<?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: SEO vs. PPC &#8211; What&#8217;s Right for Your Business?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://mikekhorev.com/seo-vs-ppc-whats-right-business/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://mikekhorev.com/seo-vs-ppc-whats-right-business</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2023 13:58:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=5.6.16</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Al Gomez		</title>
		<link>https://mikekhorev.com/seo-vs-ppc-whats-right-business#comment-963</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Al Gomez]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2018 10:14:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://mikekhorev.com/?p=10189#comment-963</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I do agree with this: “if your budget allows and if the CPC still permits a positive ROI, consider combining both for better results”. Those are good partners if you’ve got budget. It’s nice that you have discussed this Mike.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do agree with this: “if your budget allows and if the CPC still permits a positive ROI, consider combining both for better results”. Those are good partners if you’ve got budget. It’s nice that you have discussed this Mike.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Cory Stoops		</title>
		<link>https://mikekhorev.com/seo-vs-ppc-whats-right-business#comment-869</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cory Stoops]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Oct 2018 19:06:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://mikekhorev.com/?p=10189#comment-869</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Google may well be able to recognise ‘low-quality’ a lot better than it does ‘high-quality’ – so having a lot of ‘low-quality’ pages on your site is potentially what you are actually going to be rated on (if it makes up most of your site) – now, or in the future. NOT your high-quality content.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google may well be able to recognise ‘low-quality’ a lot better than it does ‘high-quality’ – so having a lot of ‘low-quality’ pages on your site is potentially what you are actually going to be rated on (if it makes up most of your site) – now, or in the future. NOT your high-quality content.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
