Anton Zaleski

G+ is still conquering the market, while FB already has its huge market share. Apart from that and the prospects unpreceedable, both social networks help much to gain traffic.

I've heard all these "free" followers do not help much to monetize your Twitter, and it looks so. Am I wrong?

The thing is that each network has its own advantages and all are promising sources of traffic - thus a bit pricy sometimes.

I believe posting is a great way to be noticed, get backlinks and gain interested visitors. Thus one should avoid spamming, for the quantity should not overcome quality.

FB may be great (at least, the service is working well), but may be not. Consider your aim and the possibilities FB gives you first, then make your decision.

I can only sympathize - clients of such kind are always a disaster. I'd say it's hardly possible to give 25 city names in 20 quality keywords - for the customers do not look for some place in several cities at a time, at least not often.

SEO+PPC+CPA+viral campaigns = good result. Kinda' simple formulae, but it works. Yet there's definitely no common approach towards Internet promotion - each specialist has his/her own tricks.

Yes, it looks like articles were made quite an outdated technique; thus, I haven't heard of any restrictions except those the sites put by themselves. Thus it's not useful to post too many articles when the site is too young, 3-4 quality texts a week will do.

This is when quality beats quantity. Better five PR-high submissions than 100 PR-low.

I actually agree with the previous comment. IE has too much in common with dog poo to call it a "browser".