Marketing and management of Internet projects

With a slight delay (not only by prokrastynację Today I released again (his third!) calendar productive.

As usual - is available here: calendar 2009 .

By the way: Viral marketing does not work. Tell everyone you meet

Seriously, the last year, encouraged by the advice Entente - calendar making available only to those who commended it to your friends. This year, I resigned from this technique. Why?

Of course, had little effect. People noted in the form and clogging my mailbox recoveries. This technique can be effective 5-10 years ago, when people actually praised by the number of their friends, but today - we have some other Internet users.

This appeared to be unobtrusive method of recommending - trench and a personal e-mail to a friend. I hope that these methods of marketing will work calendar and this year will know more people than last year.

If you have any comments on the calendar - write them below in the commentary. If you appreciate my work done in creating a calendar - please kick this link .

If you like this entry, please him
or recommend other social networking sites:

Luke Jarzembowski, author of the blog - since 2006 under the illusion that it will be rich ... ;-) But still working hard on this. Programs , blogging , and positions , creating and promoting their e-businesses .

Entries similar to the "Incentive Calendar 2009"

No related posts

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 22, 2009 at 16:18 and is classified to category: motivation . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can comment , or leave a trackback from your own site.

2 Responses to "Motivational Calendar 2009"

1. Marta wrote:
   on 10 March 2009 at 14:48

   Hi, I congratulate the idea :)
   I noticed a small mistake in the calendar. This is a calendar (apparently) in 2009 and bears such descriptions weeks: 1 week of 2008, 2 wk 2008 years, etc.

2. Jarzembowski Luke wrote:
   on 11 March 2009 at 10:14

   Thank you for your attention. Error already corrected. Schedule was / is for 2009 and the distribution of weeks to agree, and the error was only "editorial"

Comment