Central Perk

miercuri, 25 septembrie 2013

Kill It on Facebook by Being TAGFEE

Posted: 24 Sep 2013 04:37 PM PDT

This post was originally in YouMoz, and was promoted to the main blog because it provides great value and interest to our community. The author's views are entirely his or her own and may not reflect the views of Moz, Inc.

Last month, I presented a Mozinar on Deconstructing a Niche Market. Much to my surprise, the Q&A session focused almost entirely on my experience using Facebook as a niche marketing channel.

It's true that Facebook is a dynamic and oft-misunderstood creature, especially in marketing. When building a strategy with long-term sustainability in mind, it's important to avoid relying on any one source of traffic. Any channel can be fickle, and Facebook has certainly proven to be no exception.

That being said, Facebook still represents the largest share of the social space, and is at least worth considering for businesses looking to diversify their channel marketing portfolio, be it niche-targeted or otherwise.

Get Facebook Traffic
Just 9 months after we decided to give the platform the old college try, Facebook has become a substantial traffic source for our B2B business.

As I mentioned in the Mozinar, our business has spent the last nine months developing our Facebook channel. As a result, we've seen traffic from Facebook increase to the point where it is roughly equal to 30% of our organic traffic.

In this post, I'll be going through the philosophy we use to maximize engagement and traffic.

Marketing like it's 2013

In a recent post on LinkedIn, marketing wizard Gary Vaynerchuk delivered this gem: "It's 2013 and 99 percent of people are marketing their products like It's 2004."

His assessment is spot on.

Successfully building social media channels that drive converting traffic is about more than a content schedule. On Facebook, you have a built-in audience of anywhere from hundreds to millions of people who have opted in to your message. Remind you of another platform you use? Email, perhaps?

Social media, of course, adds engagement into the mix. This means that you not only have the opportunity to push your message out to your droves of fans, but a responsibility to have conversations, contribute, and be a member of the community.

If you want to market like it's 2013, you have to learn how to engage your audience, not just talk at them.

The (not so) curious case of Sue Bryce

Sue Bryce Facebook Page

Sue Bryce is an award-winning professional photographer that teaches photography through workshops on CreativeLIVE. If you take a look at her Facebook page, you'll see that her engagement is off the charts. 43,000 likes with 8,870 talking about her page.

How does she do it?

Promotional Facebook Post

First things first, she's not even remotely shy about promoting herself or her work. As you progress down her page, you'll definitely see the occasional post promoting her events or cross-promoting her partners.

But therein lies the rub. The occasional post. The promotional posts are woven into a cloth of intensely personal, fun, and sometimes catty quips about life, the photography business, and people that she meets along her journey.

Among her most engaged-with recent posts? Sharing a story about getting dental work done, and how happy it makes her feel. I guarantee that each person who liked and/or commented on this post feels closer to Sue because of it.

Have a Voice on Facebook

In addition to sharing elements of her personal life, Sue communicates with her Facebook community in her own voice. There is nothing that feels remotely fake or forced about her posts. This makes it extremely easy for her fans to feel a connection to her, and to respond to her posts, which they do quite regularly.

Finally, Sue takes advantage of the fact that visual media performs exceptionally well on Facebook. In fact, a 2012 HubSpot study found that photos on Facebook generated 53% more likes than the average post. As possibly one of the world's best photographers, of course, Sue has an unfair advantage in this arena.

Even still, one of her recent photo shares depicting her and fellow photography guru Kelly Brown in newborn poses garnered 2,174 likes, 156 shares, and 262 comments. Why? Because it was fun, relevant to the audience, and (let's be honest) darn cute.

Despite the fact that you're probably not a world-renowned photographer, it's still extremely important to engage your audience with relevant visual media. Behind-the-scenes photos, product photos, and event photos are all a good place to start, and will work for most businesses.

Obviously, as a sole proprietor, Sue Bryce has a much easier time incorporating her personal voice into her brand, and this type of strategy won't necessarily work for all types of businesses. If nothing else, this case exemplifies the possibilities of incorporating personality into your brand to achieve outlandish levels of engagement.

Channeling your inner Sue by harnessing the power of TAGFEE

Seeing success is great, but this article isn't here to tell you how awesome Sue is.

Nicholas Longtin Draws Roger

Image credit: Nicholas L., from Minneapolis

Interestingly, what makes her such a great example for the Moz audience is that her Facebook page is a ridiculously great example of being TAGFEE. How can you incorporate this attitude into your own social endeavors?

Be transparent and authentic

While transparency can get bogged down with organizational hurdles, the lesson is to be yourself. Decide who your company is, and talk about things that reflect that, even if they're uncomfortable. For example, if you sell industrial supplies, don't be afraid to talk about the downsides of certain products. Modern customers know better than to trust claims that everything you sell is made out of sunshine, rainbows, and Adamantium.

Be generous

Offer special benefits to your fans that follow you on Facebook. Offer free trials and products, highlight their success stories on your page, and intentionally seek to add as much value to them as possible. This means thinking critically about what you're adding to the conversation, not just extracting from the platform.

Be fun

Again, being fun is relative, and dependent on company culture. But, as can be seen in the example of Sue Bryce, fun drives engagement. The same goes for Moz. It never hurts to take a lighthearted approach, and a good brand personality will make your fans more engaged.

Be empathetic

On one level, empathy is about following the golden rule. Facebook manners are no exception. Strive to be professional and respectful on social media at all times. Additionally, I would argue that empathy is about continually seeking to understand how your audience feels, what challenges they face, and working hard to provide a product and resources that help them address those needs and challenges.

Be exceptional

There is no shortcut to being exceptional. Always seek to try new things, test new ideas, and be fresh and relevant. This is not only a healthy practice for your business, but a way for you to add unique value for your fans. Being exceptional lets you tell exceptional, unique, and fresh stories in a way that other brands in your industry may not be able to. It's all about setting yourself apart.

Being exceptional includes making the most of the platform. Use well designed, cohesive image posts. Not only do you want each post to be interesting from a visual perspective, but you want your page as a whole to have a sense of visual flow. Doing this will not only boost your engagement, but also make your Facebook page look more professional and put together.

The same goes for copy. Choose a voice that fits your brand, remember to edit, and deliver your message exceptionally well. Know how you plan to format your posts, and how formatting works on Facebook. If you mention one of your fans, tag their name with @Username. Create a style guide and stick to it.

Paying to play

Facebook Advertising

The problem of "pay to play" on Facebook is worth mentioning, as past and future changes have and will alter your brand's visibility on the platform. As it stands, our brand's data shows that we can expect to reach between 7% to 32% of our built-in audience when posting without advertisements.

Facebook indicated in early 2012 that the average reach of an "organic" post was 16%.

Considering that open rates of between 15% and 25% are, in general, considered good in email marketing, we can say that non-boosted Facebook posts boast respectable performance as they are.

The counter-intuitive twist is that paying to play isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Much like a Google SERP in the dark ages of Internet marketing, a Facebook feed inundated with an uncomfortable slurry of poorly written brand messages and uninteresting posts isn't really a worthwhile place for your brand to be.

A realignment in the signal-to-noise ratio is a serious come-up for a brand that uses Facebook responsibly and thoughtfully, and raises the bar to entry in a way that benefits brands that have their house in order.

Considering that Facebook advertising is relatively affordable, and allows you to target a ridiculously granular audience outside of your normal fan base, it is definitely worth a go. Lauren Vaccarello from Salesforce gave an outstanding primer on Facebook advertising in a recent WBF, and there's an excellent crash course on YouMoz. I recommend checking out both of them if you think Facebook advertising is a good fit for your business.

Additional resources

The social media landscape is constantly evolving, and Facebook is no exception. Over time, citizens of the Facebook empire will likely grow more and more desensitized to advertising. While some best practices are bound to remain exactly the same, it's important to keep an eye out for developments in the ecosystem.

That said, you can cover most of the basics with the following resources:

And that's a wrap. Enjoy building an outstanding Facebook presence, and rememberâ€"keep it TAGFEE!

Have you had great success driving traffic with Facebook? Please share your experiences in the comments below.

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!

Seth's Blog : Beyond geography

Beyond geography

The original business was a lemonade stand. At least metaphorically.

Geographically based, this sort of business offers the following proposition: We are physically convenient to you, and you won't pass another business on the way here that offers you a transaction you will like more than ours.

Originally, of course, this meant on your block. Now, it means within a drive, with good parking. Or any choice that's based on scarce options due to proximity.

The geography-based business is real-estate driven. The right neighborhood with the right rent is a good thing, a natural disaster or the decay of your neighborhood, a bad omen indeed.

The local farm is all about geography, as is a pharmacy and a pizza joint. McDonald's was focused on geography as they grew, Ray Kroc knew that few people would drive past ten other hamburger places to get to a McDonald's.

A business to business organization can also be focused on geography, either because it's a provider to local businesses, or, to get just a little metaphorical, because it's built around just a few closely-tended customers. Those businesses stick with this supplier because it's easier than switching.

As information began to spread, a second kind of business came along. The commodity-based business says, "we sell what they sell, but cheaper." The commodity business requires that information be available and that you're able to actually produce a standard item cheap enough to win at this.

A commodity business always lives on the knife edge of cheaper. More information, bigger areas served and the combination of automation and cheap labor means that at any moment, you can be made obsolete. If a business is depending on winning the Google search sweepstakes and to win the price-shopping shopper, it's a commodity business.

And the third type, the modern type, the type that's the most difficult to build and the most stable once built is the community-based business.

This entity thrives because it's worth the drive, it's worth the cost and it delivers something hard to find just about anywhere--community, not convenience. The community-based business might very well serve a local (geographic) community, but it doesn't try to serve every person in the town, just those that have decided to eagerly join that community.

McKinsey is a community-based consulting firm. Their community is the boardroom of the Fortune 1000, and they can charge a huge premium over 'geographic' providers because the product is not merely the advice they dispense. Choose McKinsey because it says something about who you are and which group you are part of.

Community-based businesses tell stories. They create remarkable products. They sync up their tribe. They happily surrender market share to the commodity seller--if it's a lower price you want, good luck to you! The community business says, "people like us shop at a place like this." This is where brands live, and where work that matters gets done.

The geography-based surf shop sells surfboards and supplies to the grommets who come to this beach this weekend. The commodity surf shop sells the cheapest boards and wetsuits, online. And the community-based surf shop runs swap meets, has a newsletter, organizes competitions, commissions original artwork on boards, and yes, along the way, sells some surf wax.

All three structures can work, for schools, for non-profits, for companies big and small. But each is its own style, with its own structures and measurements and strategies. Choose!

• Email to a friend •

marți, 24 septembrie 2013

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Will Republicans Please Put Up Or Shut Up? (I Expect Neither)
Income-Wise, What Percentage of People are Worse Off Now Than in 2000?
Reader Question: "How Can One Calculate True Price Inflation?"

Will Republicans Please Put Up Or Shut Up? (I Expect Neither)

Posted: 24 Sep 2013 10:53 PM PDT

For the third time in a couple years, the administration, mainstream media writers, and various Republican members of Congress all pretend there is some sort of budget story in the works.

Government Shutdown Hype

Lisa Rein at the Washington Post kicks off the government shutdown hype with After past shutdowns, Congress gave federal workers back pay. This time? Don't count on it.

A government shutdown next week would jeopardize the paychecks of more than 800,000 federal workers who could be told to stay home. More than 2 million other employees who are deemed essential by the government — including the active military — would be entitled to their salaries but might not get paid on time.

While there is no law requiring that nonessential employees be compensated if they are ordered off the job, Congress has in the past voted to reimburse their losses once shutdowns ended.

But this go-round could be different. The bitterly divided Congress includes many lawmakers who are unsympathetic to the plight of federal workers and could be loath to help them recoup their money.

"It's a very different time and a very different Congress," said Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, which represents 150,000 federal workers. "I'm concerned when employees who were here remember that last time employees were paid and think it will happen again, because it's not a given at all."

More Hype

Erza Klein adds to the Washington Post hype with There's much less time to avoid a government shutdown than you think

In theory, the deadline for avoiding a government shutdown is 11:59 p.m. Sept. 30. That gives Congress seven days to figure something out. But those seven days are, at this point, pretty much spoken for.

Still More Hype

Paul Kane, also writing for the Washington Post says Sen. Ted Cruz happy to be outlier in shutdown showdown

Ted Cruz began a frantic effort Monday to bend the Senate to his will by employing tactics that have earned him mostly enemies in his less than nine months in the chamber.

A master of fiery conservative oratory, the freshman senator is trying to block funding for President Obama's health-care law with a strategy that, if successful, will almost certainly lead to a partial government shutdown next week. The Texan has become the face of an effort variously described as the "dumbest idea," leading Republicans to a "box canyon" and ending with their political "suicide note."

And those descriptions were from Cruz's fellow Senate Republicans. On Monday, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and Minority Whip John Cornyn (Tex.) joined the list of longtime GOP senators objecting to Cruz's strategy, which is intended to shut down the government until and unless Democrats agree to abolish funding for Obama's health-care law.

This has left Cruz in a relatively familiar place, almost alone in advocating a tough strategy that is winning him the adoration of conservative activists but isolation and quiet disdain among his colleagues on Capitol Hill.

The Key Sentence

Did you catch the key sentence in the above article?

Here it is: "Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and Minority Whip John Cornyn (Tex.) joined the list of longtime GOP senators objecting to Cruz's strategy, which is intended to shut down the government until and unless Democrats agree to abolish funding for Obama's health-care law."

Another Wolf Call?

In simple terms, Republican leaders have no intent on doing anything but making noise (and complete fools out of themselves).

How many times can Republicans cry "wolf" on a government shutdown and have the call be believed?

Of course mainstream media, especially the Washington Post is ready to go along with the hype, effectively creating a story where there is none.

I Hope I Am Wrong!

I actually hope I am wrong. I hope government shuts down and stays shut down until there are significant, verifiable cuts in the budget (not game-playing cuts in future budgets that won't be honored).

My comment may sound harsh, but it isn't.

The quicker we stop funding insane military actions the better.
The quicker the US stops being the world's policeman the better.
The quicker the US balances its budget the better.
The quicker we get rid of government employees, the better.

My comment holds nothing against Federal employees trying to do their job. It's not their fault.

But do we really need a BLS? Do we really need a Department of Energy? HUD? FHA? etc., etc. I suggest we don't. There are countless government agencies that deserve no funding at all.

And to further reduce government expenditures, it's high time we scrap Davis-Bacon and all prevailing wage laws.

There is so much government waste, it's hard to know where to start.

Where to Start, When to Start

Where to start is debatable; When to start isn't.

The time to start is now (years ago actually), but given that Republican leaders have already thrown in the towel on forcing the issue, the odds of a government shutdown are very small. The odds that a short government shutdown would really accomplish anything are precisely zero.

History suggests that somewhere along the line, Republicans will totally and completely wimp out (because they always do). But as I said, I hope I am wrong.

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

Income-Wise, What Percentage of People are Worse Off Now Than in 2000?

Posted: 24 Sep 2013 10:52 AM PDT

Inquiring minds are wondering "Income-Wise, What Percentage of People are Worse Off Now Than in 2000?"

I asked Doug Short at Advisor Perspectives that seemingly simple question after posting his chart of Real Disposable Income in Illusion of Prosperity: Deflating the American Dream; No Recovery in "Real" Income.

click on any chart for sharper image

My comment from the above link: "Real median incomes are down 7.3% since 2000. That means at least half of the population is worse off now than 13 years ago!"

Notes Regarding Disposable Income

Not only is half the population worse off, it is worse off by at least 7.3% in "real" inflation-adjusted term, using the CPI as the deflator.

Unfortunately, the true situation is far gloomier.

Here's the primary reason: Disposable Personal Income (DPI) includes income from all sources (including transfer payments – Social Security, Medicare, private pensions, etc.) less all taxes on income: Federal (including FICA), State and (if applicable) local. Other taxes (e.g., property or sales taxes) are not subtracted from income in the DPI formula.

It's also safe to assume that substantially more than half the population has no disposable income from stocks or bonds. Meanwhile, interest on CDs and other bank accounts is next to zero (not that the bottom half holds substantial CD assets either).

Ignoring sales taxes and property taxes, I asked Doug Short "The chart of median real income since 2000 shows 50% of the people are negative by 7% or so. Where is the zero-Line? In other words, since the year 2000, what percentage of people are actually ahead in terms of real income?"

Doug Replied ...

The monthly household income data from Sentier Research has only the median incomes before taxes (not just disposable income). The annual data (now through 2012) from the Census Bureau has a number of breakdowns of the data, but none, I think, that would enable the calculation you mention. However, a telling graph is a comparison between the median (middle) and the mean (average).

Check out the mean skew of these chart (all households) – real (inflation-adjusted) data. It shows how much faster the mean has grown over the median.

Income Skew in Percentage Terms

Income Skew in Dollars

Note the slopes on the lines in red that I added to the charts.

Since the year 2000, the mean (average) income fell from $76,180, to $71,274 (a decline of $4,906 or 6.44%).
Since the year 2000, the median income fell from $56,080 to $51,017 (a decline of $5,063 or 9.03%).

As I have stated repeatedly, Fed bubble-blowing tactics benefits those with first access to money (the banks and the already wealthy). From the mid-60s until the year 2000, at least most boats were rising.

Since the year 2000, however, both the mean and the median income has been sinking, but not at the same rate. Worse yet, that income decline does not even properly take into account rising sales taxes and property taxes!

Although the data cannot precisely answer my question "Income-Wise, What Percentage of People are Worse Off Now Than in 2000?", I believe it's safe to assume that the top 10% has not taken much of a hit at all (if any), while the top 1% gains year-in and year-out.

Yet, year-in and year-out a parade of Keynesian and Monetarist economic fools plead for more inflation to fix the problems.

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

Reader Question: "How Can One Calculate True Price Inflation?"

Posted: 24 Sep 2013 01:05 AM PDT

Reader Mel writes ...

Hello Mish

I really enjoy your blog. You provide a very interesting viewpoint. One question: I have seen an analysis based on the old Sears catalogs of 30-50 years that shows how much more an average income can buy today versus 30-50 years ago based on actual prices in the catalog. It is very convincing. Do you think that is a valid approach or not?

Keep up the good work,

Mel

Hello Mel

I cannot comment on the catalog because I have not seen it. However, I will suggest that many such comparisons that I have seen are invalid.

For example, I have seen reports comparing home prices and car prices today vs. the average house or car in 1920. But how valid is such an approach?

I suggest, not very. For example ...

How much house did you get in 1920 vs. today?
Did it have dual pane energy efficient windows? Appliances? Carpet? Cabinets?
How much electronics was in a car 50 years ago?

Would you even want to drive a 1920's car today? Legally, you probably couldn't, for safety reasons. Thus, all such comparisons are totally invalid.

Easy Comparisons

Food and energy costs can easily be compared.

I happen to know food prices exceptionally well. I worked in a grocery store as the night-manager for several years in high school and college.

I recall sales prices best because the meat manager was always bitching about how much money he was losing on them.

In 1969, whole chickens on sale were a loss leader at $0.21 per pound. I had farmers come into the store buying them, telling me they could not raise them for that price.

Flash forward to today: Whole chickens are on sale occasion for as low as $0.59 per pound (and I have seen $0.49). But let's be safe and assume today's sale price is $.69.

The price more than tripled, but over 45 years.

Similarly, a 1-poind loaf of generic white bread was something like $0.18. What is that today? I do not buy generic white bread, but a 1-pound whole-grain fresh artisan loaf is something like $2.69 not on sale.

Let's now compute the annualized rate of inflation using a Compound Annual Growth Rate Calculator.

Here is the result ....

Annualized Inflation - Chicken

Annualized Inflation - Bread

My bread example is very unfairly biased on the inflation side. Yet even so, the annualized rate of inflation is not through the roof.

Annualized Inflation - Gasoline

Gasoline is also an easy comparison. Other than a few additives, not much has changed over the years.

Please consider a chart from Inflation Data.

If one goes back to 1918, the annualized rate of inflation is about 2.84%. Instead, let's cherry-pick a starting point of $0.50 in 1974. Here is the result.

If I use 1981 as a starting point the result looks like this:

Clearly the starting point matters greatly. One can easily cherry-pick starting points on any item to suit whatever story they want to tell.

Government Manipulation

Prices are most distorted where there has been the most government interference. The standouts are health care, education, and housing.

How many "affordable home" programs did Congress sponsor? What was the result? How much government interference in health-care is there? What is the result? How many student aid programs do we have? And what is the result of that?

Calculating health-care costs is problematic, but tuition is easy.

Annualized Inflation - Tuition

I recall that University of Illinois tuition for an engineering degree was on the order of $250 per semester ($500 per year) my freshman year in Autumn 1971.

The preceding link shows in-state engineering tuition is now $16,556. And here is the result.

One can go through all sorts of calculations like this. However, it's important to make sure the comparisons are valid (unlike my bread example). It's also important to use the same starting year for all of the calculations (something I did not do because I do not know historical prices for all of the items I mentioned for every year).

I suggest that a few simple calculations like this are all it takes to dispel some wildly popular cult-CPI calculations from hyperinflationists who claim CPI inflation has been 8-13% per year since 1997.

Consumer Prices Poor Measure of Inflation

Regardless of which CPI-variant you believe is accurate, consumer prices are an extremely poor measure of inflation for several reasons.

There is no such thing as a standard basket of goods and services that pertains to everyone
Prices of many items cannot be accurately measured because technology changes over time. For example, many medical procedures in place today did not exist 10 years ago. And what about such things as dual-pane argon-gas-filled UV-protection glass windows (now common-place in homes)? How long ago was it when such a thing was not available at any price? What was the price of a cell phone in 1962?
Consumer price inflation completely ignores asset bubbles, and asset bubbles are the most common result of monetary printing. The housing bubble and the dot-com bubbles are proof enough. Housing is not even in the CPI, although rent is.

So how can one calculate true price-inflation?

The answer is: It's impossible. More importantly, it's an invalid measure of inflation, even if one could accurately measure prices. But that does not stop people from trying.

For further inflation reading and who benefits from it, please see ...

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

Damn Cool Pics

Jumbo Japanese Foods That Are Pretty Freaky
Products from the Past That Will Surprise You
LeeAnna Vamp as Puss in Boots at Comic Con 2013
Gamers are the New Professional Athletes [infographic]

Jumbo Japanese Foods That Are Pretty Freaky

Posted: 24 Sep 2013 06:08 PM PDT

These massive meals are known as "ohmori" and are even more over-the-top than the meals we are used to seeing from the United States.

Products from the Past That Will Surprise You

Posted: 24 Sep 2013 11:55 AM PDT

These products will make you wonder if anyone needs them.

LeeAnna Vamp as Puss in Boots at Comic Con 2013

Posted: 24 Sep 2013 10:41 AM PDT

LeeAnna Vamp is the hottest Puss in Boots ever.

Gamers are the New Professional Athletes [infographic]

Posted: 24 Sep 2013 10:04 AM PDT

Did you know League of Legends championship series is a recognized sport like the NHL and NBA? In just one year, MLG viewers went from 3.5 million to 11.7 million. MLG currently has over 8 million registered gamers and during the winter 2013 MLG tournament: more than 1,000 competitors will battle for $170,000. The matches will be broadcast to more than 170 countries. Wow! Now that gamers are officially recognized as professional athletes, I wonder how popular the sports will become. Check out this must-see infographic presented by Direct-Ticket to see the numbers on just how many fans the sport has.

Click on Image to Enlarge.

Via direct-ticket.net

miercuri, 25 septembrie 2013

Kill It on Facebook by Being TAGFEE

Kill It on Facebook by Being TAGFEE

Marketing like it's 2013

The (not so) curious case of Sue Bryce

Channeling your inner Sue by harnessing the power of TAGFEE

Be transparent and authentic

Be generous

Be fun

Be empathetic

Be exceptional

Paying to play

Additional resources

Seth's Blog : Beyond geography

Beyond geography

More Recent Articles

marți, 24 septembrie 2013

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Damn Cool Pics

Damn Cool Pics

Pagini

Persoane interesate

Arhivă blog

miercuri, 25 septembrie 2013

Marketing like it's 2013

The (not so) curious case of Sue Bryce

Channeling your inner Sue by harnessing the power of TAGFEE

Be transparent and authentic

Be generous

Be fun

Be empathetic

Be exceptional

Paying to play

Additional resources

More Recent Articles

marți, 24 septembrie 2013

Pagini

Persoane interesate

Arhivă blog

Subscribe to