A varied week of news starts with the WordPress dev team accepting some responsibility for issues with Core Web Vitals, and Google AMP chaos ensues after a damaging update (iOS 15) breaks AMP pages. In addition, Google provides more insights into its rules for title rewrites, Ross discusses his latest presentation on SEO Competitor Analysis, his experience with naming businesses, and much more.
Noteworthy links from this episode:
- WordPress Proposes Performance Team For Core Web Vitals
- AMP links in Google Search break with iOS 15
- Google publishes new help documents on controlling titles and descriptions in search
- Google Rich Results Errors For Job Postings May Increase Due To Evaluation Change
- Can Service Area Pages With Duplicate or Similar Content Increase Traffic?
Transcription of Episode 417
Ross: Hello and welcome to SEO 101 on WMR.FM episode number 417. This is Ross Dunn, CEO of StepForth Web Marketing and my co-host is my company’s senior SEO, Scott Van Achte.
What a wonderful day!
Scott: It is a wonderful day!
Ross: Thought I’d start it off differently this time.
Scott: Yeah, you’re always “so how are you doing today?” Of course, I’m going to say “fine” even if I’m miserable.
Scott: But I’m not miserable so that’s good.
Ross: Bonus, I see. Things are looking up.
All right. Well, with that lovely entry started, let’s jump right in to some other news on WordPress. What’s this about?
Scott: Yeah, so this is great. WordPress has put together a proposal for a performance team. They’ve admitted that they’re falling behind Wix (and I’ll get into Wix maybe in a second) and similar platforms and they are suggesting they need a performance team to help coordinate speed improvements. Their proposal notes that “compared to other platforms (for example: Wix, Shopify, Squarespace), WordPress is falling behind. Other platforms are on average faster – and becoming increasingly faster – than WordPress websites…” Which I have to say, I kind of agree with. Maybe not so much with Wix, although maybe Out the Box. When you compare the two, it’s similar but I’ve seen pretty poor speeds on Wix. I guess the one advantage WordPress has now is if you have a programmer or you know which plugins to use, you can speed it up but they don’t want people to have to rely on plugins. They want people to just have it work well out of the box when people are shopping for a content management system especially the non-techies out there, they just want to see fast and WordPress is falling behind that. They feel they might start to lose a bit of share if they don’t do something about it so I think that is fantastic news if it goes through. Could you imagine WordPress Out the Box scoring 100 out of 100 on PageSpeed Insights.
Ross: It really should, Out the Box, that’s true. I’m just checking to see whether or not they mean the .com or the .org?
Scott: Okay, that’s something I didn’t pick up on…
Ross: I don’t see it. I mean, they do technically. I mean they do create both, so hopefully it is for both.
Scott: I would imagine it would have to be both.
Ross: Yeah, I guess so. Since it’s not mentioned, I’m gonna have to assume that at this point. It’s not like I’m laying money on it. Really, when it comes down to it, when you get WordPress and you have a competent development team, you’re going to be working on WordPress speed and PageSpeed and core web vitals after you get working on it. It would be great if it started out compliant but just the same, we can make it work. Just imagine how much time that could save if it was already there.
Scott: It would save time for us, it would save money for our clients who we build sites for, and it would save time and money and headaches for the DIY-ers out there who are just going to venture out on their own, who may not even know that speed is an issue. They’re not even thinking about SEO. Well, here they’re going to have an SEO advantage that they might not know about, but it’ll be there so I think it’s better for everybody, really. The internet as a whole, your website development, and the people that visit your website.
Ross: I think anything that keeps WordPress high up there is good for all that are invested in it. We’re certainly invested in it. We do all our design in WordPress and we love it, really. It’s a great system. I never would have guessed it would become what it is now. I remember having used it back when it was only a blog platform. Back then, we still considered it a CMS but it was really just hacking it. Now, of course, it is really a content management system. Gone are the days that it’s just a blog and it’s time they took it to the next level so that’s great.
Scott: Yeah, absolutely. So we’ll see what happens. Hopefully, if they get that team together, we can…I don’t know, just see a big improvement in the near… I don’t know how long it would take them. A year, probably, I don’t really have a clue.
Ross: What I’m most fascinated with is, let’s say after we develop the site, it’s at a certain stage of core web vitals that’s low – let’s say 40 out of 100 or whatever. Let’s look at PageSpeed Insights, so how much of that leftover 60 that bad stuff is due to the base WordPress not being great. It’d be interesting to see like, is it just going to increase it by 5% once they get this fixed? Hey, 5% is 5% that’d be great but I’m curious. We’ll see.
Scott: Yeah, we’re just gonna have to wait and see but it can’t be worse. There’s often a lot of fighting with plugins and stuff to get everything boosted up and like you said, we can do it but wouldn’t it be nice if we didn’t have to do it?
Ross: Yeah, no doubt. One to note, in a previous interview we had with Joost de Valk of the Yoast plugin, he was saying that they actually contribute a fair portion to the core of WordPress. They actually develop for it, to assist with it. That is open source, after all. I’d love to hear what his thoughts are on this or if his team will be working on this.
Alright, so on to SEO news. AMP links in Google Search are breaking with iOS 15. This release on September 20 caused all AMP URLs in Google search to stop working. Oh boy! John Carcutt is having a good time with that, I bet. Oh my God! All of his websites, I believe, run on AMP. That’s disastrous for new sites.
Scott: Well, it is and it isn’t. What they were saying is, when you use Safari and you try to click on an AMP listing at Google, it’s not working, it’s not taking you to that AMP page but it is directing to the non-AMP version of the page. So, at least websites are getting their traffic but it’s gonna mess with their stats. If you’re used to seeing a certain percentage of your traffic going to the AMP URLs and now that’s all screwed up because now all that traffic is going to the main site and the AMP listings are effectively going to zero, at least for Safari iOS users. If people don’t know about this issue with Google, they might start to panic like, “where’s all my AMP traffic? What’s going on here? Definitely a disaster.
Ross: Yeah, I happen to know that after discussing it with different people with different AMP- based sites, that it has dramatically improved the stickiness of their sites and the overall conversion. That’s literally taking money out of their pocket now that it has broken. Ouch. Ad suppliers and ad platforms, they’re all going to be feeling that as well.
Scott: I imagine, as with every bug that Google seems to have. This is interesting, though, considering that Google’s fixing it but it’s an iOS-related bug. It almost seems like Apple should fix it. It’s kind of like a 50-50 thing, I don’t know, because it’s only broken on Safari. I guess it’s got to be on Google’s end but how frustrating for Google too, you know.
Ross: Yeah, they got to put their team to work sometime.
Scott: Yeah, that’s right. They can’t just be playing foosball and whatever else they do over at Google.
Ross: Exactly. Going down slides and playing with multicolored toys.
Scott: Oh, now I want a slide.
Ross: Yeah, I know, me too.
Oh, well, Google publishes new help documents on controlling titles and descriptions in search. I guess this is about all that fuss that was out there about their manipulating titles on the whim.
Scott: Yeah, I don’t know how much of this was inspired by that or if this is something they had on the go but they’ve published some documents, which I’ll actually share to Facebook [SEO 101 Podcast Facebook Group] after we finish recording here just so anyone that is listening, you can go there and it will be there now. They published a couple documents on titles and meta descriptions and best practices and gave some information on how Google grabs that information. As well as giving you a little bit more idea on how to control what meta description content actually appears in search. I figure SEO 101 has 101 right in the title and what better 101 stuff is there than titles and meta descriptions. I figured I’d maybe go through a couple of these quickly. This is primarily coming directly from this Google document and none of it is really a surprise to me but for some people, it might pose a bit of help. First of all, the titles you click on within search, Google is now calling them a “title link,” which is the new name that they’re using. I’m not sure what the old name was, I think they just called them “the link”, I don’t know. They are “title link” now so if you hear people talking about that, that’s what they mean.
Ross: We need more bafflegab.
Scott: We absolutely do, we don’t have enough of that, do we? They showed a 100 page document here somewhere that explains all the random terms.
Ross: 1/10 of our glossary.
Scott: Yeah, exactly. Actually before best practices, I will just let you know how Google creates these title links and this is again from Google. This is not me making this stuff up. Primarily, they’ll start with the content found in the title element on your page (no surprise there) or they may choose a main visual title or headline shown on a page. They may choose heading elements such as an H1, they may pick other content that’s large and prominent throughout the use of style treatment. Interesting to know there that if you have text that’s physically larger on your page that you’re using CSS for, they may pull from that and see some prominence there. Other texts contained on the page — so anything, I guess. Anchor text on the page, and text within links that point to the page, they didn’t specify if that’s internal links or external links, I’m going to hope it’s primarily internal because there’s a bit of a black hat opportunity if they’ll include external. But they used to do Wikipedia and DMOZ and all that kind of stuff. I guess you’d never really know. So that’s generally where those titles come from. The best practices in this, again, is not rocket science or any big surprise here. [The best practices] are:
- Use descriptive and concise text
- Avoid vague descriptors like “home” and “profile”
- Avoid keyword stuffing
- Including branding separated by the rest of descriptive text, which is something we do for the most part anyways. You might have your stepforth.com and then a vertical pipe (|) or a colon (:) or a hyphen (-), and then a bit of descriptive relevant text about that page.
- Approximately using 50 to 60 characters in length is considered ideal but again, length has a bit of flexibility there. If you go too long, there’s no real maximum length but if you do a 5000 character title tag, most of that’s never going to be seen. So, you know, keeping it 50 to 60 characters makes the most sense.
That’s a little bit of info on titles. Were you going to say something?
Ross: Yeah, I was gonna say… I don’t know how much of it I mentioned in the last show. It always seems to be the case, I can’t remember what I did yesterday. But, one of the things that has really blown my mind about these titles is just how troublesome it is for any kind of regulated entity. See, when there is regulation in place, oftentimes it’s archaic. I’m thinking right now of dental associations. They are often basing their rules over dentists on the old print rules and they just simply don’t apply. It doesn’t work. One of the more painful ones was the Saskatchewan Dental Association – Oral Surgery Association. They have a system in place where, if you have a ranking that uses a title that says something about you being the best or says any one of their contravening phrases, they send you a letter of infraction and require you to remove it on Google search. Plus, you are required to send an apology letter. First of all, you can’t control what Google decides to choose. They will pick and choose as they wish and they can put the wrong words, hardly like the wrong meaning entirely (interpretation, everything). If you get listed in this, let’s say a “best dentists” or “best hazardous materials company” or whatever, any kind of best- listing, it’s immediately an infraction. Even though you didn’t list yourself there, someone else put you there and you immediately have to contact them and go through the pain of having that removed. It’s just stunning how much trouble this particular system that Google’s put in place could cause. If you’re putting a ton of work into ensuring your title tags, descriptions, the text on your page is all 100% compliant, and then Google goes and changes everything. Wow, it’s just mind boggling that they think they can get away with that.
Scott: In those situations, there really should be (and actually, the meta description has this available but not titles, and we’ll get to that in a sec.) a way like a meta tag or something that says do not use A, B or C or some kind of control in Search Console, or at least access to have more control If your business is in a certain category that might be impacted by some sort of health-based medical whatever, they should offer that because it’s industry wide. It’s not like one guy in one town that has this problem, it would be everybody everywhere. Well, and per country, at least, I guess.
Ross: And what it does is it makes those businesses extremely reluctant to go online. When they do go online, they’re put through a wringer. Plus, they don’t want to do ads. Plus, they don’t want to do a lot of writing. I mean they’re just concerned all the time. It’s like you’re constantly waiting for the axe to fall. Anyway, Google should have some kind of tag saying, “Do not alter” and if that’s the case and that’s a limiting factor in rankings, well, then so be it. Google ought to learn from that and say, “okay, there’s enough of these people in this search, they’re saying ‘do not alter’ that will eliminate this from being altered” I don’t know…they have to think of something because this is not acceptable.
Scott: Something like that would be easy for them because as we dive into meta descriptions here, I don’t have a lot to say about meta descriptions but one of the things that I actually didn’t know this was a thing until today (not that I’d want to use it) but there is a no-snippet meta tag that you can place on a page that prevents Google from listing a meta description or like a.. I’m not sure what their official term is, but from listing the snippet below your title link. If you don’t want a meta description to appear as the snippet, you can just say don’t show anything and throw a meta tag. So they should almost have something like that for the title tag as well, maybe not “no title,” that wouldn’t be good but something, I don’t know but I’d like Google to figure it out. Do something, guys.
Ross: They’ll just say “dentist” instead of…
Scott: Yeah, I don’t know. Don’t say “best.”
Ross: Yeah, never. May be “great”
Scott: Exactly, or list of keywords that are like negative keywords within a no link meta tag or something. I don’t know.
Ross: They just make life so much easier, don’t they?
Scott: They absolutely do. Then there’s also a couple more little things you could do for descriptions. If you want a specific maximum length for your meta description, there’s a max snippet meta tag that dictates how many characters you want your meta description to be, or your snippet to be, which I’ve never heard of either.
I also hadn’t heard that you can prevent parts of your text within your page, and this actually would have come in handy in the past had I known about it or maybe didn’t exist at the time, a data no snippet attribute. If you have a bit of text on your page that you want to ensure does not appear, guaranteed it does not appear as your search snippet, you can wrap it in a <span data-nosnippet> and Google will not use that content. If you’re finding that Google’s pulling text from a paragraph and you don’t want that to be in your snippet, but it is, you can wrap it in this tag and that will change. No saying where they’ll pull the next snippet from but at least it won’t include the stuff that you wrap. That’s kind of handy.
Ross: Charming, so nice of them.
Ross: Okay, well, let’s take a quick break and when we get back, we’re going to talk about competitor analysis for SEO.
Welcome back to SEO 101 on WMR.FM. Hosted by myself, Ross Dunn, CEO of StepForth Web Marketing and my company’s senior SEO, Scott Van Achte. Now remember, we have a show notes newsletter, you can sign up for it at seo101radio.com where you don’t have to miss a single link and refresh your memory of a past show at any time. I also invite listeners to connect with me on LinkedIn, you can connect connect with me via linkedin.com/in/websitemarketer/. Yep, instead of my name, I made “websitemarketer” my URL. At the time, it seemed smart.
Scott: I will give you 20 bucks to legally change your name right now, file the paperwork, do it.
Ross: 20 bucks!
Scott: I’m cheap. It’ll cost you more than 20 bucks to do it but you know.
Ross: There you go. Well, I’ll think about that my friend.
Scott: Can I go on a totally random side note here? The first SEO job I ever did was in 2002, I think, and it was a pro bono job. Ross might not even remember this. To help me figure out what SEO was, we found this guy and his job was to rid Canada of litter. He actually lived, at the time, about a block away from where I live now so that’s something. He used to walk around, he would pick garbage and he would bury it in his yard and it was set up to look like a graveyard with mounds and headstones of this buried garbage in his yard. I feel bad for whoever bought that house after he moved out.
Ross: How did he get away with that?
Scott: I don’t know but he got his 10 minutes of fame, he legally changed his name. If you’re listening, Mr. King, don’t take offense to this. It is kind of funny, you have to admit it. He legally changed his name to Canada Litter King, that was his legal name. So, if you’re passionate about something, why not change your name? Just go for it. Give me something to talk about next week.
Ross: Well, it’s a good segue into what I’m going to talk about after competitor analysis. I’ll just jump into it first.
Okay, so how not to choose a business name since there’s a perfect segue. So eons ago, I was asked to help a company to essentially create a proper name for their new search engine. They wanted to compete with Google, they wanted to do really well. This was back in 2003 or 2004. It was pretty cool, I was excited about it, it was really neat. It was my opportunity to make a mark and potentially have to actually say that I helped create the name of a search engine. That would be pretty awesome. I did end up doing that for a different one, but not this one. Anyway, it was a tool called “Vivisimo” and they were a search product for enterprise-level businesses. They wanted to create a consumer front facing business and they wanted a good name. So I actually consulted with a good friend of mine and we came up with a name that was brilliant. I mean, I was so amazed cause he helped me out, he was a genius. We couldn’t tell the client because he really hadn’t paid us anything yet and I knew if I just told him, he’d just run with it. I said, “well, it’s a great name. It’s based on Italian and it’s really short, it’s clever, it’s also quite classy. I think you’d really like it.” He said, “Oh, no, no, no, we’ve already chosen it.” They went with…and yes, it’s immortalized to this day, “Clusty” – “Clusty” – “Clusty” let’s hear that again. Which of course brought to mind Krusty the Clown, immediately to me.
Ross: And cluster f.. of course you know what the rest of that phrase is.
Scott: I don’t. Well, sorry.
Ross: I was apoplectic, I couldn’t believe it. “Yes, so we don’t need your service anymore” and I was like “Oh, okay.” I wrote an article about this and lambasted this idea like I just couldn’t believe it. The whole article wasn’t about it, it was about something else but I did mention this and how don’t pick a name like this. I was just so horrified. The CEO contacted me, he said “what’s wrong with it?” Anyway, needless to say it didn’t last. No one’s ever heard of Clusty. That hasn’t been around a long time anyway, in SEO and search.
You just gotta put some thought into a name. Look at different ways. If you get some feedback that’s negative, do some public testing, get some feedback on it.
And they even made it like the logo looks like a badge you would put on a work uniform, like overalls. I just don’t get it. Anyway, at the same time, and I’m sure my client appreciates this and he does listen to the show, so hello! I’ve been hired right now to help a company redefine their entire brand. Essentially, they picked a name that was in use, the .com was in use but they weren’t worried about it because it was entirely different from what they were offering. Well, that was a big mistake and I think you should all learn from this. I think, again, they would appreciate that others will learn from this too, because that brand that had the .com, what are the odds of this but they immediately copied them, either copied them or at the very same time, just by luck – they were launching the same product and it is identical. Well, the concept is, there’s no question whatsoever. They’re complete competitors now and they have the same name. What a nightmare for a startup. So I’m going through the process of helping them. I’ve already said it’s kind of luck, a good knack at finding domains and business names. That is a fun thing I like to do and I’m really grateful to be able to do this for a client. Anyways, put some thought into it [business name].
Scott: Yeah, I guess before they picked the name, they should have Clusty-ed it first. Sorry, I mean, Googled it. They should have Googled it.
Ross: Yes, and the reason they called it Clusty was because it was based on clustering search technology, like all right, that’s fine but don’t call it Clusty. Anyway, this client, though, I think their advice would be to always ensure that you can get the .com if you’re going to be doing a public facing entity that you want people to remember because if they remember it, they’re gonna go to the .com.
Scott: If you have to buy that .com, buy it now because once you’re somebody, it’s gonna get a lot more expensive.
Ross: Yeah. In fact, when we launched our First.Dentist company, the dental marketing company, we used the actual top level domain .dentist, which was quite expensive but it was really kind of cool and it was different. We didn’t own the .com and it took us about six years when I said, “you know what, we just got to pull the trigger, I don’t want anyone to buy it and end up competing with us” so we bought firstdentist.com. You do get to a certain point where you get to invest like that. However, in retrospect, we should have just bought it right off the bat. It was that, I don’t want to spend money on a company who is domain squatting, it just felt wrong. The fact is, if you need it and it’s going to be the core of your entire marketing, it’s a penny. It’s nothing compared to all the money you’re going to put into marketing. So do it. There’s my little not-so-rant-ish discussion on picking a name, I think it is important.
On another note, I had a great interview today on LinkedIn live with Jetstream, a local marketing company. My friend Mike had me on and it was really enjoyable. We talked about competitor analysis for SEO, he wanted to ask me about my experiences doing that over the years and I thought I’d just raise a few of the more interesting takeaways from it. One of the main ones is that when clients come to us and ask for competitor analysis, which we’re very good at, we’ve been doing them aggressively since 2004.
I need to sit down with our clients and really be sure they have a good sense of who their competitors are. Many don’t really know, they think they know but they’re not the competitors. It really depends on what they’re trying to attain. If they’re just like, “wow, this company next door is doing so well. I don’t know why.” Well, okay, but maybe there’s some better competitors to look at, not just this guy. Oftentimes, that’s the case. So what we tend to do is we grab a few competitors, and this is what I suggest you do if you’re going to do a competitor analysis, grab a few competitors that you think matter, as well as some of the regular top performers that are ranking well under high intent keywords. We’ve mentioned that before – high intent means these are keywords that you’ve discovered are likely to lead to the resolution you want, that conversion. Then gather their organic data from SEMrush. It’s a great tool, it’s what we use. You do need to have a paid account to get this information but it’s well worth it. Although, admittedly, they’ve gone a bit expensive, I think they are public now so gone are the really good discounts. Then assess the ranking coverage of each of the competitors.
Some of the more obvious things are: Looking at the SEMrush traffic cost, this is what SEMrush has evaluated the cost of their rankings would be if they were to pay for ads. The stability of the rankings, you can see in a good graph, how things are looking. You can see if they’re all over the place, up and down around all that stuff, then it’s typically because the site isn’t very authoritative yet. But they’re doing something right because they do get up there occasionally so maybe that’s content. How are they doing in mobile versus desktop? Are they in a market that is likely to be more mobile versus desktop? I didn’t really think about looking into that very much, initially. I thought not everything’s gonna be mobile, kind of black and white, it’s not.
StepForth – 80% of our traffic is desktop and that’s often the case for any kind of technical industry. Keep that in mind. If you’re a consumer-based business, you’re likely going to get mobile, it does really depend. If they’re focused on local rankings, just keep in mind that the competitive tools aren’t very good at comparing that. In fact, oftentimes, I see when using Semrush, I do a check for how well our clients or are our competitors doing or prospect and it says zero, there’s just nothing. But when you run a competent local visibility tool, like BrightLocal or something along those lines, tons of rankings appear. They may not be great but they show up. That’s simply because I think it’s a scaling issue. There’s so much for these tools like SEMrush to cover this. This can’t cover it all.
Some of the other elements to review: successes of a blog post, the tech stack used, ad histories or paid ads. It goes on and on. I do invite you to go and check out that Jet stream interview for the rest. I don’t want to let it all go here but it’s fascinating stuff. If anyone ever wants to talk about competitor analysis and are considering having it done, even audits, we do have it. I’m proud to say we do a very, very, very good job. Never a complaint in all our years and if we ever get feedback, we take it to heart and make the change. Good stuff and it’s very helpful when you’re starting a business.
Scott: If I can add, you said “never got a complaint,” I need to talk about the one complaint I had for doing a website audit years and years ago. One of the first website audits I did, again, it’s always when you’re new, right? I did the audit and what I thought was an awesome job, sent it to the client. He got back to me and his feedback was “you audited the wrong website?” My one big mistake was I did the audit on [a different site] and it was like a competitor site or something, I don’t know, I screwed up. That was my complaint and of course, I re-did the audit from scratch and he was very happy with the redo, but I thought I should throw that in there.
Ross: He got two for one.
Scott: He did. He learned a lot about the other one. I think I did like a .com or instead of a .ca. It was one of those types of situations.
Scott: Right. So Robert, if you’re out there listening, this is for you. On October 18, Google will be updating the job posting rich results report in Google Search Console which may result in an increase in errors within your structured data because of the way they are changing how they evaluate these reports. On October 18, you can expect to see an increase in the number of errors you’re finding as well as potentially some swaps in the severity. Warnings may become errors or errors may become warnings. Not to panic if nothing has happened on your site but you may need to address those because Google wants to evaluate it differently. Keep an eye out…that was the 18th, you probably listened to this after the fact so look at it now, look at it today.
Ross: Great. Another great article I found was on Sterling Sky and it was “Can service area pages with duplicate or similar content increase traffic.” Now those who aren’t familiar with these, if you are a local business with a brick or mortar, they typically need to also rank in places that don’t have a physical location. What we often do is we create pages that are locally relevant to a different city or whatever it may be, with more information and the services they offer. Now, a lot of companies do this and they duplicate this and they just change the location and change the image. Make it very simple, pretty much cookie cutter but for a different city. There are aspects of that that don’t need to be so cookie cutter, I do recommend some changes there. However, this one examination/analysis by Colan Nielsen, I believe it was, was that in fact, they rank very well. In this case, and I do love what he ends with, because it’s so true. We see it all the time. Don’t necessarily do as Google says, but as they do. As in these cases, they may say they don’t think these are good ideas and these pages shouldn’t be done. When it comes right down to it, if they work and they’re not harming anything. They’re certainly not polluting the internet. Go for it. You know, use it. If you want some ideas on how to maybe step it up a notch in terms of quality, well, there’s lots of articles out there or drop us a note or take a free strategy call on our website.
Scott: You did this.
Ross: This is a Mueller file. He says, someone asked whether or not product price was a ranking factor, and this is of course in more ecommerce based search results, and the answer was — nope. Now, I’m not saying that that’s all he said but that’s really the answer. I mean, I could go on long winded on you but there’s just “no” that’s not it, they don’t look at it.
On that note, on behalf of myself, Ross Dunn, CEO of StepForth Web Marketing and my company’s senior SEO, Scott Van Achte, thank you for joining us today. I hope you have a great week and remember to tune in to future episodes which are every week on WMR.FM.
Scott: And that’s the way it is. Thanks for listening, everybody