sagacity

46 ms·

421.
by sagacity 16y ago
Clickable links: Site: http://www.nordicinnovation.is/ PDF: http://www.nordicinnovation.is/issues/pdf/nordic-innovation_... Web/image: http://www.nordicinnovation.is/issues/web/1
422.
by sagacity 16y ago
Nice article, Nick- I think one more (and probably the last) important area to check would be: Navigation structure, affecting how accessible (or otherwise) the site is to (both - human visitors as well as) to the crawlers.
423.
by sagacity 16y ago
Darn it!!! It was only a few days ago that I came across a very helpful post somewhere, made by a startup where they gave a reasonably detailed account of all the third-party tools/services they're using; and I'm pretty sure CRM was one o
424.
by sagacity 16y ago
>Is there some way to validate what these businesses are searching for? Use Google keyword tool: https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordToolExternal Enter some words/terms/phrases related to your products/service that you think your
425.
by sagacity 16y ago
Here is a list of actions I can think of (in no particular order): 1. Check with (the IT/Computer departments of) local universities/colleges 2. Find a few local computer/hardware/software/networking/web design shops (via Yellow pages or on
426.
by sagacity 16y ago
A small clarification: :-) Being fairly new here at HN, I was not fully aware of the popularity of this community and actually speaking, the only context in which I made my observation was a comparison of general traffic/interest/engagement
427.
by sagacity 16y ago
I agree; one of your best bets would be right here.
428.
by sagacity 16y ago
Off topic, but I'll keep this short: At the time I post this, there are just 52 comments on the story at LATimes site, while there are 75 here !!! I guess that'll surprise a few.
429.
by sagacity 16y ago
Think through this carefully: (As the wise man said,) familiarity breeds contempt. A lot of familiarity could potentially accelerate the breeding process ;-) Also, time away from each other's company may provide both of you with opportuniti
430.
by sagacity 16y ago
I guess it deploys a sophisticated, proprietary, patent-pending algo involving weighted averages, uni-directional vectors and other related mumbo-jumbo. :-))) [A method and a process to calculate the Karma score of members] On a serious not
431.
by sagacity 16y ago
Last that I knew, Delaware used to be the cheapest state to incorporate in.
432.
by sagacity 16y ago
Not too sure about this, but moniker.com might be worth a quick look - they just might have something you could use.
433.
by sagacity 16y ago
Please consider doing at least the following: Generate a separate file (csv/sql or something) with the structure: IP Address, number of submissions and make it available for download. I guess people could use it to flag probable spam.
434.
by sagacity 16y ago
Okay - I found the following with a quick dig through our developed website portfolio: * http://www.RecipeAvenue.com * http://www.TheDrinkMaker.com * http://www.USRestaurantGuide.info * http://www.dGroceryStore.com I don't know the
435.
by sagacity 16y ago
I'd not be happy with a 10% conversion rate (unless the traffic is not targeted). Here are some suggestions I can make: To increase traffic: * If you have some budget, why not try the good ol' PPC route? Even a short (yet smart, tight) camp
436.
by sagacity 16y ago
>> The entire Television industry is being supported by ad revenue for decades. Why can't the same model work for the web? << Well-said. As a matter of fact, it can; and it is, today. (Those who are not convinced, just look
437.
by sagacity 16y ago
>> many of today's startups don't actually sell anything. They have a feature, not a business. Is Path really an eCommerce site? Hipster? << I was referring to the term 'eCommerce' in a somewhat broader context; a context in
438.
by sagacity 16y ago
>>most of the failed sites in bubble 1.0 didn't actually have good products - they didn't actually sell a basic X to Y customer.<< Some counterpoints to ponder: 1. Y (i.e. Internet user base) then was much smaller, as compar