<?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 on: RHD in Beta With New IYP Platform</title>
	<atom:link href="http://staging.blog.biakelsey.com/index.php/2008/12/22/rhd-in-beta-with-new-iyp-platform/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://staging.blog.biakelsey.com/index.php/2008/12/22/rhd-in-beta-with-new-iyp-platform/</link>
	<description>LOCAL MEDIA WATCH. The Nexus of All Things Local</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2015 22:23:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.39</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Richards</title>
		<link>http://staging.blog.biakelsey.com/index.php/2008/12/22/rhd-in-beta-with-new-iyp-platform/comment-page-1/#comment-324786</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave Richards]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 01:29:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.kelseygroup.com/index.php/2008/12/22/rhd-in-beta-with-new-iyp-platform/#comment-324786</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This seems like a very incremental set of improvements ... with almost no innovation.  I don&#039;t understand why consumers would go to their web site rather than just search at Google.com.  Google has very good search results in both their Google Local service plus in Google Maps like the person above mentioned.  Isn&#039;t this just too little too late for the IYPs or am I missing something here?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This seems like a very incremental set of improvements &#8230; with almost no innovation.  I don&#8217;t understand why consumers would go to their web site rather than just search at Google.com.  Google has very good search results in both their Google Local service plus in Google Maps like the person above mentioned.  Isn&#8217;t this just too little too late for the IYPs or am I missing something here?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed Kohler</title>
		<link>http://staging.blog.biakelsey.com/index.php/2008/12/22/rhd-in-beta-with-new-iyp-platform/comment-page-1/#comment-324408</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ed Kohler]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 20:47:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.kelseygroup.com/index.php/2008/12/22/rhd-in-beta-with-new-iyp-platform/#comment-324408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s great to see some improvements here. Differentiating between incall and outcall services is a nice touch. Another way people use Google is to search by location first, then by services within that location. So someone could search for &quot;Wrigley Field&quot; on Google Maps to zoom things down, then search for &quot;Pizza&quot; to generate a map of local spots. I often do this 2-step based on my zip code for local searches and have been satisfied with the results.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s great to see some improvements here. Differentiating between incall and outcall services is a nice touch. Another way people use Google is to search by location first, then by services within that location. So someone could search for &#8220;Wrigley Field&#8221; on Google Maps to zoom things down, then search for &#8220;Pizza&#8221; to generate a map of local spots. I often do this 2-step based on my zip code for local searches and have been satisfied with the results.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
