I decided to add this note at the beginning of this post. Please understand while there is a ton of fact in this post it is to be read as a form of satire. Many did not seem to grasp that, hence my addition of this notification.

Sometimes it seems that despite owning one of the biggest SEO Companies in the world that Google has it in for all of us. They have waged war on buying links, crippled paid blogging services by nuking their networks page rank and have even banned web sites of major corporations. They constantly seem to push a covert mantra that all SEO’s are spammers unless they “just create content and let the system work” or some version there of. Personally I think it is getting old! So on behalf of my fellow SEO’s here is my direct letter of truce to Google, let’s see if anyone cares.

Dear Google,

As a person who has been optimizing content for Search Engines before Google was a search engine let me say I admire the work you have done and the industries you have created that have benefited so many of us. That said I and many other SEO’s resent the fact that you have worked so hard to make our lives miserable, spread propaganda about us and generally blamed us for your search engines limitations.

To be blunt every time a person runs a search and can’t find something they are looking for it is not because some evil SEO have optimized spam web pages. Often it is a failure of Google to return a relevant result and it is also at times a searcher who is, well, not capable of running a proper web search.

The following is a list of why Google could not exist with out SEOs

• The Long Tail – Right now searchers are beginning to search with more and more 3 and 4 word queries, to find specific content. It is SEOs that are out here doing deep data mining to find out what these people are looking for and creating specific content to meet those needs. Without us building that content and optimizing it such queries would now still be bringing your users the same 30 – 40 websites that show up for most of the larger terms and giving them the poor result that led them to go to long queries in the first place.

• Someone to Blame – Honestly with out us optimizing content when your algorithm takes a dump who would you blame? Who would you point the finger at? As mentioned above if we did not optimize tail search terms your results would be worse and we would not be here as your whipping board.

• Links – Honestly you would not be able to find much of the quality content that allows you to sell those wonderful ads (that you arbitrarily make one person pay more for then the next for reasons only you know) that make you those billions of dollars. Most site owners are simply unable to understand the nuts of bolts of making content indexable, findable and friendly to your bots with out our guidance.

• Even the Real Spammers Helped – Seriously when your first few versions of search were released they had holes one could drive a truck through or perhaps a cruise ship would have been more accurate. With out spammers you would have never improved your product to the level you have reached to day.

• We Must be Profitable – As an SEO I must either make my content or the content of my clients profitable. To do this I must have valid and useful content and my optimizing must match the search terms to content the user wants. If I simply get a page about Panda Bears ranked number one for the term “animals” it does my client or my own company no good at all. SEO’s do not try to rank irrelevant content as you sometimes infer, we purposely rank the best content we can develop to match the users need based on what they search for. In short the best and most accurate content online today is being created by professional SEOs.

At this time I would like to propose a truce, though we are sure you have no interest in doing so, as you need us as much to have someone to blame as you do for the other reasons I have pointed out. Still do you think you could tone it down a little? I mean we both know that you need us to make your search engine the best it can be so why are you always driving that multi colored bus over us?

In conclusion you built the system that values links over content so don’t blame us for using it that way. We are only doing what is necessary to help you provide relevant search engine results to your users. Sure we profit by doing so but based on the current financial reporting you are providing it is clear you are profiting a lot more then most of us.

Sincerely,

Jack Spirko

To my fellow Internet Marketers, so anyway I am sure I missed a few things. I am sure I missed some reasons why we are a far better friend to Google then an enemy as we are often portrayed. Please chime in below with your thoughts on this and point out the other ways that SEOs have made Google better then it would be with out us.

Now before you flay me, before you explain how they have purchased huge social sites (YouTube springs to mind) understand this is not a white paper, not an industry brief, no it is simply an speculative opinion. My first speculation is that I am correct about where social media is going and my second speculation is that Google’s staff is smarter then I am and can predict even more. When I put those two speculations together it forms an very interesting view of the future.

Here is my theory in a nut shell. Search Engine Journal just reported that Google now controls 69% of online advertising. When any company gets to such a dominant position it is not always the champaign and happy times one would expect. Wall Street is a picky mistress and wants growth all the time, every time and at the expense of all other things. Growing when you own a market can be difficult at least growing any faster then the market itself and when a slump hits, even a tiny one you have it real hard.

Again not saying Google won’t continue to make billions, it is the growth of those billions that is getting harder to create.

Now further we must simply accept that Google has never built anything that has really been successful from the ground up other then their search engine. Everything else you can name that they have really succeeded with has been developed by others. The list is long,

• Blogger
• YouTube
• Google Docs
• adSense
• adWords (yep that too)
• Double Click
• And it goes on

Now the problem for Google and their growth long term is that, unlike search, social media is both easier to build platforms for and easier to innovate with. Social Networking is in its’ infancy right now it won’t just be more clone sites in the future exploiting niches (though there will be many of those – successful and flops). No, social platforms will get cooler, more specialized and honestly evolve to change the way people communicate, find jobs, gain education, earn incomes and much more.

One could state that this has already happened. I mean you can get a 100K job at The Ladders, talk to Japan for Free on Skype, find a date on MySpace and get referrals for your next big deal at LinkedIn. All while running a million dollar company from a small home office. Today is a lot different then say 1998 or to really make a point, say 1988.

What this should mean to Google though is growth of market share for the next 10 and 20 years is going to be hard fought. If we are using the web (which was little more then BBSs in 1990 accessed on 14.4 modems) to do these things today, what will tomorrow bring? My guess is some of the innovations we will see in the next 24 months have not even reached a “thought form” stage yet. I bet Google knows this too in fact I am sure they know far more then I do about it.

Now while Google can buy up companies and hire bright minds with something like social media it is going to be driven entrepreneurs coupled with smart programmers and marketers that change the landscape over the next two decades. While most web marketers are not thinking in decades yet, Google must be. As a darling of Wall Street they have to think about this quarter, this fiscal year and their long term plans as well.

I see a future with hundreds of highly successful social networking applications and many versions and niche specific applications of each. Billions of people interacting via hundreds of applications a genie that can never go back into the bottle. Unlike search where there could be a clear winner, social media is to user specific to be funneled down to a “Big Four” which everyone knows is honestly a “Big One”.

So does this scare Google? In my opinion it should. I am not saying that is should make them fear the end of an empire but perhaps the end of an ever expanding empire. In short what I am saying is the social media empire is beginning a growth curve that Google can’t either buy or innovate their way ahead of. Bold statement? I really don’t think it is, it is just my faith in the thousands of innovators out there that are building the future of the Internet.

In conclusion I would like to do one more bit of speculation in a manner anyone looking to the future should do.  Let us look into the past.  If you had to pick the “Google Analog” for say the period of 1980 – 2000, who would it be?  During those two decades who was the “800 Pound Gorilla” of Technology, the Stock everyone had to own and  company that simply could not be beaten?  While you may disagree, the numbers would prove it was Microsoft.

So is Microsoft in danger of Chapter 7 anytime soon?  Will founder Bill Gates be forced to give up his jet or private island retreats?   Of course not!  Yet what kind of growth does Microsoft have today, compared to Google?  How many bright minds want to work there as a “dream job” today?  How often are they now publicly lauded for innovation, creation and changing the way the world does business?  For younger marketers it may be hard to remember but Microsoft was “The Company” just a decade ago.

Then came the browser and even though Microsoft still controls most browsers (for now) it is Google that turned the Browser into a vehicle for a multi billion dollar empire.  When we look at Microsoft today, do we see the Google of 2018?  Now I doubt we can draw an exact analogy, however as anyone who has ever read a mutual fund prospectus can tell you, “while past performance is no guarantee of future results, history has shown it to be a strong indicator”.

Recently I published a very popular post on 20 Social Networking Sites that are good for building links. I put a lot of work into the research behind that project and isolated 20 great Social Sites that actually were useful for good old fashioned link building in the true SEO sense of the terms. Of course it was submitted it to some Social Sites and it did well, so far in fact as of right now it has

• 74 Diggs
• 51 Sphinns
• 19 Plugs
• 34 Mixxes
• 49 Propellers

Now that is a good mix of social sites and not a bad result for an SEO type post especially on Digg and Propeller. The comments were mostly good too, however, one poster took a big exception to my suggestion to self submit to these sites and just basically said it was all spam.

Part of his comment was,

“It’s best to use your brain and not try to exploit community sites in this way. It’s bad for the internet and generally unethical. You’ll accumulate a net negative of goodwill from the internet’s population in the long run.”

If you want to read my direct response just go to the original post and read it there. My question for people today though is, is he right in any way? Is it some how wrong to self submit? I personally do not think so but would like to hear others opinions on this.

My view is as follows considering that if I have that young lady on the left do my submissions I will get great results. As that is the case I think we can agree all things are not “fair and democratic” in the land of social media utopia the way some hard core users seem to claim. In some of these sites you are honestly forced to either get someone to submit for you which I have done on more then one occasion or to submit under a fake name, I am also guilty of that at times. If that is the way of the community just adapting to it makes sense.

That said I do not see why we should see self submission or client submission to a Social Site as being some sort of “evil”. The problem with that is we are judging intent vs. judging content. This is the same moronic logic behind “hate crime laws”. When you submit to these sites it would make sense for the content rather then the intent to be judged.

In many sites that is the case. No one gets bent when you self submit to Sphinn or BiggItUp, of course they are almost 100% internet marketers. Yet look how fast Mixx is taking off, I get great results self submitting to Mixx and no haters are bashing me there. They judge my content and love it or hate it and simply vote as they feel they should. Mixx is not now full of viagra postings and such on the popular pages but my posts have several times made popular there. I self submit to Stumble too, no anger, no bashing and Stumble has great content.

To me social networking has a greater future if we judge the content rather then intent. Who cares if someone wants exposure the “real news” is so driven by PR Firms anyway much of the “pure content” many members are trying to protect is every bit if not more promotional then that of a small business or typical blogger.

So what do you think? Is it OK to self submit or is it evil? I am not asking what works better but only is it right or wrong to do it? Does it pollute the web in some evil way or are a bunch of 16 year olds just hateful of anything with the dirty word “profit” associated with it?

OK so do we really need yet another social bookmarking online community (aka a Digg Clone)? At Franklin Spirko we decided that yes indeed we do and hence the launch of HatedOrLoved.com

The reasoning was simple, there are so many sites like Digg, Mixx, etc that utilize a community approach to share news, stories and just plain cool stuff. In theory they work great and spam is kept down because the community can “bury” (or what ever the equivalent may be for the site) the story and push it off the popular page and out of the normal listings. The theory behind this functionality seems solid enough but the reality is in practice many good (content wise) stories are buried.

These stories could be about god forbid on Digg, SEO, and labeled as spam simply because of the subject. This is one of the factors behind the success of Sphinn. Yet it is not just internet marketers that are beaten down on many social sites. Perhaps the story is political and against the majority thought on the site so it gets crushed. Why should this be? Just because a story is an alternate view does not make it spam, trash or poor content.

So the concept of Hated or Loved is remarkably simple. You don’t bury a story you don’t like, you “Hate It” which is far more and expression of opinion then a false need to push a story 40 other people found worthy out of the popular results. When we are done with our next set of modifications you will be able to view not just upcoming and popular stories but hated stories as well.

So each day you can check out the most hated and loved stories online, we though the concept was kind of cool so our new Web Developer (Bobby Wilson) went to work less then a week ago and we have the Beta (very beta) site up already. We invite you to sign up, sumit your content and play around with some hatred and love.

A few things to note about the site for right now

• When I say Beta I mean Beta the “Featured Hated” does not function yet. It requires a lot of work to basically recreate the algorithms for popular on the other side of things. So ignore the “Top 10 Hated for Now” it is just a place holder.

• The avatar function is not working right yet so you can’t upload a picture with your profile just yet. Bobby is working on it, the platform we are using is on PHPDug, if anyone has over come this issue we would love to hear from you about it.

• This site is designed to be SEO and Marker Friendly you most certainly are welcome to submit both third party and your own stories. We do not use nofollow and we do have permalinks for each story. So feel free to link build away in your submitting.

• When you find a bug let us know about it but give us some time. Again right now we are in really a pre beta mode but wanted to start getting some SEO exposure and some founding members right away so we decided to open up the site.

• We are looking for help with this project. I need both contributors and probably moderators in the near future if you want to be considered for either let me know. If you have a blog and blog about solid content (in any niche) we will consider adding your feed to the site for automatic inclusion. If your are interested just post your blog link in the comments and we will evaluate your site for auto inclusion.

So please let us know what you think of this new concept for a site, let us know your ideas to make the site better and by all means let us know what you love and what you hate.

~ Jack Spirko

Most site owners tend to build links in a very one dimensional way. What I mean is that they are prone to building all their links directly to the target page they are attempting to rank for a given key word or phrase in the search engine results. What I mean by this is easily illustrated in the diagram below. Do not give much thought to the sources of the links in the diagram below as they are only examples of possible sources of commonly created links.

The problem with the above approach to link building is it does nothing to boost the power of the pages giving your target page the links. This will in time require far more total links to produce a desired ranking in Google or other major search engines. In fact many sources of such links like Squidoo, Social Bookmarks or Articles in well respected directories are only effective because the sites they are hosted on have a given amount of link value simply because they are on large and trusted sites.

Smart search engine optimization experts know that such inherent link value can easily be increased by simply interlinking these sources. In other words by linking an article or press release published on a well respected site to a page on a site like Squidoo or Hubpages the power of the Squidoo or Hubpage is exponentially increased over the power of either of them individually. You can then pass on that power to your target web page. With this in mind look at how one might structure the same 7 links that we looked at in the first diagram.

The diagram below consolidates the power of 5 of these links into two main pages that I call “power heads”. By taking this approach each of the pages builds increased power as the total web structure is created.

Again do not put to much emphasis upon which sites are where in this diagram. There are many sources of such links including links on partner websites, natural links, viral links etc. The point here is to think about the term “deep linking” in a new way. Typically “deep links” are considered links that link into sub pages of your websites rather then just the home or primary pages of the site. Of course this is very important, however, my suggestion is to also think about “deep links” on the other side of the equation.

In addition to “depth” into your site intentionally build “depth” back into the external side of your link networks. Taking this approach in addition to conventional link building results in much better and much faster search engine rankings for highly competitive key words and phrases.

When this approach is applied to “long tail” phrases it is particularly deadly! Doing so not only often results in landing your target page at position number one in the SERPs, it will often end up with many of the pages where you build your links in the top ten results as well yielding not just positive results but high “frequency” in the top ten results. In other words if people end up on your web page great but if not they may indeed end up on an article that will refer them to you or perhaps a press release or some other content that can push them on to your target content.

Working with this type of link building on long tail terms is also an immense learning experience. As you build this external link depth and watch the SERPs change a very telling picture tends to form about which sites have the most relative ability to pass link power and gain their own SERPs.

As of late, I have been seeing a tremendous amount of buzz and informational products built around the concept of using social bookmark sites such as Digg, Diigo, Delicious, etc. as an easy way to build quality back links to your content and help drive Search Engine Rankings. One thing that I have always found quite troubling about this concept is how so many of these articles and products mention Social Bookmarking sites that might have the potential to drive traffic, however they do absolutely nothing to build quality backlinks.

Such sites fall into two primary categories…

• Category One – Sites that utilize rel=”nofollow” to prevent any link value from being passed on to the target content. Some people feel there is still some value in these links and our own testing has shown they do have some effect, however, that effect is at very best minimal.

• Category Two – Sites that utilize domain redirection to send visitors off to your target content. This works as follows, you link to yoursite.com/article1 but in your posting the social website links to socialwebsite.com/redirect=yoursite.com/article1 or in some other similar matter. Such links are not seen by the search engines as a link to you but as internal links to the social website. They will not and can not affect your search rankings in any way.

So I started out this little project as simply having the goal to make a list of social bookmark sites that did two things:

• Did not use domain redirection
• Did not use rel=”nofollow”

Simple right? Well I thought so until I started with a list of almost 250 various social media websites and by the time I eliminated those that did not function properly, were to specialized into a given niche, did not allow access to the site with out registering (read that as did not let spiders into the content) and obeyed the direct linking rules I was down to just about 20 odd sites.

I then began to think about some other factors that were evident and a few I decided were important enough to create a basic ranking system on a 10 Star rating system. Here are the factors I considered and my reasoning behind them.

• Google PR on The Home Page – I decided to give each site 1 point if that site had a Google PR of a 4 or higher on the main page of the site. The real value of published PR numbers is very questionable but it does give us some indication of link value. PR4 simply seemed like a reasonable expectation for sites like these to achieve.

• Google PR on the Sub Pages – This is another area where I just had to pick a number and go with it. I simply checked the main sub pages of each site to see if any were at least a PR3. Reason being that it may give some indication of how well the site passes link value on through its internal links. This is important because even if you make page one you won’t be there for very long. If the site had at least one PR3 sub page it earned one additional point.

• Does the Site Use PermaLinks – By this I mean when you submit content is a specific page created on the site just for that content. This is one of the most critical factors in my opinion so if the site uses permalinks it got two points. There reason there is so much value to this is it will allow you to build additional off site links to your posted content and build even more link value.

• Does the Site refrain from using NoFollow or Redirection – If not, the site does not even get on the list; but to round out my scale to an even 10 star system each site gets one point for this critical component.

• Is the Alexa Ranking 10K or better – This list is not about driving traffic at all, only about link value and building back links with it. Yet if a site has high traffic volume it will continue to gain more and more of its own links and build power. Hence a site with a 10K or better Alexa rank was given one point due to the fact that link value on the site in theory should continue to rise.

• Does the Site Use Anchor Links - This is another very critical factor in link building and on some levels it matters a lot more then the raw value of the page that provides the link. Some services give you a link that begins with http://. Such links are no where as near as valuable as a link that is formated with anchor text under your control. So each site received or lost two points for this factor. This factor alone dropped Propeller from a 10 to an 8.

• Is the Domain over Two Years of Age – There are two primary factors at play on this one. First in theory an older site should have more “trust” to pass on then younger sites. Perhaps more important though is that an older site is less likely to pull the old switch-er-oo on you. Here is what I mean by that. Many social sites start out giving you great links to get a lot of submissions at first. Then one day switch to redirects or nofollow to horde link juice, an older site in theory should be less likely to do this. This is in no way perfect so only one point was given based on this factor.

• Are more then 10,000 pages from the site indexed in Google – This is another one where I just had to pick a number, but 10K seemed reasonable for these types of sites. I dropped down to the 1000th result to check for supplementals and left it good at that if they were still showing valid content. One point was awarded for meeting this goal.

With that I put together my list and started judging them, as you consider the results the following things should be understood and considered.

1. The criteria was set before I determined how the sites would score. Once I set the rules, no exceptions were made for any site based on my personal feelings.
2. Factors like indexed pages and PR change often. In the week I worked on gathering this data more than three of these sites moved up or down do to such changes. These results are based on how things are as of March 4th 2008, they could change tomorrow.
3. No order of preference is given for sites that have matching scores. So this list is not saying that Metafilter is ranked higher then Digg or that IndianPad is higher then Mixx.
4. It bares repeating that this has nothing to do with direct referral traffic. This rating system is based on the value of building back links with these services for SEO and nothing more.
5. If your personal “Pet Social Site” is not listed it is not out of malice in any way. I found as many sites as I could that met the dofollow and no redirection criteria as swiftly as I could. If you know of a site that should be added to the list, please post a comment and we will try to add it.
6. Some sites can be “forced” into compliance with nofollow in a way. Such as postings on Reddit have nofollow removed after so many votes, etc. Such sites were not included. The criteria of valid back links for any and all submissions was religiously enforced.

So here is the list of sites and how they scored in each category,

How to get the most out of this data.

• First, you should understand that I am not claiming that my system is perfect but I do think it is a valid way to “classify” social sites. As you build content that you bookmark you may want to take on the approach of bookmarking one piece of content into something like 2 of the 10 star sites, 2 of the 9s, etc and rotate things often so you build links in a way that is quite random.

• Next, don’t bookmark under the same name or handle all the time. This is not suggesting that you have multiple IDs so you can go voting for yourself. No, it is simply so you don’t end up with all your submissions associated together in one single profile. A simple tool like RoboForm can help you with this.

• When you put content into a site that uses permalinks, take the extra step from time to time (think random) to create a link to that permalink. Lots of sources come to mind, a Squidoo Lenses, Blogger or WP Blogs, an Article in a Directory, a Press Release, etc. This builds the value of the link on that page and often you can get the submission itself to pop for a variety of terms in the SERPs.

• Do not expect to rely on sites like these as your sole source of link building. Think of these links like taking vitamins if you are an athlete. Consider your daily link building and viral link building to be like training and exercising etc. The vitamins (social links) help to put you over the top but they won’t make you one of the best alone.

I hope this list will continue to grow and become a valuable resource for people that want to build quality back links via social bookmarking websites. If you have suggestions for improving the list, sites you want us to consider adding or just comments or questions on this project, just leave a comment below.

For those of you who want to learn as much as possible about search engine marketing and online marketing in general I highly suggest that you take the time to go through some of the blogs on the BigList of Search Marketing. The list is maintained by the folks at TopRank Online Marketing.

This list is the most comprehensive that I have seen on the net and the blogs listed are truly the best of the best. Go check out the list and I am sure that you will find some blogs that will interest you and answer many of your questions about marketing on the Internet.

In case you haven’t been told there is a “new” domain name extension out there called .mobi for “mobile”. I put new in parentheses because it has been available for use since 2006 and has yet to catch on. Today, I and Mark Barrera noticed an article in a magazine extolling the virutes of .mobi domains and we both met it with a yawn, here’s why.

The entire point of a .mobi domain was for what would amount to “sister sites” for companies to have a “mobile version” of their websites. Sites that would be optimized in size, shape, form and function to appear properly on mobile phones and other devices. The concept was developed because many sites look really jacked up on early smart phones like my Blackberry that I refuse to upgrade, for instance. Then last year something happened that made this all pointless. One word – iPhone!

If you have used an iPhone you know that the internet on the iPhone looks, acts and is just about as close to the regular PC/Mac based internet as a phone could ever be. With the iPhone, no one needs a “mobile” only website. They only need a regular website which most companies already have. The iPhone effectively kills the entire purpose of the .mobi domain. “Wait”, I hear you saying at the screen in front of you, “not everyone has an iPhone or will” you continue. Well, I agree but it simply does not matter. You see the iPhone took on such dominance that every other phone maker is out now building their own truly smart phones and phones are going to get smarter, not dumber.

It will be a year or two at the most when 90% of new phones (even cheap or “free” ones) have excellent browsing capabilities and can access the web with no big issues that require a “special” domain. So what does that mean to you? Simple, do not waste company resources, money and/or time making special websites just for mobile users to access. Instead focus on local search marketing (local SEO)because that is the growth sector that will be most affected by the growth in mobile internet users.

Mobile users are often deep into the need/buying phase of things when they search, they are looking for something now and something close to them. As their phones will soon see the same internet as their PCs, so marketers should address their need. The need is not special websites, it is finding your website when they are in your area. The key to that is local search marketing so my advice is expend resources on developing that area and don’t worry about .mobi or developing websites specifically for the mobile user.

It’s that time again for the Fort Worth Business Assistance Center (BAC) to  pride itself on hosting the largest Entrepreneur Expo  in not only Texas, but across the country! To be exact, it’s the Lockheed Martin and Chase  Entrepreneur Expo 2008, and it will be held at the Fort Worth Convention Center this coming Friday, February 8th.

This year’s theme is “Opening Doors for Business”…and many small business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs will fill the exhibit hall and visit with the more-than-300 exhibitors to learn how to build their business and  increase sales.  The BAC has done a fantastic job listening to the exhibitors and small business owners, and this year introduces three new “zones” at the Expo: the Procurement Zone, the Opportunity Zone and the Technology Zone.

Franklin-Spirko will be on hand in booth # 233 in the Technology Zone (we’re just one row in when you come into the exhibit hall…next to the CyberCafe!) talking about our newly launched Internet marketing services designed for the small business owners. Our new products include the Google Pay-Per-Click (PPC) Advertising Starter Package  and Local SEO Package. As Jack (Spirko) says, our services “are designed to help small businesses not only open those doors to new customers, but build their company, and increase their overall sales quickly and easily.”

The Expo  only runs for one day, so make sure you come by and visit not only Franklin-Spirko, but all of the other great vendors at the event! Exhibits are open from 9:00 am – 11:30 am and 1:00 pm – 4:30 pm. There are also seminars at the Expo that will help small business owners learn more about marketing, sales generation, business management, and more.

~Deb

We provided a two hour presentation on High Impact Low Cost Marketing at the Dallas Construction Expo on January 23rd and 24th. We had a blast talking to great folks, the kind of people that build things and make a positive contribution to our nation. Many people that know me don’t know that I got my start in the construction industry in two sectors, structured cabling and underground construction. Being at the expo was really kind of like reconnecting with my roots.

We will be producing a DVD of the entire presentation but I thought I would share the last 7 minutes of it here. Stay tuned we will let you know when the full two hours is available. This show went so well that our PR Director, Debby Decker was able to get us invited to present at quite a few more upcoming Expos including a shows in Phoenix, Atlanta, New York, Austin and possibly others.

So if you are involved in the construction, housing or real estate world drop by the main Construction Expo Website for Details about upcoming dates and shows.