Someone called this morning to tell me that search results for our web site were not good (we know this). She continued to say that what we needed was some SEO then launched into an explanation of the benefits of SEO.
In the original post on this blog, in 2010, I mentioned that our website had been in need of redevelopment for four years (make that six now!). This is particularly embarrassing because we develop websites for clients and have started work on a new website design more than once, in fact, whenever there's a dull moment - but there's always another client requirement to fulfil. Obviously, I'm not complaining about that!
Our main source of revenue is SEO! So, yes, I actually know what it means and why it's important but there are two reasons it's not currently applied to our website: our website needs a total revamp and most of our business is by referral.
Surely, if the caller had bothered to look at our website, she would at least have had a clue that we know a bit about about SEO? Well, actually, no... the site was created around 2002 and last revamped (cough) more than seven years ago when terminology was different - we used words such as 'optimisation' and 'e-marketing'.
So, ironically, as the cobbler's children needed shoes, the design and marketing company needs to put its website in order. The one thing we don't need is a caller from an unknown agency who won't stop talking long enough for a polite refusal. I had to talk over her to say goodbye as I hung up.
(Note to self: New Year's Resolution - website revamp!)
Friday, 14 December 2012
Wednesday, 5 September 2012
Business Adviser or Business Advisor?
This advisor/adviser explanation makes sense but how can you trust someone's English when they write alternate instead of alternative?
viz:
"Advisor" is usually listed as an alternate spelling of "adviser"
(Oh well, OK in the USA, I suppose.)
However, if you want to make up your own mind from a wealth of opinions and references, read this 'English rules writing guide' including the comments about different ways of spelling certain words.
Friday, 17 August 2012
Soapbox: Written English
I'm a little pedantic about written English.
Spelling, finger trouble and proof reading aside, some very common grammatical mistakes (which I'll try to ignore if spoken) irritate me immensely when written by 'professional' writers.
First of all, when the subject of a sentence is a company (singular), why do so many people refer to it as 'they'?
Even BBC news readers/writers don't seem to know when to use 'fewer' rather than 'less'. Generally, less refers to a single noun and fewer relates to plurals, e.g.
There is less money (is...less);
There are fewer people (are...fewer).
'Compared to' is over-used and wrongly used instead of 'compared with'. The differences are explained well on the Daily Writing Tips website. (If in doubt, use 'compared with'.)
Use 'similar to' and 'different from' (or 'different than' in the USA) but never 'different to'! The word 'alternate' is often wrongly used in place of 'alternative' when describing an option. A full explanation with examples can be read at vocabulary.com.
The use of who/whom doesn't bother me (if in doubt, use who) as 'whom' is generally considered to be one of those words confined to history, another example being 'unto'. As a guide, however, try associating the word 'whom' with 'him' and 'who' with 'he', either as a substitute in a statement or in the imagined answer to a question.
Some people are confused about when to use 'me' or 'I' in a list but this is a really easy one to work out. Just consider which word you would use if you were alone. It's polite to place yourself at the end of a list but there is no grammatical reason to do that. Here are some examples:
The dog and I walked (you wouldn't say 'me walked');
It was too far for the dog and me to run (you wouldn't say 'it was too far for I to run').
The importance of punctuation was famously illustrated in "Eats Shoots and Leaves" - oops, sorry - "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" by Lynne Truss.
The most common error seems to be the use of an apostrophe in plurals, particularly when using numbers or initials, such as: PCs or 1900s. Notice that I've also dropped the full stops between letters, which has become the norm now, as it makes it much simpler. You can write PCs but if you write P.C.s it becomes very tempting to use an apostrophe to clarify that the 's' isn't part of the mnemonic.
An apostrophe is generally required in place of missing letters (e.g. isn't, don't, can't) or to signify possession. Here are some examples:
Music from the 1960s (no apostrophe; 1960s is plural);
Listen to 1960s' music (plural possessive!)
However, it could be argued that 1960s refers to a decade, singular:
Listen to 1960's music
which can probably be justified (I realise that I've used it this way on several occasions) but it's ambiguous because it could also mean music from the year 1960. I think, in trying to make it clearer, I've just stirred up some muddy waters!
Apostrophe: if in doubt, leave it out! That way, it just seems like you've missed it, which is less embarrassing and less noticeable than erroneous grammar.
The word 'its' is an anomaly because it seems to contradict the general rule. Use it with an apostrophe only to represent 'it is'. Think of 'its' in the same way as 'his' (e.g. his hair is red, its leaves are green).
Of course, there are always exceptions that prove the rules and I make a lot of glaring errors in blogs and on Twitter (often lazily) but I'm willing to improve!
Spelling, finger trouble and proof reading aside, some very common grammatical mistakes (which I'll try to ignore if spoken) irritate me immensely when written by 'professional' writers.
First of all, when the subject of a sentence is a company (singular), why do so many people refer to it as 'they'?
Even BBC news readers/writers don't seem to know when to use 'fewer' rather than 'less'. Generally, less refers to a single noun and fewer relates to plurals, e.g.
There is less money (is...less);
There are fewer people (are...fewer).
'Compared to' is over-used and wrongly used instead of 'compared with'. The differences are explained well on the Daily Writing Tips website. (If in doubt, use 'compared with'.)
Use 'similar to' and 'different from' (or 'different than' in the USA) but never 'different to'! The word 'alternate' is often wrongly used in place of 'alternative' when describing an option. A full explanation with examples can be read at vocabulary.com.
The use of who/whom doesn't bother me (if in doubt, use who) as 'whom' is generally considered to be one of those words confined to history, another example being 'unto'. As a guide, however, try associating the word 'whom' with 'him' and 'who' with 'he', either as a substitute in a statement or in the imagined answer to a question.
Some people are confused about when to use 'me' or 'I' in a list but this is a really easy one to work out. Just consider which word you would use if you were alone. It's polite to place yourself at the end of a list but there is no grammatical reason to do that. Here are some examples:
The dog and I walked (you wouldn't say 'me walked');
It was too far for the dog and me to run (you wouldn't say 'it was too far for I to run').
The importance of punctuation was famously illustrated in "Eats Shoots and Leaves" - oops, sorry - "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" by Lynne Truss.
The most common error seems to be the use of an apostrophe in plurals, particularly when using numbers or initials, such as: PCs or 1900s. Notice that I've also dropped the full stops between letters, which has become the norm now, as it makes it much simpler. You can write PCs but if you write P.C.s it becomes very tempting to use an apostrophe to clarify that the 's' isn't part of the mnemonic.
An apostrophe is generally required in place of missing letters (e.g. isn't, don't, can't) or to signify possession. Here are some examples:
Music from the 1960s (no apostrophe; 1960s is plural);
Listen to 1960s' music (plural possessive!)
However, it could be argued that 1960s refers to a decade, singular:
Listen to 1960's music
which can probably be justified (I realise that I've used it this way on several occasions) but it's ambiguous because it could also mean music from the year 1960. I think, in trying to make it clearer, I've just stirred up some muddy waters!
Apostrophe: if in doubt, leave it out! That way, it just seems like you've missed it, which is less embarrassing and less noticeable than erroneous grammar.
The word 'its' is an anomaly because it seems to contradict the general rule. Use it with an apostrophe only to represent 'it is'. Think of 'its' in the same way as 'his' (e.g. his hair is red, its leaves are green).
Of course, there are always exceptions that prove the rules and I make a lot of glaring errors in blogs and on Twitter (often lazily) but I'm willing to improve!
Friday, 11 May 2012
The UK Property Market
The UK property market is stagnant. Earlier this year, there was a glimmer of hope when the low end of the market saw an increase in first time buyers trying to complete in time to save some Stamp Duty but, since then, properties are languishing on estate agents books and many home owners have become reluctant landlords.
At the other end of the age scale, retirement housing is plentiful and, therefore, reasonably priced. People can't move in because they are unable to sell their current property; people who have moved to care homes need to sell to pay for care. This is not traditionally a rental market but, even so, one month's rent approximates to one week's care home fees.
If you are preparing to sell or rent a property, a splash of neutral paint is an inexpensive investment. It would also be a good idea to thoroughly clean carpets, not just to remove stains and make them look better but to freshen the smell for potential buyers or renters.
There is another option. If you need to sell a property, there are companies who will buy at a reduced price, about 25%-30% below market value. It's a good risk for them if they have long-term financial backing, as they can sell cheaply or rent it out until the market becomes buoyant again, currently estimated at around 5 years.
Friday, 3 February 2012
keeping track of time: working vs interruptions
The type of work undertaken at The BPc falls into two main categories:
In a small office with limited resources, there are a number of interruptions during any period and an accurate record needs to be kept of how much chargeable time has been spent on working for each client.
Various methods were tried, from paper-based worksheets to spreadsheets but what was needed was a simple start-stop stopwatch that could be operated with a single click.
There are free downloads, simple to install, that enable a semi-transparent box to reside 'always on top' in the bottom right of the computer screen (or bottom-left for left-handed mouse users); click to start the time, click to pause, whenever necessary. A reset button sets the stopwatch to zero so that the next project can be timed.
It is also possible to work with more than one stopwatch, in case the interruption results in you switching to another project (suggestion: set the boxes to different background colours).
This method of keeping track of actual time spent per project has resulted in regaining valuable minutes that used to be wasted each working day, locating the time sheet, typing in numbers, etc., making for a calmer environment.
- website creation for an agreed fixed fee
- optimisation / link building for a set number of hours per client per month
In a small office with limited resources, there are a number of interruptions during any period and an accurate record needs to be kept of how much chargeable time has been spent on working for each client.
Various methods were tried, from paper-based worksheets to spreadsheets but what was needed was a simple start-stop stopwatch that could be operated with a single click.
There are free downloads, simple to install, that enable a semi-transparent box to reside 'always on top' in the bottom right of the computer screen (or bottom-left for left-handed mouse users); click to start the time, click to pause, whenever necessary. A reset button sets the stopwatch to zero so that the next project can be timed.
It is also possible to work with more than one stopwatch, in case the interruption results in you switching to another project (suggestion: set the boxes to different background colours).
This method of keeping track of actual time spent per project has resulted in regaining valuable minutes that used to be wasted each working day, locating the time sheet, typing in numbers, etc., making for a calmer environment.
Friday, 2 September 2011
Recycling, still lagging behind.
A report from Flanders (Belgium) on BBC Breakfast this morning described how local authorities have addressed recycling and household waste issues. It seems to be the same formula introduced in Luxembourg in 1997, where every household had their waste and recycling bins electronically chipped to register how much weight was collected from each home.
The key to introducing the change in Luxembourg was excellent communication and a fair system of reward. Backed by statistics of average weight collected per household, itemised council tax bills showed the cost attributed to waste collection. This element was removed from the charge when the new 'chip' system started, replaced by details of the weight of recycling collected at a cost of x (cheap) and waste collected at y (more expensive). In most cases, this worked out to the same or less, providing a controllable incentive to become 'greener' and save money.
At that time, only compostable waste was collected. As in most western European countries, large containers for glass, paper, plastics, etc. are placed on street corners and collected regularly. In fact, in many countries, all waste is collected daily from large containers placed within communities rather than from each house once a fortnight. Managed efficiently, this could reduce the burden on council tax payers in suitable communities in Britain.
Way back in 1998 when my local council invited people to share their ideas for recycling, I submitted the Luxembourg case study. I did get a 'thank you' but here we are, years later, still failing to encourage people to recycle, still focusing on fines for non-compliance rather than rewards for our efforts.
The key to introducing the change in Luxembourg was excellent communication and a fair system of reward. Backed by statistics of average weight collected per household, itemised council tax bills showed the cost attributed to waste collection. This element was removed from the charge when the new 'chip' system started, replaced by details of the weight of recycling collected at a cost of x (cheap) and waste collected at y (more expensive). In most cases, this worked out to the same or less, providing a controllable incentive to become 'greener' and save money.
At that time, only compostable waste was collected. As in most western European countries, large containers for glass, paper, plastics, etc. are placed on street corners and collected regularly. In fact, in many countries, all waste is collected daily from large containers placed within communities rather than from each house once a fortnight. Managed efficiently, this could reduce the burden on council tax payers in suitable communities in Britain.
Way back in 1998 when my local council invited people to share their ideas for recycling, I submitted the Luxembourg case study. I did get a 'thank you' but here we are, years later, still failing to encourage people to recycle, still focusing on fines for non-compliance rather than rewards for our efforts.
Tuesday, 5 July 2011
Sole Traders & Partnerships not keen on becoming Employers?
There was a snippet on BBC Breakfast News this morning, related to small businesses unwilling to create jobs because the employment laws are too complex.
As the owner of a small business established over 20 years ago, I have shied away from becoming an employer, preferring instead to combine forces with other small businesses or self-employed people. There are many reasons why this suits me because, whilst my services are geared to helping small businesses to grow, plans for my own company do not include expansion beyond current capacity (ie, using my network of business contacts).
However, somewhat hypocritically, helping the UK economy and local job-seekers is a cause I believe in. Would I be tempted to employ someone - albeit part-time - if it was easier to do so? Here are some of my fears of becoming an employer:
I needn't go on. I'm convinced that this is not for me. But, for small companies with greater and sustained growth plans, there should be financial incentives as well as business support. I am aware of possible grants for training plus local networks and organisations that offer advice and business support but not of meaningful incentives for small businesses to employ someone currently receiving job-seekers allowance.
Regarding the Government's wish for UK business to employ UK residents rather than opportunists newly arrived from overseas, how about financial incentives such as paying the equivalent of 3 months job-seekers allowance to the employer, providing the person is still employed after one year?
The real problem, though, is attitude. People coming from overseas are willing, desperate, to work and will often make great efforts to contribute to the success of the company whereas, unfortunately, the attitude of some Brits stinks! Whether this is a lack of confidence in themselves or over-confidence that the 'system' will or should look after them, I don't know. Either way, as I said, not for me - but don't let it stop you!
As the owner of a small business established over 20 years ago, I have shied away from becoming an employer, preferring instead to combine forces with other small businesses or self-employed people. There are many reasons why this suits me because, whilst my services are geared to helping small businesses to grow, plans for my own company do not include expansion beyond current capacity (ie, using my network of business contacts).
However, somewhat hypocritically, helping the UK economy and local job-seekers is a cause I believe in. Would I be tempted to employ someone - albeit part-time - if it was easier to do so? Here are some of my fears of becoming an employer:
- finding the right candidate with the right attitude (without breaking discrimination laws)
- the need to sustain almost 100% increase in current business
- time/effort to be spent on employment issues (time/effort not spent on core business)
- hours and hours of one-to-one training
- how to cover the extra work during holidays and sickness
- and, if it doesn't work out, redundancy or dismissal can be costly and messy
I needn't go on. I'm convinced that this is not for me. But, for small companies with greater and sustained growth plans, there should be financial incentives as well as business support. I am aware of possible grants for training plus local networks and organisations that offer advice and business support but not of meaningful incentives for small businesses to employ someone currently receiving job-seekers allowance.
Regarding the Government's wish for UK business to employ UK residents rather than opportunists newly arrived from overseas, how about financial incentives such as paying the equivalent of 3 months job-seekers allowance to the employer, providing the person is still employed after one year?
The real problem, though, is attitude. People coming from overseas are willing, desperate, to work and will often make great efforts to contribute to the success of the company whereas, unfortunately, the attitude of some Brits stinks! Whether this is a lack of confidence in themselves or over-confidence that the 'system' will or should look after them, I don't know. Either way, as I said, not for me - but don't let it stop you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)