<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for LocalVisibilitySystem.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com</link>
	<description>Get Visible Locally. Attract More Customers.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:58:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 19 Species of Google Places Photos &#8211; Good and Bad by Phil</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2011/09/29/19-species-of-google-places-photos-good-and-bad/#comment-255</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=1412#comment-255</guid>
		<description>Great question.  Off the top of my head, my best guess would be that Google may have thought the pics were stock photos and therefore not of your real customers.  Or maybe they thought the pictures were &quot;candids,&quot; taken without having the people in them sign a model release.  But I&#039;m sure you did everything 100% correctly--those were just a couple guesses I&#039;m throwing out there--so I can only say for sure if I just see the pictures.

Maybe the thing to do is to try to upload them again, and if they don&#039;t stick this time, you can feel free to email them to me and I&#039;ll take a quick look and throw in my two cents.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great question.  Off the top of my head, my best guess would be that Google may have thought the pics were stock photos and therefore not of your real customers.  Or maybe they thought the pictures were &#8220;candids,&#8221; taken without having the people in them sign a model release.  But I&#8217;m sure you did everything 100% correctly&#8211;those were just a couple guesses I&#8217;m throwing out there&#8211;so I can only say for sure if I just see the pictures.</p>
<p>Maybe the thing to do is to try to upload them again, and if they don&#8217;t stick this time, you can feel free to email them to me and I&#8217;ll take a quick look and throw in my two cents.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 19 Species of Google Places Photos &#8211; Good and Bad by Bella Piel</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2011/09/29/19-species-of-google-places-photos-good-and-bad/#comment-254</link>
		<dc:creator>Bella Piel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 18:46:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=1412#comment-254</guid>
		<description>Two of the five photos I had on Google Places were &quot;people&quot; (vs. pictures of the building, etc...), and both of these have been removed.  Is there some kind of rule that prohibits showing photos of people?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two of the five photos I had on Google Places were &#8220;people&#8221; (vs. pictures of the building, etc&#8230;), and both of these have been removed.  Is there some kind of rule that prohibits showing photos of people?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Which Awards Grow Your Local-Search Stature? by Phil</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2012/02/13/which-awards-grow-your-local-search-stature/#comment-253</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 02:11:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=2348#comment-253</guid>
		<description>Nice!  Some time I&#039;d like to compile a list of local honors like that one.

Hope you win BoEG (if you haven&#039;t already)!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice!  Some time I&#8217;d like to compile a list of local honors like that one.</p>
<p>Hope you win BoEG (if you haven&#8217;t already)!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Which Awards Grow Your Local-Search Stature? by Cindy Morus</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2012/02/13/which-awards-grow-your-local-search-stature/#comment-252</link>
		<dc:creator>Cindy Morus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 01:32:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=2348#comment-252</guid>
		<description>In Elk Grove, CA, we have &quot;Best of Elk Grove&quot; and it&#039;s quite a big honor!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In Elk Grove, CA, we have &#8220;Best of Elk Grove&#8221; and it&#8217;s quite a big honor!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Top UK Local-Business Directories (AKA Citation Sources) by Phil</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2011/12/19/top-uk-local-business-directories-aka-citation-sources/#comment-251</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 22:31:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=1982#comment-251</guid>
		<description>Hey, thanks for the compliments!  That&#039;s a very handy table you&#039;ve created.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, thanks for the compliments!  That&#8217;s a very handy table you&#8217;ve created.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Top UK Local-Business Directories (AKA Citation Sources) by emerikusz</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2011/12/19/top-uk-local-business-directories-aka-citation-sources/#comment-250</link>
		<dc:creator>emerikusz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 20:58:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=1982#comment-250</guid>
		<description>Useful list! From time to time we get down to see what kind of online business directories are out there, draw a table and analyze statistics a bit.
http://cylexuk.blogspot.com/2011/11/online-business-directories-in-2011.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Useful list! From time to time we get down to see what kind of online business directories are out there, draw a table and analyze statistics a bit.<br />
<a href="http://cylexuk.blogspot.com/2011/11/online-business-directories-in-2011.html" rel="nofollow">http://cylexuk.blogspot.com/2011/11/online-business-directories-in-2011.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Unorthodox Strategy: Testimonial Photos on Your Google Places Page by Phil</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2011/11/09/unorthodox-strategy-testimonial-photos-on-your-google-places-page/#comment-249</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:53:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=1821#comment-249</guid>
		<description>Hey Matt,

Thanks for weighing in.

Yeah, Mike definitely has pointed out the main caveat to this technique: at least some of the testimonial text should be readable in a thumbnail, or else it won’t compel anyone to take a closer look.  Definitely calls for a touch of photo-editing, rather than just slapping a photo up on the Places page as-is.

I completely agree about the irrelevant photos…and so do most customers.  If they can’t tell visually what you offer, that can be a deal-killer.  Sure, it can be tough to think of good photos, but so many business owners don’t dig deep enough, don’t study their competitors’ photos, and don’t think to get some second opinions…resulting in the lame photos you mentioned.

Btw, do let me know if you’d be interested in a guest post on this…maybe along the lines of “Great photos you can upload even if your wheels are spinning” (for example).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Matt,</p>
<p>Thanks for weighing in.</p>
<p>Yeah, Mike definitely has pointed out the main caveat to this technique: at least some of the testimonial text should be readable in a thumbnail, or else it won’t compel anyone to take a closer look.  Definitely calls for a touch of photo-editing, rather than just slapping a photo up on the Places page as-is.</p>
<p>I completely agree about the irrelevant photos…and so do most customers.  If they can’t tell visually what you offer, that can be a deal-killer.  Sure, it can be tough to think of good photos, but so many business owners don’t dig deep enough, don’t study their competitors’ photos, and don’t think to get some second opinions…resulting in the lame photos you mentioned.</p>
<p>Btw, do let me know if you’d be interested in a guest post on this…maybe along the lines of “Great photos you can upload even if your wheels are spinning” (for example).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Unorthodox Strategy: Testimonial Photos on Your Google Places Page by Matthew Hunt</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2011/11/09/unorthodox-strategy-testimonial-photos-on-your-google-places-page/#comment-248</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Hunt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:11:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=1821#comment-248</guid>
		<description>Phil,

Cool idea.  Mike might be right, but I do think there is room for creativity with these images.  QR codes, or even being very specific/strategic with the images, using images that grab attention and so on.

I think though GP wants you to load photos of the inside of your business (if possible) or if it applies to be relevant to your business (might not be necessary for services based businesses).   

My biggest pet-peeve is when people do not use images that are relevant to what the business does.   If you have a guitar shop don&#039;t have images of people without feature guitars... you get the idea.  I can&#039;t tell you how often I listings that have the strangest photos representing their business.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Phil,</p>
<p>Cool idea.  Mike might be right, but I do think there is room for creativity with these images.  QR codes, or even being very specific/strategic with the images, using images that grab attention and so on.</p>
<p>I think though GP wants you to load photos of the inside of your business (if possible) or if it applies to be relevant to your business (might not be necessary for services based businesses).   </p>
<p>My biggest pet-peeve is when people do not use images that are relevant to what the business does.   If you have a guitar shop don&#8217;t have images of people without feature guitars&#8230; you get the idea.  I can&#8217;t tell you how often I listings that have the strangest photos representing their business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Top UK Local-Business Directories (AKA Citation Sources) by Top UK Local-Business Directories (AKA Citation Sources) &#124; TheMarketingblog</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2011/12/19/top-uk-local-business-directories-aka-citation-sources/#comment-247</link>
		<dc:creator>Top UK Local-Business Directories (AKA Citation Sources) &#124; TheMarketingblog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 07:47:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=1982#comment-247</guid>
		<description>[...] Will Corry on February 15, 2012 in Marketing, Research  I came across this US site which after complaining that we in the UK  &#8217;may drive on the wrong side of the road and [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Will Corry on February 15, 2012 in Marketing, Research  I came across this US site which after complaining that we in the UK  &#8217;may drive on the wrong side of the road and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on New Inequality in Google Places: Sitelinks in &quot;Blended&quot; Local Search Results by Phil</title>
		<link>http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/2012/02/04/new-inequality-in-google-places-sitelinks-in-blended-local-search-results/#comment-244</link>
		<dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:10:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.localvisibilitysystem.com/?p=2332#comment-244</guid>
		<description>Hey Justin,

Thanks for the intel.  As I&#039;ve said and as of course you&#039;ve noticed first-hand, the evolution here is that the sitelinks are becoming more common.  I find it a little puzzling (though I guess not surprising) that #1 so consistently is the one with sitelinks.  My best guess at this stage is that it reflects what seems to be Google&#039;s growing emphasis on site quality as a GP ranking factor.

Feel free to let me know if you notice some new development in terms of sitelinks--either in your client&#039;s market or in general.  I have a feeling this isn&#039;t the last post I&#039;ll be doing on sitelinks.  

In any case, it&#039;s awesome that you got your client in such a good position.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Justin,</p>
<p>Thanks for the intel.  As I&#8217;ve said and as of course you&#8217;ve noticed first-hand, the evolution here is that the sitelinks are becoming more common.  I find it a little puzzling (though I guess not surprising) that #1 so consistently is the one with sitelinks.  My best guess at this stage is that it reflects what seems to be Google&#8217;s growing emphasis on site quality as a GP ranking factor.</p>
<p>Feel free to let me know if you notice some new development in terms of sitelinks&#8211;either in your client&#8217;s market or in general.  I have a feeling this isn&#8217;t the last post I&#8217;ll be doing on sitelinks.  </p>
<p>In any case, it&#8217;s awesome that you got your client in such a good position.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

