I really never thought I would have to put this into writing. I actually assumed that everyone using the Internet understood this. But hey, I am a big thinker, I do not spend my time thinking about or sweating the small stuff. Until it came to my attention how harmful this is to the real business marketers out there and how silly it is for this to even be an issue.

So what is it? It is search engine results advertising, or pay per click advertising.

A couple of years ago, I took an Internet marketing class, although it was basically a waste of my time, there is one thing which really stands out from that class.

We were taught “”when advertising on the Internet, find something that is really hot and connect your keywords to it”" to generate more traffic and greater results. The example we primarily used was “”who is hot in entertainment”". For example, if Britney Spears is in the news, use her as a keyword and link your site and your ad to anyone who is searching for information on her.

Well, at the time, I thought it was silly and actually unethical, so I never used that technique. After all, people searching for Britney would never be looking for a way to improve themselves or even a home based business.

But today, I find this tactic is being so badly misused in Internet Search Marketing. Google any legitimate business or person and what you will find is paid advertising, ads that blast or slam the company only to bring attention to another company.

I find this especially true in home based businesses, but don’t just take my word for it. Google any legitimate business, businesses where people are having amazing success and results and see for yourself what those with no ethics are doing.

You will find things like “”Why I did not join”", Why I quit”", “”This is a scam”" and the disgusting antics go on and on and on.

Most Internet marketers would NEVER pay any attention to ads such as this. Marketers know these people are just using unethical approaches to ride the tide of success of other legitimate marketers. But the inexperienced public does NOT know this. Unfortunately they believe what these guys are saying. All they really have to do is click on the ads and see that it is actually an ad for another company. Duh! How hard is this to figure out??

Why do you think advertising always slams the other guy? If the other guy is hot, then jump on the bandwagon. That is all these sleazy people are doing, is jumping on the bandwagon of success. Making a disgusting attempt to legitimise themselves by disenfranchising the real marketer.

So, what do I suggest? Do your homework. Talk to people who are ACTUALLY involved in the opportunity so see what they think. Talk to the Attorney General of the listed home state, talk to the Association of Home Business, talk to the State Incorporation offices, they will tell you all you need to know. BUT, do not listen to unethical, sleazy people who do not know how to advertise without slamming another company.

Anyway, why would ANYONE want to get started with a business who bases it’s advertising on slamming other businesses? That would certainly be a red flag to me and businesses started with this technique are surely going to have little success. It is the law of nature, the Law of Reciprocity”".

And one more thing I absolutely must add here…

Adults have to be responsible for their own results in life. If someone fails at any business opportunity, it is because THEY failed. Either they did not follow the already proven systems (trying to reinvent the wheel), or they were waiting for someone else to do the work for them, or maybe even they never expected to succeed anyway. I truly believe this is why most failures occur, there was never a level of expectation for success.

You should also trust your feelings in these cases as well. If a product feels right, if it is hot, if it is cutting edge, and if others are having success, then there is no reason why you can not as well as long as you are willing to do the work.

So get out there and find what you are looking for, but stay away from paid advertising slamming your company and let those who are practicing this know, it DOES NOT WORK FOR YOU!

To your success…

Wanda Grindstaff is recognized in the Direct Sales industry as a true leader. She teaches a very simple system to assist people in accomplishing major income goals. Serious entrepreneurs are invited to request information on starting a home based business. For more information, visit her here.

Article Source

Tags: marketing, ethics, ethical, competition, compete

Occupational frauds is a big internal business. Every instance of fraud cause small company a loss of $127500 on an average. Fraud probably occurs in every organization, and you may not be able to totally eliminate it. However you can do something to minimize the risk of fraud.

Information is sensitive and accounting information is even more. Handing over the accounting information poses threat for business secrets. Many Small businesses thinks in this fashion.They are often afraid that if the information is disclosed to a third party be it auditor or competitor , it can be misused. It is hard to change this attitude but there is something which small business owners can do to combat the frauds.

Small business have every reason to worry about fraud. But there is nothing to fear this virus. This is the financial worm that has to be removed from the roots to combat the frauds. There are some useful tips to combat the occupational frauds.

Oversight Process

The second important factor is review of the accounting information. Just because the owners have the authority to sign does not mean that there are no frauds in the accounting databases. Cash is not the only thing to be followed in any business, one more thing that plays a crucial role in commission of the frauds and that is books of accounts such as biils, purchase orders and payment terms. Reasonable internal controls are critical in a small business. It is accepted that the small business owners have some more priority works but to review the accounts they need to spare the time.IF THEY THEMSELVES CAN NOT do it then they should buy the softwares which can perform the requisite functions on their behalf.

Limited controls

Small businesses rarely have sufficient personnel to adapt adequate controls; “one-person accounting departments” as in are the rule, not the exception. Owners are unable to look into the accounting matters. But the business owner should actively understand and verify the financial information reported to him or her. The owner can engage a external auditors to attest to the credibility of the financial information, even if the company doesn’t have a regular audit.The controls in the organisation needs to be checked up regularly for the deficiencies and loopholes, though not the only one, internal controls are the powerful deterrents of the frauds.

Employee Education

A small business owner if takes few cautions he can stop many occurrences of frauds in his organisation. Most crucial factor in any occupational fraud is the empoyee.If there are no employees then there will be no occupational frauds but without employees no growth of the business.Educated employees adds value to business. Now it is well accepted that education about the frauds helps to combat the frauds successfully.Making the employees aware about the nature of frauds makes them aware about the methodologies and they do not remain the passive visitors to the instance of the fraud.Most of the times it is observed that the employees have blown up the whistles against the frauds where they have come to know that what is happening is called fraud. Some of the big financial scandals like Refco or Enron are the outcomes of the employee awareness about frauds. Anti-fraud training is an essential factor.

Adequate employee prescreening

Small businesses rarely spend the money to check work references, criminal records or professional recommendations of potential hires or require applicants to undergo drug screening, psychological testing and other vetting procedures. It is frequently seen that the employees in small softare companies are recruited based on the interview and the resume, however no checking is done regarding his past performances,whether employee was involved in any fraudulant case or not.

Undesirable applicants know this and thus gravitate to small businesses. The problem, according to ACFE study, is that about 7% of employees have a history of workplace theft and fraud. This small but costly group know the degree of scrutiny into their past likely will be minimal; all too often, they are right.

Too much trust

The third factor for large fraud losses in small businesses involves the human element. In a situation where employees know each other well, it is natural for them to trust one another. Indeed, the intimate familial atmosphere of a small business is one of its most appealing features. Most of the time, believing in your coworkers is well founded, but not always. The dichotomy is that trust is an essential element of business as well as an essential element of fraud. Never having faith in your employees is a bad thing; so is always trusting them. The goal is to strike a balance between the two. Or, as Mark Twain said, “Trust everybody, but make sure you cut the cards.”

These few things a small and medium sized business owner should adhere to in order to reduce the median losses of $98000 caused to it every year.

About the author

Mr. Mayur Joshi authored this white paper. He is a Fraud Examiner and is associated with Indiaforensic research foundation for more than 5 years.

Article Source

Tags: ethics, essay, personal, business, competition

With the majority of the rich world now having upgraded to IE7, did Google notice the way Microsoft have stolen search share? Did WE notice? In IE7 there is now an embedded web search facility in the toolbar at the ‘top right’ of the browser. Whilst Google can be selected as the search provider, did we think Microsoft would give up the search currency so easily? Not the same people that knocked Netscape into a cocked hat and into the sidelines of connected world control. But with world on constant alert of the software giant’s malpractice, it can’t be too high in profile. They chose a perfect way to unethically get people to stray from Google.

How they did it How? By not allowing the selection of a ‘regional’ Google as the search provider. Let’s take the case of a searcher in Canada. When searchers use Google.com for their searches they get a set of results. If they travelled across the border to the US, using Google.com for the same search would yield a different set of results again (some similarities, but different). Now back in Canada the user searches using Google.ca and gets different results again – this time the best optimised set of results. He’s in Canada and Google.ca is built for Canada and delivers the best results (Google.com gives results somewhere between the two because of the overwhelming recognition of .com as a first stop for many domains). The fact that for USA searchers it makes no difference at all gives Microsoft a leading time for regional users to become dissatisfied with the search leader Google before it’s flagged up as a ‘bug’. It’s a perfect mechanism to accomplish their plan of shifting some of that persisting favour Google has amongst web users.

Why don’t they just switch to local Google? You can try it. Selecting different search providers takes you to Microsoft’s web site from where you get a choice of providers. If you need a regional Google, you have to jump through hoops which the vast majority will not do. But even if they do, the selection doesn’t persist across browser sessions. Microsoft have to allow users to select a different search provider, who knows – someone may even want to use MSN. But the selection is only available from the broad companies – MSN, Yahoo, Google, Ask, etc. These other main search engines (Yahoo, MSN and Ask) have redirects in place that provide local results just as if they were using yahoo.co.uk, yahoo.ca, etc. Google is on their own in the way they provide regional results. Perfect then. Microsoft put up with Yahoo, but bitterly hate the Google that some of their best people are defecting to. The IE7 browser upgrade doesn’t permit people to easily select Google.ca (or other region) as their search provider – and even successfully jumping through the hoops they provide doesn’t allow the selection to persist. Users aren’t going to bother – over time they’ll notice the sub-optimal results but not work out why, they won’t see this search turf issue. They’ll go elsewhere – right into the arms of the next two – Yahoo and MSN.

The solution

Who know the best way for Google to beat this? But first they need to recognise it – we doubt they even know. Effecting a solution could start the first search world war. Consider the most blood curdling solution – Google developing their own browser. Could Microsoft ‘netscape’ it? Google have nearly as much money as Microsoft and so could fight them legally equally – but what would the famous Microsoft fighting with ‘time’ produce (as with Netscape)? Other solutions? Google could skew results locally when searching through this toolbar facility, so that effectively users would be seeing the same results as the google.co.uk or google.ca they should be using. Google could show nothing, no results at all for searches originating through this IE7 toolbar. Google could do what the other engines have done – show the same results for regional uses of .com as those searched for using google.co.uk (etc.), or redirect IP ranges to their regional engine.

Microsoft have skewed the results for searches outside the USA. It may seem minor, but companies in other countries don’t show up when searched for through the Microsoft utility – a solution is needed – wake up Google – work on this one.

By Baron Turner, Search Strategist at TurnerDow Search Engine Optimisation – where optimising web sites for search engines is our passion. Web Optimisation for the new connected world – let us help you make a success of your web presence. Let us help you get heard above the noise.

Article Source