Google Adsense

Latest Adjusted Search Share Results Have Google Down Just a Bit

Written on August 17, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: marketing

We all play the monthly search share game but it has become a bit more complicated as of late. We now have to pay attention to whose numbers are being considered and what they are using to measure this important metric. It used to be that we would take comScore at its word (which is admittedly a dangerous play) but other players like Chitika have raised the bar by at least playing in the same ballpark as comScore.

Now comScore is adjusting its measurement techniques. Both Chitika and comScore’s approaches are covered with the usual thoroughness that Danny Sullivan provides over at Search Engine Land. I recommend that you read both articles to get the big picture on the ‘new’ landscape of search share measurement.

As for the numbers for July based on the adjustments to comScores ‘core search’ analysis The Business Insider reports

According to the data, total US explicit core search volume increased 15.1% Y/Y in July, an acceleration from 10.8% growth in June. The July level was also above 2Q’s 7% growth.

Google domestic explicit core search market share was 65.8% in July, down slightly from 66.2% in June. Google domestic explicit core search volume growth of 16.9% Y/Y in July was an acceleration from June’s 12.7% growth and 2Q’s 9.1% growth.

Yahoo! domestic explicit core search market share increased to 17.1% in July from 16.7% in June. Yahoo! July explicit core search volume increased 1.8% Y/Y, an improvement from June’s 5.5% decline and 2Q’s 10.5% decline.

Microsoft sites’ domestic explicit core search market share stayed flat at 11.0% in July. Microsoft sites grew July explicit core search volume by 43.8% Y/Y vs. 46.6% growth in June and 42.2% growth in 2Q.

Ask Network domestic explicit core search market share stayed flat at 3.8% in July. Ask grew July explicit core search volume by 9.7% Y/Y, up from 5.7% growth in June and 3.9% growth in 2Q.

AOL July domestic explicit core search market share dropped slightly to 2.3% from 2.4% in June. AOL July explicit core search volume declined by 13.8% Y/Y vs a 16.3% decline in June and a 19.9% decline in 2Q.

So what’s the takeaway here? It appears as if Google is stuck. Maybe there is no more room at the top and the old axiom of ‘what goes up must come down’ is starting to take hold here. Maybe it’s time for Google to advertise and stop being so smug about its dominance in the space. Maybe it’s just the way it is and Google is trying to hedge its bets by branching out into other areas.

All of these are possible but the reality is that Google’s lead in search share is still dominant even if they have slipped a bit. Everyone will want to bury the Goog but unless there is truly a better mousetrap out there that is unlikely in the foreseeable future.

So what is your take? Does any competitor REALLY stand a chance to knock Google off its pedestal? Even if Google slipped even lower in market share in the US would there be cause for alarm or is it just part of the process? Do you see a competitor of any real worth on the horizon?

View original here:
Latest Adjusted Search Share Results Have Google Down Just a Bit

Hyperlocal’s Patch Notches 100th Site

Written on August 17, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, marketing

Aol. (folks, that is not a typo that is the new logo!) has reached a milestone with its Patch hyperlocal service. Patch, which was purchased by Aol. (not a typo, really!) in June 2009 has created its 100th ‘Patch’ (congratulations, Morristown, NJ ,which is where I was born a real long time ago) and is getting ready for a major ‘patch push’ by the end of the year.

TechCrunch tells us some more

When AOL bought hyperlocal news site in June, 2009, it covered five towns in Connecticut and New Jersey. On Tuesday, it will open its 100th Patch, and by the end of the year it plans to open 400 more for a total of 500.

…….. its main focus is covering local news and creating an in-depth directory of local businesses and places of interest. Each Patch covers a small town with a population between 15,000 and 75,000, places like Fairfield, Connecticut, Mill Valley, California, Scarsdale, New York, and Morristown, New Jersey (which will be the 100th Patch).

So what’s the big deal you ask? It’s about local and the continuing emphasis on the fact that people’s lives happen on a local level more than it does on an Internet level. No matter how long you spend online and ‘talk’ with your ‘friends’ from around the world you have to go outside to go to a store that is, gulp, amongst the commoners of your town or city. Oh, so you only do delivery right to your door? Well, then you are likely to do a local search when looking for another option so even though you are ‘jet setting ‘round the world’ in your PJ’s you are still a local citizen whether you admit it or not.

This sudden realization that the world wide web is the most powerful local business tool seems to be some kind of epiphany to the masses. Of course, this is nothing new but the attention being given to local is. Maybe instead of the “Year of Mobile” we should be touting the “Year of Local”?

Local news is the front facing reason for Patch to interest people but the real power lies in its quest to challenge the likes of Yellow Pages providers and Google maps Place Pages with its growing database of local businesses. Of course, there are chances for that local business to advertise in Patch and then you have the magic ‘R’ word (revenue) which is why Patch, or anything else, exists on the Internet.

So far it has 105,000 local listings, and is building out more every day. Before Patch launches in a town, it creates a directory of the local businesses, parks, hospitals, schools, and other public places. It launches with about 1,200 for each town, which get entered into Patch’s structured database. Each place gets its own profile page on Patch, with a description and highly detailed data such as teacher/student ratios for schools or suggested dress code and parking options for restaurants.

Take a look at this listing for a restaurant in the high end town of Chappaqua, NY (home of the Clintons if you care about those things). It’s pretty impressive and a nice supplement / complement to a web page. maybe Google’s Place Pages should take note?

Now let’s not forget that this is an Aol. project so it has its trouble and its detractors. Among those most unhappy with the Patch system are the ‘journalists’ used for reporting news. Apparently, Patch isn’t the greatest paying gig but when was the local paper a place for big time writers to make a living anyway?

If Patch can get to 500 sites by the end of the year there needs to be quite a push so we will keep an eye out on just how this plays out. In the meantime, if you are a local business in a Patch town maybe its something you need to consider for your advertising rather than the, gulp, yellow pages.

Any thoughts?

Read the original here:
Hyperlocal’s Patch Notches 100th Site

Google Ventures Invests In Paid Search Play

Written on July 21, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: marketing

You have to hand it to Google. They’re not afraid to put their efforts somewhere that will cause a ruckus among those concerned about whether Google is ‘too invested’ in its own business, so to speak. In the latest case of “We dare you to tear this one apart”, Google Ventures has invested in Trada which is an interesting approach to paid search campaign management that is directed at the most underserved of the market, the SMB.

TechCrunch reports

Google’s AdWords may be one of the most successful products in Internet history, but it’s fair to say that most small and medium-sized business owners aren’t exactly experts when it comes to writing their ad copy or picking out keywords — in fact, there’s a whole industry of consultants and firms who specialize in doing just that. Enter Trada, a startup that launched in March that’s looking to help turn the industry on its head with the power of crowdsourcing. The company just closed a $5.75 million Series C round of funding led by Google Ventures, with participation from previous investor Foundry Group.

Essentially the company crowdsources the account management of campaigns so that there are up to 25 ‘experts’ working on an account at once using Trada’s systems. At this point some of you are thinking “What in the world? Why would anyone want to do that?”. Trada assures people that their experts are vetted through being Google AdWords certified and passing a 45 minute exam from he company. They also receive scores as to their effectiveness so users can decide whether to keep someone or not.

Sure sounds interesting. Here is a video to explain the process.

I won’t go into any great detail on just how the system works. The TechCrunch post does a good job of that. What is important to note is that this service is provided across Google, Yahoo and bing platforms so by giving the end user the option that should keep some of the critics at bay.

What I find interesting is that Google obviously recognizes just how much money they are leaving on the table by not giving SMB’s the chance to truly compete in the paid search game. Anyone who deals with SMB’s or has looked the market always drools at the sheer numbers of them but the education of the group combined with notoriously tight wallets makes it hard to get scale in this space. Google knows it and is willing to invest in this type of game-changer while obviously awaiting the industry and government challenges that are sure to happen.

So what’s your opinion of Google getting into the paid search campaign management game? Is it good, bad or a non-issue?

See the original post:
Google Ventures Invests In Paid Search Play

Up to 25% of Yahoo Search is Now bing-ified

Written on July 21, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: book, marketing

Last week Yahoo sent a letter to their search advertisers about a rather large window for when they can anticipate the integration of bing. In a post yesterday on the Yahoo blog they went a little further and said that they were currently testing the results. Here is what they said

We’ve started testing organic (also referred to as algorithmic) and paid search listings from Microsoft for up to 25 percent of Yahoo! Search traffic in the U.S. The primary change for these tests is that the listings are coming from Microsoft. However, the overall page should look the same as the Yahoo! Search you’re used to – with rich content and unique tools and features from Yahoo!. If you happen to fall into our tests, you might also notice some differences in how we’re displaying select search results due to a variety of product configurations we are testing.

Here is the screenshot of a page and the ‘changes’ that have occurred. To the untrained eye (and even the trained one) noticing this difference is well, next to impossible unless you had memorized the result set returned by Yahoo. I doubt that happens much.

Since 25% isn’t a real large number your chances of seeing this out in the wild is not so strong. Also, unless you are an advertiser or you are a previously high ranked organic site in the Yahoo results this ‘change’ won’t even be noticed. Interestingly enough, this entire change over from Yahoo to bing search is quite disruptive to the industry side of the coin while probably going completely unnoticed by the vast majority of Yahoo search users.

So now that we are on the cusp of this ‘historic moment’ how do you really view this play? Will bing being the back end of Yahoo search make a difference for those who use Yahoo as a search engine? Will regular users notice and are they even aware that this tectonic shift has happened?

From the little guys’ point of view this is a non-event as long as the search function in Yahoo is not interrupted at great length. This shift effects 13 or so out of a hundred searchers according to the latest search shares.

The real impact is to the advertisers and until they squeal this is going to be a non-issue in my book.

Go here to see the original:
Up to 25% of Yahoo Search is Now bing-ified

foursquare Follows Twitter’s Footsteps with Search Engine Talks

Written on July 19, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: book, marketing, seo

When Twitter finally got to the point where it realized that there needed to be a next step (whether they felt ready or not they were told they were ready by everyone and their brother) they turned to deals with the search engines. It’s a rite of passage for businesses t reach the level where they can even be thought of as a viable source of information that the engines would actually pay to have.

It appears as if foursquare is about there already. The Telegraph has the scoop

Speaking exclusively to The Telegraph, Dennis Crowley, Foursquare’s co-founder, said that his company was in talks with “everyone” in the search space – including all three major players: Google, Yahoo!, and Microsoft about a data partnership.

“Our data generates hugely interesting trends which would enrich search,” Crowley said.

We can anonymise data and use it to show venues which are trending at that moment. Twitter helped the world and the search engines know what people are talking about. Foursquare would allow people to search for the types of place people are going to – and where is trending – not what.”

Whether or not you are buying into the ‘check-in’ craze this is important to marketers since foursquare is showing signs of taking off. It recently reached the 2 million account plateau just three months after it had hit the 1 million mark. We have seen this kind of hockey stick adoption rate in the past so it is best for foursquare to strike while the iron is hot.

Of course, any deals with the engines are gambles because of the fear that the location based game is still very wide open and plans by social giants like Facebook and Google themselves could put a dent in the idea that foursquare could dominate the space.

Right now its biggest threat is Gowalla but this space is so new and is developing so rapidly that there could be an unknown lurking in the bushes that could come in and do something different. In fact, one of the concerns about the whole location based craze right now is just what can be done AFTER someone checks in and gets excited about being the mayor of a place that they are visiting. Foursquare is making strides in this area which will likely determine just how far they can go in the future.

For now though it’s all good as Crowley says about his current competition

“We are more social than Gowalla and ultimately have different visions moving forward. They are excited about different things.”

So this will be worth keeping an eye on as more and more elements of search move away from the traditional blue text link. Real estate on the first page of SERP’s (search engine results pages) for anything with a location element are already crowded with maps and seven packs and more. It sure will keep the SEO community on its toes as it tries to keep pace with the change and figure out just what a search result is going to look like in certain circumstances in the very near future.

Where are you on the geo-location craze? Are you active? Passive? Waiting to see what happens? Let us know where you are at .

View original here:
foursquare Follows Twitter’s Footsteps with Search Engine Talks

International CRO - Choosing the Wrong Colors and Other Mishaps

Written on July 11, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: seo

Posted by Sam Crocker

Good morning Mozzers!

Today we’re going to walk you through some rather basic but far-too-oft overlooked conversion factors specifically for international SEO. Anyone who has had the pleasure of using ecommerce sites in multiple countries may have noticed that as a general rule the sites look pretty similar if not identical. Today we are going to walk you through some of the pros and cons of this approach and how you might actually benefit from mixing things up for different audiences in different countries.

WARNINGS:

1. There is something to be said for having a similar site, brand, and feel that can be recognized all over the world.

2. Some CMS systems do not allow for easy changes to be made for different versions of the site.

3. With Google Translation, many folks are becoming less interested in having multiple sites anyhow.

4. More sites mean more potential problems and things to worry about.

Now, with these warnings out of the way let’s first jump into some of the potential benefits, and then look at some examples.

Is it time to reassess your linking strategy?

Written on July 8, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: searchengineguide, seo

by Mike Moran

I wrote a post in this space over a year ago that advised small businesses on how to attract links to their Web sites. In that article, I offered the somewhat contrarian advice that spending lots of time begging sites to link to you might be time better spent building content that entices them to do the same thing, but without you having to ask.

Recently, someone commented on that post, asking why their link building efforts aren’t working and wondering how to do better. Here is part of what was asked:

I built this site over 60 days ago, spent 45 days linking with search engines, Squidoo sites, my blogs, etc, but now when I do a link search thru webmaster tools, i see 128 links, all mostly from a few sites that i know. I don’t see anything from pages that i purposely linked to mine, and what about the submission to 800 search engines and 45 directoriess a month ago. I get email every day that I have been added, but still only 128 links. If i do this same link search in Yahoo, I get a totally different number and higher.

So, link building, done the old-fashioned tin cup way, can be quite difficult. As the questioner has learned, Google doesn’t like to come clean about how many links you really have. Yahoo! tells you a lot more, but with the move to Bing, it’s hard to know how long Yahoo! Site Explorer will be supported. So, it’s not easy for you to keep track of your links and it might start getting harder.

Image by Sifu Renka via Flickr

And why are you keeping track of links anyway? The SEO gurus tell you it is all about link juice, that elusive quality that search engines assess in determining the quality of your page. For Google, that algorithm is called PageRank, and the gurus tell us that the quantity and quality of the links to your pages pass that coveted link juice, which provides Google the information it needs to know which pages shine above the rest. They don’t merely contain the search terms being searched for, but they are good pages because they attract links from other places. The gurus are right about all of this, but they go off the rails when they suggest that you go out of your way to get people to link to your site through begging for links. It can work, but that kind of thinking can quickly get out of control.

I am more and more frequently hearing about companies buying links to improve their link juice—some lament that there is no other way to do it. You should realize that if the search engines get wind of what you are doing, you will be penalized, but what’s more, if buying links actually works, the search engines will start deemphasizing links as part of their ranking algorithm. The engines are already beginning to look at social media activity as part of how they decide a page’s quality, so sites with many links that get few views, comments, tweets, and other measures of quality will begin to look suspect. Old-fashioned link campaigns will also result in links that fit the same low-quality profile that paid links do.

So, what’s a marketer to do? I hate to keep repeating the same old shopworn advice, but you need to focus on your content. If you create content that is truly helpful to your customers, you should expect sites to link to it without being asked. And you’ll get the social media activity around that content that further proves to the search engines that your pages are the ones to favor in the rankings. Instead of figuring out how to manipulate your links, it might be time to break down and actually give searchers and search engines what they want.

Be sure and visit our small business news site.

Read the original here:
Is it time to reassess your linking strategy?

Marketers Respond to the Apple v. Flash Battle

Written on May 21, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: book, marketing

In the past few weeks the back and forth between Apple and Adobe about the merits and demerits of Flash technology use has gone from bad to worse. Bitter rhetoric and open letters to about each other played out like a high school romance gone bad. Needless to say you would hope that grown-ups might act, well, more grown up but this is the Internet era after all and sometimes it’s what you say over how you say it that wins the day.

Evidence of how Steve Jobs’ tirade against the evils of Flash and Apple’s adoption of HTML5 as the future of all things Apple might have worked is becoming apparent. Who says throwing a public hissy fit can’t help business?

The Wall Street Journal explains just what impact is starting to be seen in the market and it’s not great news for Adobe.

The punches that Apple Inc. is throwing in its fight against Adobe Systems Inc. are beginning to land, prompting some companies to shift away from Adobe’s video and animation technology and forcing Web designers to work with competing standards.

Programmers and Web designers say clients increasingly are asking that their websites or applications be compatible with Apple’s iPhone and iPad. Those sites can’t be built with Adobe’s Flash technology, which is used widely for online video and animation but which Apple has banned from its devices.

“Since the iPad came out we’ve had a lot of clients say that they just don’t want Flash on their sites,” said Chantelle Simoes, vice president at Ninth Degree Inc., a design firm in Dana Point, Calif., which has built websites for Sanyo and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. If current trends continue, Ms. Simoes said, her 10-person firm will need to hire people familiar with Apple’s development tools.

So, if you are Jobs and Apple you gotta feel like this battle is moving in the right direction. If you are Adobe and the Flash community there may be some hand-wringing going on as this plays out over time.

Does this sound like an over reaction to the early market response to the ‘Flash War”? For some maybe but when you have major players like Sports Illustrated adjusting their strategies to fit Apple’s view of the world you have to take notice.

On Wednesday, Sports Illustrated, whose website uses Flash extensively, unveiled a Web app built with HTML 5. “We’re going forward on more than one front,” said Terry McDonnell, editor of Sports Illustrated Group, a unit of Time Warner Inc. “The last thing that we want to do is make some decision that we’re not sure about.”

While that means having to maintain multiple versions of its properties, Mr. McDonnell said it doesn’t make sense to settle on one technology because Sports Illustrated needs to be able to reach readers no matter what device they use.

This kind of market reaction to embrace a relatively new and under developed ‘standard’ like HTML5 speaks volumes about who has clout in the market place.

Waiting in the wings is Google who is promising to cover all bases with Android devices. If that truly takes place then the gloves are off and confusion will be the order of the day. Developers and designers will be forced to put together two versions of everything they do so they can do just as SI did to ensure they reached everyone and not just one platform’s users.

Where this goes is anyone’s guess but due to the overwhelming adoption of the iPhone and now the iPad one has to think that HTML5 is going to ‘grow up’ real quickly right before our eyes. Flash, on the other hand, will be fighting to secure its future in the online world.

Who’s operating from the position of power here? You tell us.

Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community

More here:
Marketers Respond to the Apple v. Flash Battle

Google Takes Aim and Fires at Apple

Written on May 21, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: marketing

As one might expect, Google is pretty confident when it comes to just about everything. You have to be to do what they have done in a short period of time relative to most business success stories. Of course, taking the lead position in the development of the Internet Age will do that, won’t it.

Google also is very interested in maintaining that position as the shift toward a more robust mobile computing and communication world is underway (it may even be for real this time!). So when Google’s Vic Gundotra spoke yesterday at the Google I/O developer conference he left little room for speculation as to Google’s intentions for the Android OS and who it is looking to ‘take out’. At about the 3 minute mark of the video below Gundotra takes aim directly at, you guessed it, Apple.

So we should be looking for a true battle of these titans because Google is making a dent in the valuable market of mobile communications. They are going about it in a very different way than Apple which comes as no surprise. What may be a surprise, however, is the speed with which Google and Android are impacting the space.

I know many iPhone app developers who shrug off the Android’s advances and feel that Apple will win the day in the long run. They may be right. What is not going to happen, however, is that Apple will have the runaway success many had predicted. Apple’s first position in the market is their strength right now but Google’s open approach and ability to leverage all of its other market leading capabilities are hard to compete with over time. Couple that with an aggressive stance on going after Apple and the way Steve Jobs views the world and we are in for quite a show.

Who will come out on top? Let’s hear your thoughts.

See original here:
Google Takes Aim and Fires at Apple

Social Media in the B2B World: A Talk with Hoover’s Tim Walker

Written on May 4, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: book, marketing

From time to time we like to take a break here at Marketing Pilgrim and talk about the actual practice or actually “doing” social media and search in the real world. Sure it’s fun to talk about ideas, news and theory all day but in the end if there is no action attached to it then, well, you just talked about a lot of stuff. How this plays out in the real world gets too little attention and we like to talk to those that are in the weeds every day for perspective.

I recently “talked” via e-mail with Tim Walker, social media manager for Hoover’s. Hoover’s is a Dun & Bradstreet company that provides detailed company and industry information to the business community. I had heard Tim speak at an event last year and liked his take on things. Of course, working for one of the largest B2B information services makes social media a bit different than trying to make the next great viral video to promote some product. Here’s Tim’s take on his work at Hoover’s and the industry in general.

Please describe your role with Hoovers and give a brief description of the business.

My title at Hoover’s is Social Media Manager, which means that I help with both strategic direction and tactical implementation for all of our customer-facing social media efforts, particularly on the marketing side.

Hoover’s is the world’s top publisher of business information about companies, industries, and the people who lead them. It was an independent company from its founding in 1990 until Dun & Bradstreet acquired it in 2003. Now we combine both our own industry expertise – embodied in our 80-person Editorial department – with the unrivaled breadth of D&B’s information on companies worldwide.

How long have you been in the Internet / social media space? How long has Hoover’s been involved?

As I see it, my involvement in social media started in the late 1990s, when I moderated an international listserv on current affairs. My tenure as an editor at Hoover’s – which publishes the vast majority of its information via the Web – began in 2000. I started my personal blog in 2005 and my blog for Hoover’s (hooversbiz.com) in 2007.

Hoover’s was very early getting online: having been launched in 1990 to produce reference manuals (which we still sell to libraries), we began to publish company profiles on Compuserve and AOL as early as 1994.

Did you initiate the programs at Hoover’s or did you take the wheel when things were under way?

A friend of mine in the company started our Twitter account (@Hoovers), and a group of editors started the blog at Bizmology.com. Otherwise, I’ve had a larger or smaller role in most aspects of our social media presence (and I’ve been running the @Hoovers account for nearly two years).

What have been the biggest success thus far?

I would say our involvement with Twitter, which has allowed us to interact with many customers, prospects, and other interested parties on the fly, and which has brought us positive attention from Mashable and others.

Have you had any ‘flops with a resounding thud’ that you are willing to share?

Had them? Yes. Willing to share them? Less so.

The key to succeeding in social media, I think, is to keep evolving – just as the social networks and tools themselves do. You do your homework in advance, hopefully without falling into analysis-paralysis, and then you make an honest effort to get the thing to work. When it doesn’t work – and some things won’t – you retool and try again.

What are the most effective social media outlets for your space and how does your space differ from others?

Twitter has been effective for us, and we’ve begun to see some pickup from Facebook. Many B2B companies like us have also had good success with blogs, which is an area we expect to build out in the future.

The key difference for our market is that we’re B2B. Plenty of things in social media work just the same for B2B as for B2C, but some things don’t. You can’t expect to sell business information the same way you’d sell lipstick.

Are there any companies outside of the usual suspects (Comcast, Dell etc etc) that you feel are doing a solid job using social media to advance their business?

I’ll steal a line from my friend Bernie Borges of Find and Convert by citing Indium Corporation, which has been very successful using blogs to sell . . . solder paste.

The moral of the story: don’t limit your thinking about what can and can’t work in social media. Find your audience and serve them, and you won’t go wrong.

What do you see as the most important aspect of the space for the next year? If you would like to venture a 5 year guess feel free as well.

The biggest thing, I think, is that companies will be far less interested in the hype – and anti-hype – around social media, and far more interested in how social media does or doesn’t deliver results for their business. It’s time for everybody to get down to work.

What can we look forward to hearing from Hoover’s in the next year or so?

We’re doing lots of things to make sure that our users can get the right information when, where, and how they want it. For example, we just launched a great app called Near Here (http://hooversmobile.com/) for the iPhone; it allows road-warrior salespeople to find prospects in their vicinity and then access the relevant company and people information so that they can drum up more business on the fly. We’ve also just implemented a major upgrade to our subscriber platform, and we continue to improve the ways that users can access our information from other platforms, especially the major CRMs.

We expect to continue this kind of product innovation going forward, just as we expect to keep improving the mix of our social media efforts to better serve our audience. Stay tuned!

Thanks to Tim for taking the time to talk to us here at Marketing Pilgrim. My biggest takeaway is his sage advice to stop talking about social media and start doing social media. In fact, if you think you are “doing social media” well, let us know and maybe we’ll feature your efforts for the rest of the Marketing Pilgrim audience to see.

Read more from the original source:
Social Media in the B2B World: A Talk with Hoover’s Tim Walker