<?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: Confusing Local Search Intent At Google</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2010/01/03/local-search-intent/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2010/01/03/local-search-intent/</link>
	<description>Search Engine Optimization Journal is an SEO Blog that contains usefule articles, tips, resources and news about SEO.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:02:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Is Google Quietly Tweaking Local Search</title>
		<link>http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2010/01/03/local-search-intent/comment-page-1/#comment-87089</link>
		<dc:creator>Is Google Quietly Tweaking Local Search</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:02:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/?p=9878#comment-87089</guid>
		<description>[...] There is an interesting article on Web Pro News that discusses a significant change to local search when it comes to SEO and web design. Put simply, SEO and web design businesses are no longer appearing in local searches, at least, not for simple searches. I wrote about this last week as well, please read the post at the following link: http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2010/01/03/local-search-intent/ [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] There is an interesting article on Web Pro News that discusses a significant change to local search when it comes to SEO and web design. Put simply, SEO and web design businesses are no longer appearing in local searches, at least, not for simple searches. I wrote about this last week as well, please read the post at the following link: <a href="http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2010/01/03/local-search-intent/" rel="nofollow">http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2010/01/03/local-search-intent/</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Stamoulis</title>
		<link>http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2010/01/03/local-search-intent/comment-page-1/#comment-85522</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Stamoulis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:10:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/?p=9878#comment-85522</guid>
		<description>Hi Rinnell,
Thanks for reading.  Google right now is the king for sure!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Rinnell,<br />
Thanks for reading.  Google right now is the king for sure!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rinnell Garrett</title>
		<link>http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/2010/01/03/local-search-intent/comment-page-1/#comment-85456</link>
		<dc:creator>Rinnell Garrett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 07:55:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com/?p=9878#comment-85456</guid>
		<description>Great information. Google is like a king who can do anything he wants. But this decision by king looks good to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great information. Google is like a king who can do anything he wants. But this decision by king looks good to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

