In an interview at MIX07 where Techcrunch’s Mike Arrington interviewed Ray Ozzie, Microsoft’s chief software architect, Ray made some interesting comments when asked about competing with Google.

The DNA of Microsoft is not going into a space unless we can change the game and win in some form. More interesting from a competitive standpoint related to Google and large incumbent competitors in general is how Microsoft approaches it and secondary and tertiary effects.

and, this…

If you go back to Sony years ago, the Playstation 2 look unassailable. A side effect, secondary effect was the creation of an entire entertainment and devices division in Microsoft.

and finally…

From a Google perspective, the secondary impacts have already begun to happen.

(referring to ad models)

Ozzie also discussed Office on the web, competing against Adobe Flash with Silverlight, and how he would rate himself since he took over Gate’s position as Chief Software Architect. But let’s face it. What’s really interesting is how they feel about competing with Google.

Technorati Tags: SEO, Microsoft, Google, Ray Ozzie, Playstation 2, Flash, Silverlight, Bill Gates

Original post by DazzlinDonna

Techcrunch and Search Engine Land both seem to think Wikipedia is using a double standard by giving special treatment to their own website properties, because they are not nofollowing links to their own sites.

Why should they? Nofollow is supposed to indicate that the link is to a site that cannot be vouched for. Obviously, Wikipedia can vouch for its own sites, so calling it unfair or a double standard is just sensationalism or link baiting, in my opinion.

Original post by DazzlinDonna

I’ve talked about submitting to directories several times before and I’ve recently discovered another good directory submission service. Some of the things I like about this particular service are:

• You can distribute and schedule your submissions at your own pace, i.e. you can submit your site to as many or as few directories as you want to at any given time. This allows you to space out the submissions, which gives it that natural, organic flavor. Luckily, they keep track of the list of directories your site is submitted to on each order. This way, you can submit to more directories from their list in the future without worrying about duplicating submissions (and fees).
• Use up to 5 different anchor text and descriptions.
• Live, detailed status reports

At 14 cents each ($14 per 100 directories), and with each directory being hand checked for SEO friendliness, this is a viable contender in the directory submission niche.

They also give lots of helpful advice within articles. One in particular that caught my eye was Directory Submission Guidelines - Improving the chances of getting your site approved. If you’re going to pay (even 14 cents) for something, then you should at least do your best to make that money count. Give the submission team good data to work with, and they stand a better chance of getting directory editors to approve your listings.

Sometimes I have the time to do my own directory submissions, but most of the time I don’t. That’s when I turn to a service to do the work for me. Directory Maximizer is now on my list of services to outsource to.

Original post by DazzlinDonna

If you’re trying to think of business concepts that garner a lot of lip service from corporate America with little action to back it up, “employee recognition” would probably have to rank well up on the list, perhaps even approaching some of the all-time greats like “quality&…Read More

Original post by Gerhard Gschwandtner

Search engine optimization is an ongoing ‘battle’ that requires constant oversight in order for a Website to maintain high search engine rankings. Should you turn to the pros?

Original post by Malcolm Fleschner

This tech-savvy entrepreneur is leaving everyone twitterpated with his global online community.

Original post by Geoffrey James

There’s a range of free software and services available to small business owners. Here’s where to get it and some advice on when you should just pay.

Original post by Geoffrey James

In my previous post, I explained that it's dangerous to have a strategic account without being a strategic vendor.  According to Sam Reese, CEO of the giant sales training firm Miller Heiman, there are three ways to become a strategic vendor:

1. Control a de-facto monopoly. Sell the customer a product that no other company can provide but which the customer absolutely needs to be successful.  Example: Microsoft is strategic to all PC vendors because PC users the PCs are useless without them.
2. Command a high cost of replacement. Sell the customer a product that would cost them a big wad of dough if they tried to go elsewhere. Example: IBM is strategic to thousands of firms because replacing mainframes with low-cost servers would be a logistical nightmare.
3. Offer a best-in-class product.  Sell the customer a product that’s significantly superior to the competition’s, making a change-over into a highly unattractive option. Aeron ergonomic chairs are strategic products to firms that use office furniture as a management status symbol.

If none of the above is true (or potentially true) about your relationship with a strategic account, your firm is at serious risk. The most you can hope is that you’re flying so far beneath the account’s radar that they don’t bother to take advantage.  

With all this in mind, you should be asking yourself five questions before entering into a strategic account relationship:

1. Do we really want this account?  Define the real benefits will your firm get from having an ongoing, potentially unprofitable relationship with this account.  If the advantage isn't clear, bail.
2. What could we build/supply to make us their strategic vendor? Define what you could do, and what it would cost, your firm to build or supply something that this customer couldn't do without once they've got it.
3. Is everyone on board with this?  Make sure that engineering and customer support are both willing to fulfill “special requests” for products and services that would make you into a strategic vendor for this account.
4. How much are we willing to lose?  Define exactly how far you’re willing to go to keep this customer happy.  And when you hit that limit, hit the road.
5. What do we do if we lose the account? Define an action plan in case the account demands more than you’re prepared to offer.  Never let an account become too strategic.

Once you've answered these questions to everyone's satisfaction, you can go ahead with the "strategic" relationship. 

A word of warning: if you've got a non-strategic account that's unprofitable, either figure out how to make it profitable or dump the account.  Don't fool yourself into throwing good sales cost after bad by labeling them "strategic."

Original post by Geoffrey James

I speak for the Certified Management Accountants of Canada for three of their annual conferences across Canada this month. This topic is sales as an accountability tool. I have prepared a condensed sales podcast in the topic.

Click Here th Download the MP3 Now

Subscribe in iTunes to this Sales Podcast

Get focused, think bigger, and close bigger!

Shane Gibson

This sales podcast is presented by Shane Gibson.

Shane Gibson is the author of Closing Bigger the Field Guide to Closing Bigger Deals and President of Knowledge Brokers International Systems Ltd. a leading sales performance and leadership development organization. Shane divides his time between his entrepreneurial projects, speaking at major conferences and mentoring salespeople and entrepreneurs.

Quick Links:

Sales Training Canada
Sales
Training South Africa
Sales Training Boot Camps Vancouver
Complete Sales Action System
Managing Complex Business
Relationships System

Original post by Sales Podcast Blog

All online videos should have some kind of tagging system that allows users to click on a tag and jump right to the part of the video it references. That’s just what veotag does and it’s pretty cool.

Better yet, the tag menu text will show up in search engines, and clicking on that SERPs result will take the user right to that part of the video. Sweet! User friendly and search engine friendly too. What more could you ask? If you’re looking for ways to better optimize video, you’ve just found one.

Hopefully, this kind of thing will take off. The thumbnail below shows what it looks like, with the clickable descriptive menu of each section of the video on the right.

Original post by DazzlinDonna