfortunately I can't talk about fully, transparently, because this is an interaction that I had with someone who did not give me permission to disclose it. It's a big brand. It's a brand that you've heard of, a site that you've heard of, and they had this experience where their user experience changed at one point, and they made a conscious decision to change it. It was providing sort of a worse experience for people coming to them for search results, but they were getting a higher conversion rate as a result of how they changed the experience, and Google just dropped them way down. Their search traffic cratered and fell off a cliff. They had anticipated that they would be hurt by it a little, but certainly not this much, and that's speaks to the quality of user experience that you're providing.

If Google sees lots of people go and visit your page and then come right back to the search results and click on someone else, that's a really bad signal for them. So if you're not answering that query and doing a great job from the landing page of delivering value, Google sees that. Whether you're using Google Analytics or not, they see it from people coming back to the search result and clearly being unsatisfied, clicking other listings more frequently than they do when they click on someone else's result first. That tells Google you're not the right match, and so you want to make sure that you're delivering that sort of user experience.

Another thing that I see sometimes is people saying, "I have more links, for more linking root domains to my page than they do." Okay, but let's examine a bunch of things about citations, and I don't just mean direct links. I also mean mentions, brand mentions and brand association mentions, and I also mean things like social shares and social mentions, because remember these are all being taken into account, either as a first order direct impact or a second order effect.

So I like to ask about quality. Are those coming from high quality sites?
Are those references high quality? Are they really saying this is a good place to go for this? Remember, Google has started using things like sentiment tracking and sentiment analysis to determine are people really pissed off at this brand? If so, that's not actually a mention that I want to make them rank higher.

I'm looking at quantity and that's certainly something that all of us can track pretty easily.

Variety, this is one that's tough for people. What they see is hey everyone out there is linking to me. Well, are they all exactly the same kind of stuff? Like no news sites are linking to you. No blogs are linking to you. No social shares are coming to you, but a bunch of small business websites that use your widget on their page, maybe you've got some sort of a tracking widget or you have a WordPress plugin, or something like that, but there's no variety. Everything that links to you is of one particular kind, and years ago, this tactic totally worked. Now it's much tougher. If you don't have that broad sentiment of lots of people saying nice things and lots of kinds of people saying good things about you and linking to you, it can be tougher to win.

Also acceleration rate. Sometimes I see folks who have a really strong site, a really strong page, and they're seeing someone with only a few links, who's relatively new popping up, and they're go, "What's going on here? How are they getting so far ahead of me?" The answer often times is well, their acceleration rate is higher. You're growing links at sort of this rate, and they're growing links at this rate, and even though you might be up here in terms of links, and they're way down here in terms of links, that growth rate is something that's taken into account, especially if it's coming fast and furious, because it suggests to Google this is really interesting right now. Lots of people might be interested in this today, this week, this month.

Next, I look at content quality and usefulness. When I'm addressing that, I want to know does the content address the searcher's intent? One of the challenges that people have a lot of time is when they've got commercial products especially. So, for example, let's say that you are selling backyard chicken coops. Your competing with folks like Williams-Sonoma and BackyardChickens.com, and you see content outranking you. You've got to be realizing, oh there's a lot of people who are not looking to buy this product, but are merely interested in set up and design and learning more about it. Can I offer that educational, or resource-based, or news-based, or just design based type of content as well? Should I be blogging about this in addition to having my commercial page about it, and maybe both of those can help me perform better in the search results.

Does the content provide great or unique value than anyone else? I actually did a whole Whiteboard Friday on providing unique value. I'll let you guys watch that one. That's a pretty good Whiteboard Friday on this particular topic. But it could be the case that even though you've got a great page, with great pictures, great video, how to set up, all this good stuff, it's not unique. There are seven other people in the top ten who do almost exactly do the same thing, and you're not providing unique value. You need to stand out. You have to be the exception to the rule if you want to outperform, and that's often why you see stuff that looks like it doesn't have the metrics to perform doing so well.

Last thing, ask a little bit about results biasing. Remember that if you're doing a search, if I'm doing a search from Seattle, Washington, I might see a lot of Seattle-based and local companies in here, even if it's not the maps and local results, because that local impact, Google knows where I'm coming from, where my IP address is. If I'm using a mobile device, they know nearly exact where I am. That kind of biasing can hurt. So I like to append. You can do a search that appends something, like &gl equals your country code, onto a search that you uses say .co.uk. So I might go Google.co.uk?search=chicken+coops&gl=us, and now I've said put me in the UK. No wait, put me in the back in the U.S., and now there's no localization, and I can see what the national, sort of geographic picture is, the non geo-biased results. If it's geo-biasing that's going on, it's really going to be very, very hard to compete in those geo markets unless, you have a local presence in that market, and for a lot of searches, that's what Google's doing, and the best you can hope for is be the national brand that performs somewhere in here.

Also, look for mobile biasing. Remember that Google has said recently that they will discount or not rank you as well if your site doesn't perform quickly, have responsive designs, do well on mobile devices. So that might mean that if you're seeing a large amount of mobile searches, be careful, that's something you definitely need to test.

And finally verticals. Sometimes Google sees that, hey, when people are searching for a particular keyword phrase, they really want video. They really want news. They really want images. If your page doesn't have some of those features, you might not perform well even in the normal search results. Video snippets a lot of the time can help folks to perform in those types of results.

So these are all questions you can use to ask yourself in that case scenario where the numbers just aren't lining up. I really like using Moz's Keyword Difficulty tool, which has this advanced SERPs analysis, does this big kind of Excel spreadsheet layout of oh yeah, this is every metric about every kind of thing possible or imaginable, and now I can really get into those numbers. if you're seeing those numbers not matching up, this is a next good step to go through, check mark by check mark, and figure out why you might not be performing.

All right everyone. Hope you enjoyed this edition of Whiteboard Friday. I look forward to the comments, and we'll see you again next week. Take care.

Video transcription by Speechpad.com

Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!

Mobile Bid Adjustments Part 3 – Location, Location, Location

Posted: 12 Jul 2013 01:19 AM PDT

Previously I've discussed ways to calculate your mobile bid adjustment, and how to use weighted averages to change keyword level bids to ad group level adjustments. Today it's time to check how adding location bid adjustments will change things.

Firstly, a disclaimer: a 10% change to a bid is not the same as a 10% change to a CPC. CPC depends on competitors’ bids rather than your own; changing the bid changes what auctions you enter. If you're restricted by budget, then the proportion of spend on each device might change. But this is a rough check, to make sure the layers of adjustments aren't creating unexpected exponentials.

The first step, as ever, is to download your data. Go to the Dimensions tab, then to the User Locations report. Make sure you have the right level of detail: if you're only going to add adjustments for countries then you can have just the Country/Territory; if you're using UK countries or US states then have the Region column.

Download the User Location report with the Device.

Add a second worksheet, rename it ‘Location’, and list your location bid adjustments. These are campaign level only.

Then add a third worksheet, rename it ‘Mobile’, and list your mobile bid adjustments. These could be campaign or ad group level: here I’ve got mine at ad group level.

We want these adjustments in the first worksheet, so go back to that one and add ‘Location Adjustment’ and ‘Mobile Adjustment’ columns. ‘Location Adjustment’ is:
=SUMIFS(Location!C:C,Location!A:A,D3,Location!B:B,C3)

‘Mobile Adjustment’ is:
=SUMIFS(Mobile!C:C,Mobile!A:A,D3,Mobile!B:B,E3)

If you had campaigns targeting multiple devices then the mobile bid used would not be the same as the bid you actually entered, as Google automatically adjusts it by an unknown amount. That means you can’t work with your actual mobile CPCs, because they don’t come from the right bid. So instead use the Desktop CPC, which will be multiplied by the mobile bid adjustment. Add a ‘Desktop CPC’ column.
=SUMIFS(I:I,A:A,"Computers",B:B,B3,C:C,C3,D:D,D3,E:E,E3)

Then we get the adjusted CPC by multiplying it by our modifiers.
=IF(A3="Mobile devices with full browsers",O3+1,1)*(N3+1)*P3

This uses the mobile adjustment if the row is for mobiles, and always uses the location adjustment.

Multiply the Adjusted CPC by the number of clicks to get the Adjusted Cost:
=Q3*F3
This is assuming that the bid changes won’t affect your number of clicks – which is wrong, as changing bids leads to changing position which leads to changing CTR. Again, this is just a sanity check that your bids are in the right area: we can’t calculate the precise difference they will make, as you don’t know the position or CTR you’ll end up with.

Now we’ve assembled everything, it’s time to put it into a Pivot Table. Select the data, go to Insert on the menu ribbon and click Pivot Table:

A dialogue box will appear – click ‘Okay’.

You’ll get a pivot table in a new worksheet. Select fields to appear in it – I suggest Campaign, Ad Group, Cost and Adjusted Cost to start with.

Then add calculated fields: click ‘Option’ under PivotTable Tools in the ribbon, then ‘Fields, Items, & Sets’, then ‘Calculated Field…’:

Create one called Adj CPC, for the adjusted CPC:

Also add ‘CPC’, which is:
=Cost/Clicks

CPA:
=Cost /'Conv. (1-per-click)'

and Adj CPA:
='Adjusted Cost' /'Conv. (1-per-click)'

You can then see how your bid adjustments should roughly affect the Cost, CPC and CPA.

You can change the Row Labels to see how bids are affected when viewed by Region or Device. You can also add an ‘Effective Adjustment’ calculated field (=CPC /'Adj CPC' -1) to see what percentage the difference is between current performance and expected performance. You can also change your adjustments in the Location and Mobile tabs, then hit ‘Refresh’ in the PivotTable Tools Options to see the effects.

You might want to have ad scheduling as well. Unfortunately you can't segment the User Location report by time of day, but you can segment by Device and Day of the Week. If you want ad scheduling but no location adjustments, you could download the Hour of Day report segmented by Time of Day and Device. You'll then need an extra worksheet with your time-based adjustments, and an extra column to add them to the main data, but you can calculate the 'Adjusted' columns and pivot in the same way.

If you’d like to see the example spreadsheet then download it here.

That’s it! Our three-part discussion of bid adjustments is over (for now). Do you have any thoughts on how to calculate them, or predict their effects when there are so many unknowns in play? Let us know in the comments.

Seth's Blog : All hyperbole is totally useless

All hyperbole is totally useless

Sure, it gets people's attention, but does it change minds?

Hyperbole needs to be hooked up to a story in order for it to make a difference. A story that resonates, that matches our worldview, that holds up to scrutiny.

Hyperbole can open the door, but it doesn't change behavior. Persistent stories that are true, amplified by the tribe... that's what changes behavior.

• Email to a friend •

joi, 11 iulie 2013

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

"Win-Win" Situation for Employers to Not Offer Healthcare to Part-Time Employees
Police Investigate 'United Stasi of America' Artist
Portugal Uncorks Bottle of EU Crisis Genie
German Officials Liken EU Banking Power Proposal to "Nazi Enabling Acts"; What Germany Can Expect; What About the UK?
Gold Jumps Nearly $50 as Market Digests Non-News From Fed; Gold Correction Over?

"Win-Win" Situation for Employers to Not Offer Healthcare to Part-Time Employees

Posted: 11 Jul 2013 11:04 PM PDT

The peculiarities of Obamcare keep piling up. Here's the latest: Wegmans, a Rochester-based grocery store has decided to do something beneficial for its part-time employees, stop health care insurance.

The reason? Employers and employees alike are better off if the employer does not offer health-care benefits to part-time employees.

Please consider Wegmans cuts health benefits for part-time workers.

Et tu, Wegmans?

The Rochester-based grocer that has been continually lauded for providing health insurance to its part-time workers will no longer offer that benefit.

The company said the decision was related to changes brought about by the Affordable Care Act.

Part-time employees may actually benefit from Wegmans' decision, according to Brian Murphy, a partner at Lawley Benefits Group, an insurance brokerage firm in Buffalo.

"If you have an employee that qualifies for subsidized coverage, they might be better off going with that than a limited part-time benefit," Murphy said.

That's because subsidized coverage can have a lower out-of-pocket cost for the insured employee while also providing better benefits than an employer-paid plan.

Under the Affordable Care Act, part-time employees are not eligible for health insurance subsidies if their employer offers insurance.

"It's a win-win. The employee gets subsidized coverage, and the employer gets to lower costs," Murphy said.

Wegmans employs roughly 1,433 full-time employees and 4,304 part-time employees in the Buffalo Niagara region.

Now Ain't That Special

Police Investigate 'United Stasi of America' Artist

Posted: 11 Jul 2013 08:09 PM PDT

Is it illegal to project a sign such as the following onto a building?

What if the person projecting the image is in Germany, and the target building is the US embassy in Berlin?

The Local reports Police investigate 'United Stasi of America' artist

Berlin police are investigating whether an artist who projected "United Stasi of America" onto the US embassy in the German capital earlier this week could be charged with a criminal offence.

German artist Oliver Bienkowski projected the message, along with a picture of internet tycoon and online activist Kim Dotcom onto the US embassy in Berlin on Sunday night.

He was likening reported sweeping internet surveillance by Washington and London to spying by the former East German secret police. And while the image was projected onto the building for 30 seconds on Sunday night, the action has caused quite a stir.

An investigation has been launched into whether the action constituted "slander against the organizations and representatives of a foreign state," the Berlin-based Der Tagesspiegel newspaper reported on Thursday.

Bienkowski's lawyer Fabian Eickstädt pointed out that the projection was onto the US embassy, which is technically US territory. "For me it is not even clear whether German law would apply," he said.

And Der Tagesspiegel said that a criminal case of slander could only be launched if the victim were to make a formal complaint. The US embassy told the paper it had no interest in a prosecution.

I commend the message and the target.

For those not familiar with the term, Stasi refers to the secret police in East Germany. Origin is from German Sta(ats)si(cherheitsdienst), literally: state security service.

Given the US cannot prosecute out of fear of publicity, let's hope this practice spreads.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Portugal Uncorks Bottle of EU Crisis Genie

Posted: 11 Jul 2013 12:34 PM PDT

The Financial Times reports Portugal president's call for national unity backfires

[President] Aníbal Cavaco Silva's call for a "national salvation" agreement between the ruling coalition and the main opposition party, leading to early elections in June 2014, was intended to restore calm following a government crisis triggered by the resignation of two senior ministers.

But the president's appeal for a cross-party deal in support of the country's €78bn bailout programme prompted a fresh increase in bond yields on Thursday and hit share prices that had only just recovered from last week's political turmoil.

"Portugal is in a deeper crisis than it was a week ago," said Ricardo Santos, an analyst with BNP Paribas. "The president sought to ease volatility, but he has almost certainly increased it."

Silva ruled out holding an immediate snap election, saying this would significantly increase the risk of Portugal needing a second bailout. But he called on the three parties to agree on holding an early ballot next June, a year ahead of schedule.

Agreeing to Mr Cavaco Silva's proposal would require António José Seguro, the opposition PS leader, to support €4.7bn in planned spending cuts and the potential laying off of tens of thousands of state workers, measures that he vehemently rejected until now.

"It's difficult to see how the president's proposal can work given that the concessions involved could end the political careers of both the opposition leader and the prime minister," said Mr Santos.

Portugal was plunged into crisis last week after Paulo Portas, leader of the junior coalition party, resigned as foreign minister less than 24 hours after Vítor Gaspar also quit as finance minister amid tensions caused by government austerity policies.

Portugal 10-Year Bond Yield

Multiple Crisis Genies Unleashed

The coalition in Portugal cannot last and Portugal is 100% certain to need another bailout.

With German elections coming up in September, politicians everywhere are scrambling to contain the "Crisis Genie" until after the election.

Financial Times writer Peter Wise says Last week's protests in Portugal show it will not take much to uncork the botle of the ECB's crisis genie.

I suggest more than one genie is already out of the bottle: the spy genie, the Italy genie, the Portugal genie, the EU Banking Proposal genie, etc.

Some genies are more powerful than others, but all will help AfD bring an end to the regime of chancellor Merkel in September. For related discussion, please see Germany Election Update: AfD Soars in Online Poll; Is Merkel Toast?

German Officials Liken EU Banking Power Proposal to "Nazi Enabling Acts"; What Germany Can Expect; What About the UK?

Posted: 11 Jul 2013 11:21 AM PDT

In June, an EU commission put forth a banking resolution proposal giving itself powers in which the ability to shut down banks would be centralised in the European Commission.

Brussels would have the clout to overrule the bank's home country and use funds from a central pot.

Specifically, the commission proposed the resolution authority to "be equipped with a single bank resolution fund". The fund would have the power to borrow from markets, using the "assets of euro area banks" as a guarantee and backstop.

Nazi Enabling Acts

The proposal was presented on Tuesday by Michel Barnier, EU commissioner for internal market and services, and immediately went up in flames when German politicians likened Brussels bank powers to Nazi 'enabling acts'.

The head of a Bavarian banking association compared the European Commission's plan to grant itself the final say on winding up troubled banks to the type of law that allowed the Nazis to seize power.

The comments by Stephan Götzl, head of the GVB, the Bavarian association of co-operative banks, underscore the depth of German opposition to the plans presented on Tuesday by Michel Barnier, EU commissioner for internal market and services.

"We in Germany have had a bad experience with enabling acts," he said, appearing to refer to the 1933 constitutional amendment that handed the Nazis sweeping powers to enact legislation, unchecked by parliament.

The remarks were first reported by the Wall Street Journal and confirmed later by a spokesman. The spokesman noted Mr Götzl had not specifically mentioned Hitler or the Nazis.

"In our view, this proposal gives the commission powers it does not possess according to current [EU] treaties," chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesman said on Tuesday

Wolfgang Schäuble, Ms Merkel's finance minister, also warned Brussels to respect the limits of the law or "risk major turbulence".

A spokesperson for Mr Barnier declined to respond to Mr Götzl's comments.

Mr Barnier is confident the proposed measures are legally sound and cites support from lawyers at the commission, the European council and European Central Bank. Officials say they reluctantly proposed powers for the commission, rather than a separate agency, and did so only because it was the most legally solid and effective institution to handle bank crises under existing EU treaties.

Mr Barnier contends Europe cannot afford to wait for treaty change, which is typically an arduous process that can take years. Brussels wants the resolution regime, commanding some 300 staff, to begin from January 2015.

Reflections on What Germany and the UK Can Expect

The EU will stop at nothing to give itself sweeping powers to do whatever the hell it wants including the creation of monetary transfer mechanisms that are absolutely against the German constitution.

In case this was not obvious before (it should have been), it is certainly obvious now.

Note the excuse by Mr Barnier "Europe cannot afford to wait for treaty change". In other words, to hell with legalities and treaties.

This is such a dangerous, slippery slope that even Merkel and Schäuble commented on it.

What About the UK?

The same applies to the UK in a broader sense (in regards to the EU as opposed to the eurozone).

The only solution is for Germany to say it has had enough of the transfer proposals and to exit the European Monetary Union (EMU). For identical reasons, the UK should exit the EU.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Gold Jumps Nearly $50 as Market Digests Non-News From Fed; Gold Correction Over?

Posted: 11 Jul 2013 12:32 AM PDT

Inquiring minds note the interesting action in gold today following the non-news from the FOMC minutes from June 18 that the Bernanke Fed is not quite ready to tighten.

(See FOMC Minutes and Economic Projections: Dissent in Both Directions; Confused?).

Gold 15 Minute Chart

click on chart for sharper image

Gold Correction Over?

I wonder why anyone thought the Fed was really going to tighten in the first place. Regardless, here's the key question: Does the non-news that the Fed is not really serious about tightening mark the end of the gold correction?

Unfortunately, I cannot answer that (and no one else can either).

However, I do expect extremely negative sentiment regarding gold to bottom at any time, and perhaps this is the time.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

vineri, 12 iulie 2013

Go Behind the Scenes This Week

Why You Might Be Losing Rankings to Pages with Fewer Links, Worse Targeting, and Poor Content

Why You Might Be Losing Rankings to Pages with Fewer Links, Worse Targeting, and Poor Content

Video Transcription

Mobile Bid Adjustments Part 3 – Location, Location, Location

Mobile Bid Adjustments Part 3 – Location, Location, Location

Seth's Blog : All hyperbole is totally useless

All hyperbole is totally useless

More Recent Articles

joi, 11 iulie 2013

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Pagini

Persoane interesate

Arhivă blog

vineri, 12 iulie 2013

Video Transcription

More Recent Articles

joi, 11 iulie 2013

Pagini

Persoane interesate

Arhivă blog

Subscribe to