Conventional wisdom holds that somebody once said that it is easier to tear down than to build up.
That guy was right.
After much discussion, disagreement and digression, we still have not established a Mission Statement that might bring about a New Day Rising in IndyCar racing.
Our most comprehensive effort to date came from the keypad of Citizen John. Let us review his submission.
"IndyCar exists to provide a superior auto racing product for the avid and casual fan alike that is compelling, entertaining and fun to watch. IndyCar is committed to making every interaction a fan has with IndyCar an exciting, enjoyable and memorable experience."
Recall that the Mission Statement should explain why the firm should exist. More specifically, it should broadly state what the organization must do consistently if it is to achieve its Vision. Our Vision Statement is below.
"IndyCar shall be the clear number-one choice among auto racing consumers in the United States. At its core is the Indianapolis 500, an iconic American institution that shall transcend the sport of racing and be a worldwide automotive celebration."
Can we assume that if we were to achieve the Mission that John has proposed, we could then expect IndyCar to become "the number-one choice among auto racing consumers in the United States?"
I am skeptical. I believe that IndyCar must do more. For example, I like the addition that was proposed by Mr. Cooper.
"...leadership in testing automotive solutions for 21st Century needs."
This might lend relevance and technological intrigue to IndyCar racing that would differentiate it from NASCAR. Here, we could rearrange the playing field, adding real significance to the product so that we might avoid competing head-to-head with NASCAR in the racingtainment market. Innovation also speaks to our Vision of the Indy 500 transcending the sport to become a worldwide automotive celebration.
BC wrote that IndyCar should 1) serve fans and 2) "honor and build upon the heritage" of the Indy 500 and championship racing. I think that Mr. Cooper's suggestion would help us to accomplish both of those tasks.
Ground Rules
I think that we are close to resolution. However, certain asides continue to foil our efforts. Therefore, as we attempt to finalize our Mission Statement, let us not raise any one of the following subjects.
- The name of either the series or the sanctioning body
- Specific attributes of the cars, drivers and tracks
- Costs
We will discuss each of those issues and many more in due time.
For now, let us consider Citizen John's proposed Mission Statement. Does it contain redundancies that should be eliminated? Have we omitted anything that is essential to IndyCar's existence?
Let's get moving and wrap this up.
Roggespierre
Hi "R."
ReplyDeleteI commend you for your leadership. The specific task of the moment is a mission statement, not a discussion of opinions about promotional tactics. That distinction must be clear for someone to make a meaningful contribution and I see you are trying to help people understand.
Based on the contributions I am seeing to the specific task, a synthesis of John's original work and my augmentation about 21st century transportation leadership/solutions looks pretty good.
I think there should be a trigger point to revisit the mission statement at a milestone in the not-too-distant future. A check-in after additional discussion with a potential loop back to mission is entirely appropriate. In fact, I would say it is due diligence.
Doesn't this say it all?
ReplyDelete"IndyCar exists to provide a superior auto racing product for the avid and casual fan alike that is compelling, entertaining and memorable".
osca
The role of leadership in testing automotive technology is essential. It is part of the value of the brand dating back to Carl Fisher. Without it, your mission statement has no teeth. It is not unique in the marketplace. If it is not more than entertaining - which it needs to be - it is a drop in the sea with nothing special to merit attention.
ReplyDeleteSpot on Tom.
ReplyDeleteI forgot to add the words "as well as technically innovative", so it now read;
"IndyCar exists to provide a superior auto racing product and appeal to the avid and casual fan alike that is compelling, entertaining and memorable as well as technically innovative".
Better?
osca
Thanks, osca.
ReplyDeleteI like just a little more specificity around "technically innovative." That could mean a lot of things and we need to be clear that we expect to provide leadership in testing 21st century auto solutions.
Let me suggest, "provides leadership in testing 21st century automotive solutions," in place of "and memorable as well as technically innovative."
I am also not convinced that our mission statement should skew the sport to the "casual" fan. Part of a good marketing plan would be to identify un-served markets, but that's different and more tactical in nature. The implication of having "casual fan" in your mission statement is that you intend to go to extraordinary efforts to accommodate them. I just don't think it wise to chart a course of business around people that are ambivalent about your value proposition. So, here is what I suggest:
"IndyCar exists to provide consumers of the sport their premier choice of auto racing entertainment with leadership in testing 21st century automotive solutions."
I like this because it says you want to be number one in a market space with clear parameters. It is also consistent with the heritage of the Indy 500, which has lost its way in recent years and stumbled around in the dark a bit.
Tom:
ReplyDeleteI like your proposed mission statement for two reasons. One: it differentiates us from NASCAR (which truth be known has never claimed any technical innovation worth a hoot) and two: it, as you say, places us in a market space that no one else has laid claim to.
Thanks, GreyMouser.
ReplyDeleteI think it also distinguishes us from F-1 as well. F-1 is unlimited tech, or something along those lines. Indy should be about tech with a purpose of tackling the tech challenges of transportation transformation.
I like the idea of differentiating IndyCar from NASCAR with innovation. However, I'm having a hard time translating innovation into increased fan interest. Sure, there would be some interest, but as to substantial interest 'because of' innovation, I don't know. Fan interest in sports seems to center around skill and strategy of the participants.
ReplyDeleteLike I said, I like idea in some capacity, but how many people will watch IndyCar 'because' it is the leader in testing automotive solutions for 21st century needs?
-John
Hi everyone, been watching this for a month now, finally decided to contribute my 2 cents.
ReplyDeleteTom Cooper said...
"Indy should be about tech with a purpose of tackling the tech challenges of transportation transformation."
This is great in theory, but it seems to me that the tech challenges for transportation in the 21st century are about energy efficiency. It certainly isn't about speed and power, except within the constraint of energy efficiency. I'm not convinced that you can create a compelling racing product around what amounts to a fuel economy run. (Homestead anyone?)
As far as it goes, I'm not even sure that technical innovation is really much of a selling point for most fans. The most popular racing product in the US is intentionally kept low tech, and it doesn't seem to hurt its popularity.
I think technical innovation is fine for the mission statement but I'm leery of tying it too closely to 21st century transportation transformation. If it ends up that way, great, but why constrain yourself?
--Dave NJ
I think technical innovation is fine for the mission statement but I'm leery of tying it too closely to 21st century transportation transformation. If it ends up that way, great, but why constrain yourself?
ReplyDeleteDave,
WOW, what a way to jump in to this thing! I was thinking exactly the same way as you - linking IndyCar to "transportation" or "automotive" solutions for the 21st century definitely seems to be a bit of a "leading" focus, so to speak. Like, "we'll be right in the fuel efficiency mix".
Ok, this will be the only comment I'll make on this post (unless specifically addressed). Slogging indeed. Roggespierre, do you get to add "committee moderation" to your resume?
I think I was approaching this from off of the same page as everyone else. I've been suggesting mention of building upon the heritage of the 500, and/or a specific phrase that alludes to the whole of Championship/Indy racing.
I think I get it now that we are looking for a DESCRIPTIVE term that naturally includes elements of Indy racing's heritage. For example, the purpose might be "to be innovative" vs. "to uphold the heritage of the Indy 500 [which includes a strong tradition of innovation]".
So, for the two parts of the mission statement:
1. "Serve the fans". For this part I would only say that I agree with not specifically targeting "casual fans" at such a broad level.
2. The "teeth" (per Tom C's usage):
I've been fan of referring to the heritage in order to, by default, allude to the values we will embrace (innovation, relevance, whatever we come up with). Others here support referring to specific values or focuses which would by default suggest a continuance of the heritage.
I feel like my approach is more naturally inclusive. I can see how both ways could be limited. "Automotive solutions in the 21st century" points decidedly away from things like raw speed while "upholding the tradition of..." could impede discussion of values and solutions that may be of use NOW but would not have been a part of championship/Indy racing in the past, and vice versa.
But since the discussion seems to be moving away from my initial conception of the idea, I hereby declare support of however Roggespierre decides to put the statement together, "as if" I fully agree. Haha.
John wrote:
but how many people will watch IndyCar 'because' it is the leader in testing automotive solutions for 21st century needs?
This is kind of why I don't like that specific phrase, and why I like the "heritage" stuff...but on the other hand, couldn't the interest in innovation have everything to do with what exactly "innovation" means and how it is marketed? Innovation=speed was a drawing point in the past. At the mission statement level, it seems like Roggespierre would like to leave it at Innovation=?. Until ? is discussed, I wouldn't be against hanging on to a concept that has been such a major part of Indy racing's history.
BC:
ReplyDeleteYour point about the heritage of IndyCar being innovative is noted. But I think it can be argued the last "true" innovation that came out of IndyCar was the rear view mirror. Fuel cells came from the aircraft industry as did disk brakes. Innovation as in Andy Granatelli's turbine car did not translate to the general automotive scene. So I'm wondering if innovation, in the broad sense of the word, is leading us up a path which ultimately may be a dead end?
GreyMouser,
ReplyDeleteI think you may be overlooking what "innovation" may mean to this statement.
Since every era (automotive era) brings new ideas, "innovation", means not only new ideas, but also adapting to and improving the ideas already available.
Turbo charging was adapted and improved on Indy cars (Herb Porter started the trend, his first ones were awful, but over time they began to bring a new tool to be used to go faster with smaller engines), tire improvements have been directly improved by racing including IndyCar.
It may be argued that "innovation" even when it fails to translate to our everyday transportation--it still has value to a racing series. The KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery System) may be adapted to road cars--or it may not.
Toyota developed the Hybrid System for the Prius--might it not be adapted and used some day by an “innovative” engineer on a race car?
You mentioned the "turbine", it was a failure on the "roadway", but it sure brought interest to the "speedway".
The first lay-downs ( Lesovsky and Epperlly‘s) , the first Watson, the first Kurtis Kraft “Roadsters”, the first rear engine Offy, the Novi, the little green Lotus, the first turbo Ford engine, Smokey's side-car-----all were "innovative", some good ,some bad, some awful, but all brought interest to racing.
Maybe there is a better word--or series of words that define what we are trying to say--but it seems to me that "technological innovation" is as close to what we mean to say as I can come up with.
osca
Every year in F-1, we've seen cars become faster and faster showing new equipment, and not solely because of horsepower. Lots of people hated the F-1 cars the last two/three years because of all the wild aero-outcroppings. I thought it was great. Seriously, how cool was it to see the Honda factory team getting beat by a modified two year old chassis? You can't tell me either that it no affect on aerodynamic styling when you see supercars like the Gumpbert.
ReplyDeleteInnovation will always initally be limited to the racetrack early on and moves from there with public demand and interest assuming you have a testing ground for that sort of thing. Nothing wrong with that.
In terms of the vision statement;
"IndyCar shall be the clear number-one choice among auto racing consumers in the United States."
Hate this. If we're looking to market solely to whatever it is that auto racing consumers are, failure is inevitable. It must be a product that appeals to them, but long term success and the return of ratings requires new people.
"IndyCar shall be the clear number-one auto racing choice among consumers in the United States."
That, I feel, is better.
Guys,
ReplyDeleteThis discussion is outstanding. It leaves me wishing that I had a more efficient forum option so that we could more easily exchange ideas.
I really, really like TC's idea about revisiting the Mission statement after we begin to tackle the nitty gritty of the Marketing Plan.
For example, I think that the small but significant change that VB has suggested for the Vision Statement has merit. At first glance, I am inclined to accept his argument and make the change.
We need to be able to do that going forward. And so we shall.
I'll take some of these points to the top this afternoon. I'm thinking that I'll go with multiple posts - one per issue. That might be the best way to tackle this; it might also work well when we get to the myriad issues involved in the Marketing Plan.
Thanks and Regards,
Roggespierre
VB and osca:
ReplyDeletePoint taken. I agrre with you. I like VB's rephrasing. Innovation does not neccessrily mean "new" it can also mean "new applications" of existing technology or nascent technologies.
Be careful with just using the word, "innovation," as it provides little direction and fails to differentiate. I like relevant innovation. The market discontinuity disrupting the auto industry is a huge opening for IndyCar to seize leadership within a definable market space. It would be a huge mistake to miss this opportunity. As for 21st century automotive solutions leading us onto a path of economy runs, that's silly. It is still a race and the objective is to get to the finish line ahead of everyone else. Like the original intent of the Indy 500, testing innovations under the extreme conditions of this huge competition is simply a way of demonstrating that if it will work in those circumstances, it will work in common use.
ReplyDeleteTC:
ReplyDeleteHow about this: "...providing leadership in testing new applications of existing or emerging technologies."
Hi GreyMouser.
ReplyDeleteI guess my problem with that is that it is too broad and again, does not differentiate. How is that different than what F-1 does? How can we insure that what we do is relevant to the market discontinuity that is facing the automobile industry in general? To know that the automobile industry is reacting to challenges of sustainability and energy independence and not to latch onto that allows something special to slip through our hands. These changes are the next big thing for automobiles. Again, when we reflect on guys like Carl Fisher, that is exactly what they were about. It is our heritage, it is our claim to a grander cause. It will also be good business and attract new market segments/sponsors.
Hi Tom:
ReplyDeleteI can see were you are trying to get to. I think this is closer to what you (and I) are striving for:
"IndyCar exists to provide consumers of the sport their premier choice in auto racing entertainment. At the same time it is responding to the oncoming challenges in automotive development by testing new applications of existing and emerging technologies."
I think this differentiates us from NASCAR and F1 by emphasizing relevant, practical "innovation". This also hearkens back to Carl Fisher's dream of Indy being a testing ground for the automotive industry.
All this about assembling a field of cars going in some form of a circle in some form of competition... amazing.
ReplyDeleteYes, let's reflect on Carl Fisher, who was an investor and promoter, not a car guy. The reason there is an Indianapolis 500 is because the Speedway couldn't make ends meet with balloon, motorcycle and auto racing. The 1911 500-mile event was a last gasp to turn sufficient profit - and it worked out essentially by mixing a long race with its many uncertainties, a big purse, and the most famous drivers of the day with a festive holiday picnic. And that recipe worked well until 1996.
Now, for all the verbiage expended above, the fact remains that somewhere along the line you're eventually going to have to design a series product that is profitable to promoters and participants, not to mention sponsors and media, around those vision and mission statements - or doctor the words to cover the product.
Rocketman53:
ReplyDeleteYour are right about Carl Fisher in almost all regards. You forgot to mention that the original purpose of the track at Indianapolis was to provide a testing ground for automobiles that would allow the safe testing of cars off the public highways. The reason the track was built in Indianapolis was because the fledgling automible industry was clustered around there. When it became clear to Fisher and his aassociates that the track was not paying it's way as a test track they resorted to putting on races to pay the bills. The rest of what you wrote is correct.
Regarding the designing of a "series product", that is what we are attempting to do here. We are trying to define what IndyCar should be.Remember that IndyCar racing "evolved" over an 80+ year span. It was not directed by design it evolved naturally. Today's IndyCar is a horrible mutant of the original form.
As a broad purpose/mission statement, is the following acceptable?
ReplyDeleteI. IndyCar's 'primary' purpose/mission is to provide the highest quality entertainment to the greatest quantity of people.
-John
Rocketman:
ReplyDeleteTom Cooper here.
Please, let's not get off on a tangent. At risk of doing so, I have to tell you your assessment of Carl Fisher is incorrect. He was very much a "car guy." He raced them competitively with moderate success. He started what may have been the first dealership in the United States, certainly in Indianapolis. His breakthrough product was an automobile accessory, the first viable headlight, albeit compressed gas, not electric. He led the development of the first transcontinental highways. He was not an engineer, but he was a marketer and there are plenty of "car guy" marketers. That said, debating that point does not help us progress in the worthwhile pursuit of a mission statement.
Remain focused on a mission statement. Properly done, these can be tedious. Getting frustrated and skipping over important elements of a professional marketing plan leaves where we have been the past 15 years: yaking on forums full of egos trying to "one-up" the next guy. I could compromise to something close to GreyMouser's proposal, but we cannot phrase it with a word like "responding to." It must be leadership.
To another of GreyMouser's points, he is very much correct that through most of its history the "500" evolved organically. That's all fine, but it needs direction now because we are on a different point of the product lifecycle. That is one of the reasons why catching the next wave of relevant tech - driven by sustainability and alternative energy - is a huge opportunity for leadership.
I have just found this blog and am trying to catch up. I like the Vision statement, but think that it fails to place Indy in its proper perspective...I know that this issue has been decided, but felt that I could at least suggest a close alternative. Here it is the way it stands:
ReplyDeleteIndyCar shall be the clear number-one choice among auto racing consumers in the United States. At its core is the Indianapolis 500, an iconic American institution that shall transcend the sport of racing and be a worldwide automotive celebration.
and my version:
IndyCar shall be the clear number-one choice among auto racing consumers. At its core is the Indianapolis 500, The Greatest Spectacle in Racing, that shall transcend sports and be a global celebration.
ALL THAT ASIDE...I feel that the inclusion of a term like INNOVATION should include the partners and race teams as they are likely to be the ones introducing it. It was not the sactioning body that put the first rear-view mirror on the Marmon Wasp.
Maybe something like:
We are committed to working with our partners to provide a superior auto racing product for the avid and casual fan alike that is compelling, entertaining and fun to watch. We are also committed to providing race teams with the opportunity to push the boundaries of racing technology and innovation into the 21st century and beyond. Every interaction a fan or partner has with our company should be an exciting, enjoyable and memorable experience.
Thanks for letting me voice my opinion. I have always loved the 500 AND the series. I believe that this series should aim at claiming the Open-Wheel World Championship as its own.
-indyian
inndyian:
ReplyDeleteBRAVO!!!!!
Sometimes a fresh ser of eyes helps us all see clearer. I like your vision statement and your mission statement. It addresses all our core constituencies. It differentiates us from NASCAR (entertainment for entertainment's sake) and F1 (ultimate technology for technology's sake) and places us in a market realm no one else had laid claim to.
Please continue with us. Welcome sir.
We are committed to working with our partners to provide a superior auto racing product for the avid and casual fan alike that is compelling, entertaining and fun to watch. We are also committed to providing race teams with the opportunity to push the boundaries of racing technology and innovation into the 21st century and beyond. Every interaction a fan or partner has with our company should be an exciting, enjoyable and memorable experience.
ReplyDelete+1
Don't know if it's THE one, but I felt pretty darn satisfied reading this.
Why focus on IndyCar serving 'suppliers' in the mission statement?
ReplyDeleteWe can't serve two masters.
-John
Carry on...
ReplyDeleteI think the mission should be focused on promoting technical variety (different chassis and engines) rather than focusing on new technologies specifically. I don't think the racing consumer really cares that someone is using the latest tech as much as they care that team A is doing something different from team B. Technical variety still encourages teams to try new things if they make sense and will make them competitive, but doesn't box teams into technical solutions that don't make sense for racing just because the auto industry is trying to develop it.
ReplyDelete--Dave
I think we're working too hard to compromise and not enough to find a powerful mission statement. As long as we stay within the limited domain of saying we want to entertain people (and yes, we need to do that or we're toast), we have no differentiation. Saying it differentiates doesn't mean it does.
ReplyDeleteCheck out this link:
http://cleantechnica.com/2009/10/19/25-billion-for-imported-oil-in-one-month/
This is a clear market trend. You may not agree with it, but it is. 90% of the trick of marketplace success is recognizing where things are going, not where we are. And there are plenty of people that will argue that what we have now is "entertaining." We need to connect with a very real issue that is relevant to the automotive industry and will touch everyone's lives - 21st century automotive solutions does exactly that. That does not mean the racing product will not be fast, thrilling and competitive - just like NASCAR, Motocross, MotoGP and so on. This is a leadership issue - which means you need to break away from the pack with new ideas, not just a promise to out-do the other organization that delivers motor sports entertainment.
Tom,
ReplyDeleteI contend that your market trend is one of economic necessity, not passion and enthusiasm. As such, I don’t believe that it automatically translates into consumer demand for it in the racing world.
Generally, people do not buy “green” cars because they are really awesome; they buy them to save money or the environment. Similarly, the fact that people buy more hamburger than steak does not mean they prefer hamburger, and it doesn’t mean they will be satisfied with hamburger when they choose to spend their money on the luxury of dining out.
Racing is the automotive equivalent of dining out. I don’t believe the racing consumer will be satisfied with the same “hamburger” that they drove to the race, unless it is capable of competing on equal terms. If all of this “green” tech was made legal for next year, there isn’t one technology that I’m aware of that would even come close to qualifying, let alone winning the Indy 500, without effectively outlawing the current technology. “Green” tech is years, if not decades away from competing straight up against current tech, and until it can it will make for a second-rate race car and a second-rate race. I believe the racing consumer wants sound and fury and speed, not a science fair. If you have some relevant data that shows otherwise I would like to see it.
(The above comment does not consider a conventional engine using alternate fuels since that is a trivial alteration that I don’t think is the kind of tech you are talking about.)
Anyway, I’m guessing that you and I will have to agree to disagree on this one.
--Dave
Hi Dave.
ReplyDeleteI am not suggesting "green." I think marketing cars or energy because they are "green" is a non-starter. This is about dealing with the reality of a world that needs sustainability in its products for national security. It is the way the automobile will evolve, why not position IndyCar as a leader in this trend.
Interest will be piqued in a mix of new and different cars as it was for decades in the history of the Indy 500. Why people want to devolve new ideas to stark black and white choices is hard to understand.
I am not advocating outlawing the current formula. I am merely suggesting that we advantage an alternative based on nascent technology to give it a chance to flourish - and for our form of racing to make a contribution that is unique.
This is how it could manifest itself in rules for the 2011 Indy 500:
*Current formula legal as is.
*Requirement: nobody uses more than 20 gallons of fuel.
*Open the rules to allow unlimited electric motor cars. Anything goes with the powerplant.
*Open the rules in the same manner for hydrogen cell cars.
*Hybrid cars are wide-open as well - but are also limited to 20 gallons of fuel.
You give competitors a loophole and by God they will come up with something astonishing. That is very exciting.
As I have said repeatedly, nothing about this says these race cars should not go fast, be dangerous, be thrilling. You are labeling what I am saying as "science fair," but that is your characterization, not mine.
What I do not see is an attempt to produce a mission statement that reflects a unique market position that IndyCar can own. It is essential to be unique to own a space and build a meaningful brand. Otherwise we have just another flavor of motor sports entertainment that will produce no more interest than currently exists. What is needed is breakthrough thinking, not denigration of creativity.
Hi Tom,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your comments, and want to apologize if I come across as denigrating. I guess I get caught up in my argument.
I mentioned in an earlier post that I think technical variety should be encouraged. To me that would include any technology that makes sense for winning the race under a given set of constraints. I would agree that fuel consumption limits would be a potentially interesting constraint.
What worries me is that in order to make the technologies you mentioned competitive you have to drop the fuel comsumption standard pretty low. In your example, 20 gallons for a 500 mile race. That would mean that the cars would have to get 25 miles to the gallon. That would effectively outlaw the current formula since they don't get 25 mpg even under yellow flag conditions.
Electric cars don't go much faster than 130mph and given current battery tech, they won't go far. I've heard as much as 150-200 miles between charges but that is certainly not at 130mph.
Hydrogen fuel cells? How do you package the compressed hydrogen bottles so that they aren't a bomb in a crash?
Hybrids? They're great at making mileage in stop and go conditions, but at sustained speed they are just a regular car carrying unneeded hardware.
That is not to say that none of these issues can be solved but is only meant to point out that none of this is ready for 2011 or 2012.
I think what could work is to gradually lower the fuel consumption limit over the years. That would have the teams trying different conventional engine solutions, and open the window for new tech when it's ready for prime time.
I think this really a discussion for later in the process, so back to the mission statement.
--Dave
Thanks, Dave.
ReplyDeleteI pretty much agree with everything you said in this latest post. I picked 20 gallons to start a discussion. Obviously, Honda would be up in arms. Maybe it is even the kind of thing where you announce a gradual increase in fuel mileage as you suggest. I also believe that tech advancements that seem impossible now suddenly become achievable when you lay down the challenge. Letting people do whatever they want with specified emerging motor tech would inevitably encourage somebody to take a stab at it. In this I am hopeful that a whole new breed of interested parties will emerge. From my conversations with some Formula Hybrid teams, these young engineers are interested in motor sport, but want nothing to do with IndyCar. They want to do F-1, but tell me that if another series would focus on sustainable tech they would be all over it. But you are right...we should finish our first draft of mission statement and then get into product definition.
Thanks for writing.
This piece of writing will help the internet people for creating new weblog or even a blog from start to end.
ReplyDeleteVisit my website - click through the next document
I seldom comment, but i did some searching and wound up here "Slogging toward a New IndyCar Mission".
ReplyDeleteAnd I do have a couple of questions for you if you usually do not mind.
Could it be simply me or does it look as if like a few of the responses appear like they are coming from brain dead visitors?
:-P And, if you are posting on additional social
sites, I'd like to keep up with everything new you have to post. Could you list of all of all your communal sites like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?
Here is my page - organic green coffee beans uk
Good day! Do you know if they make any plugins to protect against hackers?
ReplyDeleteI'm kinda paranoid about losing everything I've worked hard on.
Any tips?
my blog post; garcinia urdu
Way cool! Some extremely valid points! I appreciate you penning this
ReplyDeletewrite-up plus the rest of the site is also really good.
my site: realgarciniacambogia.webs.com
For the reason that the admin of this website is working, no uncertainty
ReplyDeletevery rapidly it will be renowned, due to its quality contents.
my webpage: teeth whitening process
Hello there, You have done an incredible job. I'll certainly digg it and personally recommend to my friends. I'm sure they will be benefited from this website.
ReplyDeleteAlso visit my web page - hair brush
Thanks for your personal marvelous posting! I actually enjoyed reading it, you
ReplyDeletewill be a great author.I will be sure to bookmark your blog and may
come back sometime soon. I want to encourage that you continue your great posts,
have a nice evening!
Look at my site; garcinia source naturals
When I originally commented I clicked the "Notify me when new comments are added" checkbox and now each
ReplyDeletetime a comment is added I get several emails with the same comment.
Is there any way you can remove me from that service?
Thanks!
Look at my blog; julie chen md garcinia cambogia
We are a gaggle of vοlunteers аnԁ opеning а brand
ReplyDeletenew scheme in our community. Youг site оffereԁ us with useful info to woгκ
on. You havе done аn impгessive process аnd ouг entіre community can be grаteful to you.
Аlsο visit my weblog; kmi.tl
Ηі there Deaг, are уou really ѵisitіng this web site regulaгly, if ѕo afterwaгԁ уou
ReplyDeleteωill definitеlу obtaіn pleasant еxperience.
Hеrе is my web pаge: http://bilingualfamiliesinspain.com/
It's an remarkable article for all the online visitors; they will take advantage from it I am sure.
ReplyDeletemy blog ... www.sgfc-kazan.net
Nice ρost. I uѕed to be checking continuously this weblog and I'm impressed! Very useful information specifically the remaining phase :) I care for such information much. I used to be looking for this certain info for a very lengthy time. Thanks and good luck.
ReplyDeleteHere is my homepage :: does the raspberry ketone diet work
Nice blog heгe! Also youг web ѕіtе loads up fast!
ReplyDeleteWhat host are you using? Cаn ӏ get yоuг
affiliatе link to youг host? I wish my site loadeԁ
uρ as quickly as youгs lol
Fеel fгee to visit my weblog ... pure green coffee bean extract walgreens
Hey there! Thiѕ is my first visit to youг
ReplyDeleteblog! We are a gгοup οf ѵolunteers
and starting a new ρroϳect in а сommunity in the ѕаme nichе.
Your blog ρгoνided us beneficial information tο ωoгκ on.
Yοu havе donе а outstаndіng job!
Review my blog ultimate raspberry ketone reviews
ӏ got this site from my buԁdy who sharеd with me on the topiс of this ωеb site anԁ nοw thiѕ time I аm νisiting thiѕ ωeb
ReplyDeletepagе and reading verу infоrmatіve artiсlеѕ
at this time.
my wеb-sitе ... pure raspberry ketone
I pay a visіt еveгy day а feω sites and infoгmatіon sites to read aгticles, but this weblog givеs featuгe basеd сontent.
ReplyDeletemy web pаge - raspberry ketone diet dr oz
we still have not established a Mission Statement that might bring about a New Day Rising in IndyCar racing. motorsport sponsorship proposal example
ReplyDelete