By Rajesh Menon
LinkedIn Profile
One of the fundamental digital marketing practices is doing Search Engine Optimization or SEO as it is better known as. As a practice the importance of SEO lies in the ability to rank one’s website on the top pages of Google Search Engine, the obvious understated benefit being that ranking on the top pages would result in an increase level of organic visits to the website.
Unlike other marketing initiatives, SEO operates in a fairly competitive scenario with multiple competitors trying their best to ensure that they get similar ranking as oneself on page 1 of Google. But the distinct advantage the practice of SEO has over its other digital marketing or traditional marketing initiatives is that what matters most is not the quantum of spends that a brand or company puts into this media but the quality of thought.
As a brand or marketing manager, you can buy yourself into the top radio, TV, print or Google AdWords slot by simply pumping in more money or buying at higher prices. But this is not possible when you are doing SEO. Value in an SEO comes from understanding how the Google Algorithm works in ranking various contextual subject matters and using that knowledge in developing the right SEO approach for your website.
Take the example of Agencyonnet- a company that Atul Jain runs. After 3 years of starting up his company and a million dollars down the drain, he was still nowhere. He was staring at a possible windup of his company should his new pivot of relaunching the product as a B2B SaaS procurement software not take off.
Agencyonnet ( www.agencyonnet.com )came into being in early 2013 on the back of a dream to create an online marketplace where companies looking to hire marketing service providers could visit, place their requirements online and have competing small and mid-sized agencies compete for their business.
Atul had largely based his company model on a similar experiment that had been successful in the UK called the Blur Group (www.blurgroup.com). Eager to scale in what appeared to be a large market; Atul launched his platform simultaneously in three markets- Australia, India, US and the Middle East.
Within 6 months of launch, Atul realized that marketplace was floundering. While he had been able to ramp up over 1000 marketing vendors on the platform and was able to generate serious enquiries from potential clients on the platform, the response of vendors to proposals was very lukewarm.
Both clients and vendors quickly lost interest on the platform and within a year Atul was back to the drawing board.
Atul decided to pivot his online marketplace and create a B2B SaaS product aimed at helping drive efficiencies in procurement by providing large companies fully automated procurement software running on the cloud.
The competitive environment and positioning for Agencyonnet is shown below
In 2016, Atul decided to go back to the drawing board one last time and re-engineer the product to suit the market. He decided to focus Agencyonnet as a general procurement software solution
The key product and market inputs he made in his final plan were:-
Atul carefully calibrated his SEO approach using two pillars:
Using data points derived from his Google Search Console (GSC), he analysed his SEO impact over the past 3 months
Table 1: Search Query Data - below gives the 3 months data points of Google Search Console.
Queries refer to actual search words entered by real users on Google Search while searching for relevant information.
Impressions refer to the number of times a particular url of Agencyonnet was shown to the user in his search result
CTR as a percentage refers to impression over clicks /impression x 100 and is a term used to determine effectiveness in digital campaigns. The higher the CTR, the more effective the creative or campaign is expected to be.
Position refers to the rank position the url that was shown in Google Search Results. Normally there are about 10 organic search results that appear on each page of Google. So a rank of 2.2 as shown in row 1 indicates that the average position for the 1469 impressions the average url position was 2.2. The lower a rank position indicates a better position. A rank position for example of 32 would indicate that the url was shown in page 4 of google on the top.
According to the GSC data, the top 100 search queries resulted in a total of 1473 clicks out of a total impression of 18135 impressions with an average CTR of 8.2%.
As can be seen above the top 100 search queries were relevant queries from possible potential users of a procurement software solution.
This table shows the top level page urls that came up on search results and the number of corresponding clicks, impressions, CTR and overall rank position. For example in row one the url http://www.agencyonnet.com/top-10-procurement-outsourcing-companies/ came up 42,999 times and was clicked a total of 2546 times and had a rank position of 28 ( which translates into page 3 of google)
This table shows which country the search query emanated from and the corresponding clicks, impressions, CTR and rank position for that country. As can be seen from row 1 and 2, the overall rank position for the website in India was 22 (page 3 of google) and for United States it was 36 (page 4 of Google)
As can be seen from a sample of the 3 data tables
So after 6 months of careful SEO practice, Atul appears to be on the right track w.r.t to his brand.
Now let’s try and estimate the value of the SEO work achieved
One of the way to estimate the value of SEO is to simply take the value of each click and compute a value. This is by far the simplest manner as it directly takes into account the sum of money that one would have paid otherwise to advertise on Google AdWords
Let’s understand this with an example from the above tables to see how this is done
This shows 14 keywords culled out form Google AdWords keyword Planner (a tool used to do keyword research) for the search volume in the countries of US and India collectively.
Average Monthly Searches refers to the number of times, a particular keyword or keyword phrase was used in search in a month. Suggested Bid is the approximate bid or Cost per Click (CPC) bid price that Google recommends putting as a competitive bid in order to come up in the top of the page result on page 1. This is a INR rupee value mentioned in the table
Now for the above 14 keywords let’s look at the number of clicks that were generated due to the SEO efforts
These 14 keywords generated 776 clicks for the company in a month’s time frame.
Now using the suggested bid price in the first table one simply multiplies it with the number of clicks generated by SEO to determine the value as shown in the below table
The total value of SEO done is therefore estimated at Rs. 2, 54,412. This is the amount of money that would need to have been spent on Google AdWords to get the same amount of clicks for the same set of keywords.
Estimating the direct computational monetary value of SEO is one of the key components to determine whether it would be cheaper to advertise or do SEO. However what must be borne in mind is that SEO rank position once obtained tends to remain so for a longer time and hence the intrinsic value of a rank position is much higher than what is the price one would pay in Google AdWords.
LinkedIn Profile
One of the fundamental digital marketing practices is doing Search Engine Optimization or SEO as it is better known as. As a practice the importance of SEO lies in the ability to rank one’s website on the top pages of Google Search Engine, the obvious understated benefit being that ranking on the top pages would result in an increase level of organic visits to the website.
Unlike other marketing initiatives, SEO operates in a fairly competitive scenario with multiple competitors trying their best to ensure that they get similar ranking as oneself on page 1 of Google. But the distinct advantage the practice of SEO has over its other digital marketing or traditional marketing initiatives is that what matters most is not the quantum of spends that a brand or company puts into this media but the quality of thought.
As a brand or marketing manager, you can buy yourself into the top radio, TV, print or Google AdWords slot by simply pumping in more money or buying at higher prices. But this is not possible when you are doing SEO. Value in an SEO comes from understanding how the Google Algorithm works in ranking various contextual subject matters and using that knowledge in developing the right SEO approach for your website.
Take the example of Agencyonnet- a company that Atul Jain runs. After 3 years of starting up his company and a million dollars down the drain, he was still nowhere. He was staring at a possible windup of his company should his new pivot of relaunching the product as a B2B SaaS procurement software not take off.
Pre 2016 Background-
Agencyonnet ( www.agencyonnet.com )came into being in early 2013 on the back of a dream to create an online marketplace where companies looking to hire marketing service providers could visit, place their requirements online and have competing small and mid-sized agencies compete for their business.
Atul had largely based his company model on a similar experiment that had been successful in the UK called the Blur Group (www.blurgroup.com). Eager to scale in what appeared to be a large market; Atul launched his platform simultaneously in three markets- Australia, India, US and the Middle East.
Within 6 months of launch, Atul realized that marketplace was floundering. While he had been able to ramp up over 1000 marketing vendors on the platform and was able to generate serious enquiries from potential clients on the platform, the response of vendors to proposals was very lukewarm.
Both clients and vendors quickly lost interest on the platform and within a year Atul was back to the drawing board.
The Pivot
Atul decided to pivot his online marketplace and create a B2B SaaS product aimed at helping drive efficiencies in procurement by providing large companies fully automated procurement software running on the cloud.
The competitive environment and positioning for Agencyonnet is shown below
In 2016, Atul decided to go back to the drawing board one last time and re-engineer the product to suit the market. He decided to focus Agencyonnet as a general procurement software solution
The key product and market inputs he made in his final plan were:-
- The product would be sold as a B2B SaaS software.
- It would be a DIY product which meant that potential customers would
pay for the product online and start using it. Hence the re-engineered
product was designed to be simple to understand how to use.
- Pricing was based on a per user per month model, starting with a
free model for a single user licence going upto a 15 user licence per
month. Prices ranged from $145 per month per user at the lowest level
and went down to $95 per user per month at the highest slab of users.
- Since this was now a DIY product, Atul realized that India was no
longer a market given the fact that the adoption of DIY products in this
space in India was very low. Instead he decided to focus his attention
in the US which already had several procurement software solutions,
given the fact that it was the world’s largest market accounting for
nearly 40% of the total revenues of all procurement software companies.
- Atul also decided that within the digital marketing domain, Search Engine Optimization would play a critical role in driving potential users to his website. Moreover being short of further investible funds, he turned his back to media advertising and instead chose to go the long run route of using SEO to build his company’s awareness.
The SEO approach
Atul carefully calibrated his SEO approach using two pillars:
- Building content led strategy that would act as informational
knowledge magnets for potential users who were looking for information
on procurement and outsourcing – a key segment that he was targeting.
Accordingly several long form articles, case studies and thought
leadership articles were commissioned by Atul to build the content
around the company’s product and domain.
- Building on-page and off-page SEO activities that would help propel his website into the top ranked pages within the key potential search segments he had identified.
Key results 6 months later
Using data points derived from his Google Search Console (GSC), he analysed his SEO impact over the past 3 months
Table 1: Search Query Data - below gives the 3 months data points of Google Search Console.
Queries refer to actual search words entered by real users on Google Search while searching for relevant information.
Impressions refer to the number of times a particular url of Agencyonnet was shown to the user in his search result
CTR as a percentage refers to impression over clicks /impression x 100 and is a term used to determine effectiveness in digital campaigns. The higher the CTR, the more effective the creative or campaign is expected to be.
Position refers to the rank position the url that was shown in Google Search Results. Normally there are about 10 organic search results that appear on each page of Google. So a rank of 2.2 as shown in row 1 indicates that the average position for the 1469 impressions the average url position was 2.2. The lower a rank position indicates a better position. A rank position for example of 32 would indicate that the url was shown in page 4 of google on the top.
Queries
|
Clicks
|
Impressions
|
CTR
|
Position
|
procurement companies
|
218
|
1469
|
14.84%
|
2.2
|
procurement outsourcing
|
84
|
2384
|
3.52%
|
7.1
|
top procurement consulting firms
|
81
|
309
|
26.21%
|
1.3
|
top 10 procurement consulting firms
|
76
|
301
|
25.25%
|
1.6
|
procurement company
|
58
|
1048
|
5.53%
|
6.6
|
best procurement companies
|
41
|
265
|
15.47%
|
1.2
|
top procurement companies
|
40
|
388
|
10.31%
|
1
|
top procurement outsourcing companies
|
38
|
262
|
14.50%
|
1
|
top procurement companies in India
|
37
|
103
|
35.92%
|
1
|
best procurement companies in the
world
|
36
|
124
|
29.03%
|
1.1
|
procurement consulting firms
|
26
|
474
|
5.49%
|
5
|
procurement firms
|
26
|
210
|
12.38%
|
2.1
|
procurement outsourcing companies
|
25
|
379
|
6.60%
|
1.3
|
procurement service provider
companies
|
25
|
108
|
23.15%
|
3
|
procurement companies in India
|
23
|
88
|
26.14%
|
6.1
|
procurement outsourcing companies in India
|
23
|
86
|
26.74%
|
2
|
list of procurement companies in India
|
21
|
78
|
26.92%
|
1.5
|
procurement company names
|
21
|
50
|
42%
|
1.1
|
top procurement consulting companies
|
20
|
64
|
31.25%
|
1.8
|
b2b marketplace Europe
|
19
|
135
|
14.07%
|
4.5
|
procurement service provider
|
18
|
845
|
2.13%
|
7.1
|
procurement services companies
|
17
|
574
|
2.96%
|
3.5
|
top 10 procurement companies
|
17
|
59
|
28.81%
|
1
|
best procurement consulting firms
|
17
|
42
|
40.48%
|
1.8
|
procurement companies in USA
|
16
|
127
|
12.60%
|
3.2
|
procurement services providers
|
16
|
332
|
4.82%
|
6
|
procurement business names
|
15
|
63
|
23.81%
|
1.4
|
outsource purchasing
|
14
|
92
|
15.22%
|
4.5
|
b2b platform Europe
|
14
|
122
|
11.48%
|
4.6
|
procurement consulting companies
|
13
|
371
|
3.50%
|
4.5
|
best procurement companies to work
for
|
13
|
94
|
13.83%
|
2.7
|
outsourced procurement services
|
13
|
98
|
13.27%
|
4.5
|
outsourced procurement companies
|
12
|
61
|
19.67%
|
1.1
|
list of procurement companies
|
12
|
84
|
14.29%
|
1.1
|
e procurement companies list
|
12
|
141
|
8.51%
|
5.8
|
procurement bpo
|
12
|
485
|
2.47%
|
10
|
purchasing outsourcing companies
|
11
|
83
|
13.25%
|
1.5
|
third party procurement services
|
10
|
81
|
12.35%
|
4.5
|
Europe b2b marketplace
|
10
|
96
|
10.42%
|
4.1
|
sourcing and procurement companies in
India
|
10
|
54
|
18.52%
|
4.7
|
outsourcing procurement
|
10
|
216
|
4.63%
|
9.4
|
outsourced procurement
|
9
|
155
|
5.81%
|
7.7
|
b2b marketplaces
|
9
|
501
|
1.80%
|
20
|
outsourcing procurement companies
|
8
|
42
|
19.05%
|
1.9
|
role of marketing in procurement
|
8
|
16
|
50%
|
1.9
|
procurement outsourcing providers
|
8
|
250
|
3.20%
|
1.7
|
Europe b2b websites
|
7
|
38
|
18.42%
|
2.7
|
European b2b marketplace
|
7
|
231
|
3.03%
|
4.2
|
procurement outsourcing companies in USA
|
7
|
15
|
46.67%
|
1.8
|
outsource procurement
|
7
|
87
|
8.05%
|
8.2
|
b2b marketplace in Europe
|
7
|
60
|
11.67%
|
3.5
|
what is marketing procurement
|
7
|
84
|
8.33%
|
8.3
|
procurement consultancy firms
|
7
|
131
|
5.34%
|
10
|
procurement bpo companies
|
6
|
130
|
4.62%
|
1
|
procurement service company
|
6
|
34
|
17.65%
|
5.2
|
procurement service providers
|
6
|
207
|
2.90%
|
6.8
|
purchasing outsourcing
|
6
|
171
|
3.51%
|
5.6
|
key procurement skills
|
6
|
111
|
5.41%
|
7.7
|
it procurement companies
|
6
|
20
|
30%
|
1.4
|
procurement consulting firm
|
6
|
73
|
8.22%
|
7.7
|
marketing procurement
|
5
|
138
|
3.62%
|
22
|
global b2b marketplace
|
5
|
373
|
1.34%
|
9.5
|
b2b services marketplace
|
5
|
114
|
4.39%
|
6.8
|
procurement services provider
|
5
|
144
|
3.47%
|
7.5
|
sourcing and procurement companies
|
5
|
78
|
6.41%
|
3.1
|
procurement services company
|
5
|
61
|
8.20%
|
4.4
|
procurement skills
|
5
|
415
|
1.20%
|
13
|
procurement bpo providers
|
5
|
123
|
4.07%
|
1.1
|
b2b website in Europe
|
5
|
29
|
17.24%
|
5.6
|
outsourced purchasing services
|
4
|
29
|
13.79%
|
3
|
b2b market places
|
4
|
89
|
4.49%
|
10
|
outsourcing purchasing
|
4
|
110
|
3.64%
|
8.4
|
b2b Europe
|
4
|
34
|
11.76%
|
33
|
procurement provider
|
4
|
92
|
4.35%
|
7.9
|
b2b Europe marketplace
|
4
|
50
|
8%
|
4.2
|
supplier scoring
|
3
|
53
|
5.66%
|
6.2
|
knowledge and skills for procurement
manager
|
3
|
29
|
10.34%
|
11
|
top b2b marketplace
|
3
|
94
|
3.19%
|
9.2
|
procurement outsource
|
3
|
60
|
5%
|
8.9
|
business procurement outsourcing
|
3
|
71
|
4.23%
|
4.4
|
indirect procurement outsourcing
companies
|
3
|
98
|
3.06%
|
1
|
outsourcing procurement services
|
2
|
10
|
20%
|
6.5
|
procurement outsourcing service
providers
|
2
|
7
|
28.57%
|
1
|
top 10 b2b websites in the world
|
2
|
62
|
3.23%
|
12
|
procurement process outsourcing
|
2
|
164
|
1.22%
|
8.5
|
outsourced purchasing
|
2
|
57
|
3.51%
|
4.7
|
b2b marketplace sites
|
2
|
199
|
1.01%
|
44
|
procurement outsourcing firms
|
2
|
97
|
2.06%
|
1.1
|
GEP revenue 2016
|
2
|
11
|
18.18%
|
19
|
marketplaces b2b
|
2
|
15
|
13.33%
|
20
|
Europe b2b
|
2
|
43
|
4.65%
|
7.1
|
procurement sourcing companies
|
2
|
2
|
100%
|
3.5
|
it procurement outsourcing
|
2
|
97
|
2.06%
|
6
|
companies that provide outsourcing
services
|
2
|
63
|
3.17%
|
8.9
|
top 10 b2b marketplace
|
2
|
12
|
16.67%
|
8.8
|
top 10 b2b companies in world
|
2
|
42
|
4.76%
|
11
|
procurement operations outsourcing
|
1
|
98
|
1.02%
|
5.8
|
supplier evaluation form
|
1
|
3
|
33.33%
|
120
|
marketing procurement best practices
|
1
|
68
|
1.47%
|
8.6
|
According to the GSC data, the top 100 search queries resulted in a total of 1473 clicks out of a total impression of 18135 impressions with an average CTR of 8.2%.
As can be seen above the top 100 search queries were relevant queries from possible potential users of a procurement software solution.
Table 2: Top level Search Pages URL’s
Pages
|
Clicks
|
Impressions
|
CTR
|
Position
|
2546
|
42999
|
5.92%
|
28
|
|
419
|
6808
|
6.15%
|
24
|
|
101
|
2534
|
3.99%
|
28
|
|
84
|
1013
|
8.29%
|
27
|
|
80
|
1457
|
5.49%
|
32
|
|
37
|
1607
|
2.30%
|
64
|
|
28
|
1023
|
2.74%
|
47
|
|
10
|
281
|
3.56%
|
35
|
This table shows the top level page urls that came up on search results and the number of corresponding clicks, impressions, CTR and overall rank position. For example in row one the url http://www.agencyonnet.com/top-10-procurement-outsourcing-companies/ came up 42,999 times and was clicked a total of 2546 times and had a rank position of 28 ( which translates into page 3 of google)
Table 3: Country wise Data
Countries
|
Clicks
|
Impressions
|
CTR
|
Position
|
India
|
817
|
7876
|
10.37%
|
22
|
United States
|
727
|
20264
|
3.59%
|
36
|
United Kingdom
|
228
|
2707
|
8.42%
|
20
|
Germany
|
85
|
667
|
12.74%
|
17
|
Canada
|
79
|
1281
|
6.17%
|
24
|
Nigeria
|
66
|
618
|
10.68%
|
12
|
South Africa
|
56
|
571
|
9.81%
|
12
|
Kenya
|
53
|
495
|
10.71%
|
7.9
|
United Arab Emirates
|
51
|
495
|
10.30%
|
14
|
Pakistan
|
50
|
864
|
5.79%
|
27
|
France
|
45
|
551
|
8.17%
|
26
|
Singapore
|
42
|
561
|
7.49%
|
23
|
Netherlands
|
41
|
619
|
6.62%
|
22
|
Australia
|
38
|
766
|
4.96%
|
19
|
Malaysia
|
38
|
534
|
7.12%
|
28
|
Philippines
|
36
|
776
|
4.64%
|
36
|
Italy
|
31
|
635
|
4.88%
|
29
|
Indonesia
|
30
|
746
|
4.02%
|
31
|
Russia
|
27
|
1498
|
1.80%
|
35
|
Poland
|
26
|
458
|
5.68%
|
34
|
Thailand
|
25
|
477
|
5.24%
|
29
|
Uganda
|
24
|
181
|
13.26%
|
6.2
|
Romania
|
24
|
328
|
7.32%
|
39
|
Spain
|
24
|
496
|
4.84%
|
34
|
This table shows which country the search query emanated from and the corresponding clicks, impressions, CTR and rank position for that country. As can be seen from row 1 and 2, the overall rank position for the website in India was 22 (page 3 of google) and for United States it was 36 (page 4 of Google)
Summary of GSC Data
As can be seen from a sample of the 3 data tables
- The approach of using SEO to reach out to potential users when they are searching for information relating to the product domain is paying off.
- Focus of developing relevant content that would appeal to the users is paying off
- The search impressions from USA far out exceeds the search queries from other countries
So after 6 months of careful SEO practice, Atul appears to be on the right track w.r.t to his brand.
Now let’s try and estimate the value of the SEO work achieved
Estimating Value
One of the way to estimate the value of SEO is to simply take the value of each click and compute a value. This is by far the simplest manner as it directly takes into account the sum of money that one would have paid otherwise to advertise on Google AdWords
Let’s understand this with an example from the above tables to see how this is done
Monthly search Volume data
This shows 14 keywords culled out form Google AdWords keyword Planner (a tool used to do keyword research) for the search volume in the countries of US and India collectively.
Average Monthly Searches refers to the number of times, a particular keyword or keyword phrase was used in search in a month. Suggested Bid is the approximate bid or Cost per Click (CPC) bid price that Google recommends putting as a competitive bid in order to come up in the top of the page result on page 1. This is a INR rupee value mentioned in the table
Keyword
|
Avg. Monthly Searches
|
Suggested bid
|
procurement companies
|
480
|
224.2
|
procurement outsourcing
|
390
|
353.03
|
top procurement consulting firms
|
70
|
539.16
|
top 10 procurement consulting firms
|
50
|
465.45
|
Procurement company
|
2400
|
123.06
|
best procurement companies
|
40
|
73.56
|
top procurement companies in India
|
30
|
142.19
|
top procurement outsourcing companies
|
110
|
861.87
|
best procurement companies in the
world
|
20
|
509.99
|
procurement consulting firms
|
140
|
411.12
|
procurement firms
|
20
|
379.32
|
best procurement consulting firms
|
20
|
38.97
|
indirect procurement outsourcing
companies
|
10
|
312.76
|
outsourcing companies
|
3600
|
500.26
|
Now for the above 14 keywords let’s look at the number of clicks that were generated due to the SEO efforts
Keyword
|
Clicks
|
procurement companies
|
218
|
procurement outsourcing
|
84
|
top procurement consulting firms
|
81
|
top 10 procurement consulting firms
|
76
|
Procurement company
|
58
|
best procurement companies
|
41
|
top procurement companies in India
|
40
|
top procurement outsourcing companies
|
38
|
best procurement companies in the
world
|
36
|
procurement consulting firms
|
26
|
procurement firms
|
26
|
best procurement consulting firms
|
26
|
indirect procurement outsourcing
companies
|
25
|
outsourcing companies
|
1
|
These 14 keywords generated 776 clicks for the company in a month’s time frame.
Now using the suggested bid price in the first table one simply multiplies it with the number of clicks generated by SEO to determine the value as shown in the below table
Keyword
|
Clicks
|
Suggested bid
|
Value
|
procurement companies
|
218
|
224.2
|
48876
|
procurement outsourcing
|
84
|
353.03
|
29655
|
top procurement consulting firms
|
81
|
539.16
|
43672
|
top 10 procurement consulting firms
|
76
|
465.45
|
35374
|
Procurement company
|
58
|
123.06
|
7137
|
best procurement companies
|
41
|
73.56
|
3016
|
top procurement companies in India
|
40
|
142.19
|
5688
|
top procurement outsourcing companies
|
38
|
861.87
|
32751
|
best procurement companies in the
world
|
36
|
509.99
|
18360
|
procurement consulting firms
|
26
|
411.12
|
10689
|
procurement firms
|
26
|
379.32
|
9862
|
best procurement consulting firms
|
26
|
38.97
|
1013
|
indirect procurement outsourcing
companies
|
25
|
312.76
|
7819
|
outsourcing companies
|
1
|
500.26
|
500
|
776
|
254412
|
The total value of SEO done is therefore estimated at Rs. 2, 54,412. This is the amount of money that would need to have been spent on Google AdWords to get the same amount of clicks for the same set of keywords.
Conclusion
Estimating the direct computational monetary value of SEO is one of the key components to determine whether it would be cheaper to advertise or do SEO. However what must be borne in mind is that SEO rank position once obtained tends to remain so for a longer time and hence the intrinsic value of a rank position is much higher than what is the price one would pay in Google AdWords.
No comments:
Post a Comment