Search Fulfillment: Yahoo! is best of breed
Written by Jeremy Crane (contact - e-mail) -- September 26th, 2007 | Recommend ThisEvery month I write about market share and inevitably the story tends to remain the same … Google big and growing. An interesting data point got me thinking recently. According to Compete data there are roughly 7.5 billion search queries performed every month by the US Online Population. However there are only about 5 billion search referrals every month. This means that roughly 1/3 of all searches in some sense go unanswered. People search for something and then don’t click on a search result. So the obvious question is which search engine is doing the best job from a “search fulfillment” standpoint? As a reminder here is where we stood from a market share perspective in August.
As I noted a few weeks ago, Google gets about 2/3rds of the web search volume. So from this perspective Google appears to dominate and have the most successful search engine. If volume is an indication of effectiveness, one might be ready to crown Google the best search engine. However, if we look at the numbers from a “search fulfillment” perspective by engine we get a very different story.
Yahoo! pretty much takes the cake on this one with about 75% of searches performed on Yahoo! in August resulted in a referral. By comparison, searches on Google result in a referral about 65% of the time and searches on MSN/Live result in a referral about 59% of the time. Lower search fulfillment numbers mean that on a percentage basis fewer search queries on that engine resulted in the searcher clicking on a result link. So from this perspective one might consider Yahoo! more effective at getting consumers the results they want.
In reality the devil is in the details and the story is much more complicated than that, but it’s always interesting to look at something from a new angle. Regardless of your opinion of which engine is more effective, it is important to consider actual referrals as well as top level searches. This is one of the reasons that we focused our Search Analytics tools on helping marketers understand actual search referral traffic as opposed to simple search query volumes.
Did you like that post? You'll love these.
Done reading? subscribe: To get an automatic feed of all future posts subscribe here, or to receive them via email enter your email address in the box in the right column.
Link to This Post:
Posted under: Online Media & Search |
Trackback Link | Permalink | 
Get the 
September 26th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
Depending on the search being done, the results can indeed show different stories. Especially when it comes to the one third of searches not resulting in a referral.
Here is but one: http://blog.mpecsinc.ca/2007/09/windows-live-search-versus-google.html
In a simple search for some contact information, Google hit it so good, that one did not need to click on any links to get to more information. They even included a map.
Yahoo.ca was the same in its results without a map. Their top two results gave us the info we were looking for.
Windows Live Search missed by a long shot. In fact, the search was delineated by ” ” and they still missed.
Thanks for the stats and the info on search results.
Philip
September 26th, 2007 at 9:11 pm
Hey Jeremy! Interesting post, but I’m not sure I agree. For example, sometimes you can get the answer you want right from a search engine snippet, and don’t need to click on anything.
Here’s a couple simple examples:
- Do the query [ounces in a shot] on Google vs. Yahoo. Google gives you the answer directly: “1 shot = 1.5 US fluid ounces”. On Yahoo, you don’t get any OneBox answer, and the snippets are unclear. You’d need to click on a result or two to find the answer.
- Suppose I wanted to know what your job title was and did the query [jeremy crane compete] on Google vs. Yahoo. On Google, I see the answer right in snippet for the #3 result: “Jeremy Crane Director, Search and Online Media”. On Yahoo, the snippets aren’t as helpful; you’re described as an analyst a couple times, but not until the #10 snippet do I see your job title. So a Yahoo user might be more likely to click on some results to find the answer on the page.
There are lots more I could think of (e.g. people using Google for spellcheck), but those two examples were the first ones I thought of.
September 27th, 2007 at 10:30 am
Absolutely, I couldn’t agree with you more Matt. This is why I mention at the end of the post “In reality the devil is in the details and the story is much more complicated than that, but it’s always interesting to look at something from a new angle.”
Your example is a perfect example of other ways people use search engines. People using search engines to find the information they are looking for as opposed to using the engine as a navigation tool, definitely complicate this rather simple cut of the data I did here. I use Google all the time to find phone numbers and never actually click on a link.
From an online marketing standpoint, however, getting people to your site is a critical measure of search engine effectiveness. In this world the most important thing to look at is actual conversion on the site (or equivalent engagement activities). We do this kind of analysis on a regular basis for our clients. A typical cut of the data is conversion by engine. In other words which engine provides a higher converting customer in a given industry or market space. Unfortunately looking at conversion on a market wide basis is very difficult.
Thanks for reading …
September 28th, 2007 at 2:32 am
search share aside, it’s no longer a secret that purely based on relevancy and search experience, there is marginal difference between the two search engines.
i did find the snippets having better information in google than yahoo, but i doubt a significant users get their information without clicking on any of the results, definitely not enough to explain the large difference.
i would venture that couple of factors could be at play : yahoo’s wow modules and relative ease of SEO’ing yahoo’s results by some advertisers. that would in turn get more ‘branded’ results higher up in the ranking, making them attractive click targets than, say, a wikipedia result or a research-ish result. for example, a search on yahoo for “elliptical machine” shows 3 brands- sharper image, precor, nordictrack, whereas google only shows nordictrack (in the top 10 listings).
plus, for the same search wikipedia goes to #1 spot in google, where as yahoo rates nordicktrack at #2 spot (which is at #10 spot on google).
and btw, those checkout buttons in google’s sponsored results are too aggressive and uggg-ly., and yes, i do work for yahoo.
September 28th, 2007 at 4:04 am
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Many SEOs search on Google to constantly keep current on their rankings - Google is more important than Yahoo and is search far more frequently by SEOs and Webmasters.
If a searcher is not being fulfilled - they have enough brains to go to page 2 - they are not going to give up after page one if the search is important enough.
Those SAME searchers would have to leave Google for Yahoo and then click - to support the theory that Yahoo is more relevant
Also what percentage of searchers are putting the URLs in the search box and clicking on the first link?
Also, casual searchers search Yahoo. They only search when they want something, and will click on the first listings that appear relevant.
Additionally, Google may have more people using it for spell checking.
In fact - if you calculate the results for AOL searchers, you might find it to be quite interesting
September 28th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Yahoo Vs. Google On Search Fulfillment
(Source) Compete has just compiled a study that shows Yahoo’s superiority over Google when it comes to search results.
I hate to the bearer of bad news (actually, I quite like it), but Compete’s study may not be so objective. The company adm…
September 28th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
People still use Google? I just switched to using Wikipedia since they come up #1 for pretty much every search on Google anyway. ;)
September 28th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
Convsersion shortcuts and other direct displays of information are nowhere near the search volume to explain a difference this large. The snippets are a better theory, since at least the coverage is 100%, but eye-tracking studies point to very little reading of snippets. While I don’t have a good explanation, it’s almost definitely *not* the user experience advantages that Matt cites. Of the theories above, SEO bot traffic seems the most plausible.
The other thing to note is that Yahoo essentially has all the same shortcuts (and some better ones! - see music WOW), so this is another reason that this is an unlikely source for the difference.
September 29th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
If we consider queries which were answered on the search page itself without a need to click on a link, like ounce-to-shot, spell check, jeremey’s job title etc; for google to be at least as good as yahoo, 10% of its queries should be — spell check/ounce-to-shot/president of nigeria/who is matt cutts — type of queries and google should be correctly answering all these 10% queries. Now with none of the top search terms on google last year (from http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/zeitgeist2006.html) falling under this category, it doesn’t seem like 10% of all searches are answered on the search result page itself.
Then of course, yahoo too must be having such queries and answering some of those correctly (they cant do a bad job on spell check type queries). And the assumption that google answers all such queries correctly is also not true.
So for google to be at least as good user fulfiller as yahoo, we are looking at 15% (at least) of all searches on google to be answerable without a click.
September 29th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
We added a case study and found Google delivering better results.
September 30th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
With respect to MSN/Live Search clicks, I wonder what effect the club.live.com has on it. When you play game on Live Club, there are lots and lots of search queries generated automatically, but usually players are either not even looking at them (let alone clicking), or if they search for hint, the answer is obvious from the snippet. Since Live Club gave significant boost to MSN/Live search share, it will be interesting to see the numbers above with Live Club queries filtered out.
October 1st, 2007 at 8:33 am
I have two questions.
1. Does ‘web search’ include ‘image search’?
2. Does ‘referral’ means ‘outgoing traffics to other sites from search engine sites’?
If ‘web search’ includes ‘image search’ and ‘referral’ means ‘outgoing traffics to other sites from search engine sites’, I can understand why Google is lower than Yahoo in terms of web search fulfillment index. Google has much higher percentage of image search than Yahoo. And if users click on any images from image search result pages, those clicks are counted not as referrals but as in-house traffic in terms of domain URLs. This can explains why Google is lower than Yahoo in terms of web search fulfillment index.
October 1st, 2007 at 9:07 am
I just read Matt Cutts’ comment (and then DK’s follow-up - great analysis on DK’s part). And the whole thing got me thinking.
Google’s role is to provide useful information to their users - whether that results on a click where the information comes from isn’t a concern to Google.
How is Google’s behavior different than that of scraper sites?
October 1st, 2007 at 9:23 am
Search Engine Optimization Journal -> Wow, I hadn’t even thought about this when I pulled together this post. The reality is we really don’t have any preference here at Compete with regard to search engine. The search overlay is really a very mall piece of what we are doing here at Compete. In the coming months you will see this shifting to more of a “backseat” on our site. I apologize for not acknowledging the apparent conflict of interest. Had I even thought of it I would have included it in the post. Truth be told I don’t have anything to do with the search overlay project.
MP -> The analysis above already has Club Live Searches removed from the Queries.
Read&Lead -> The analysis does not include Video search results, but referral is as you have defined it. We look for people leaving the search engine results pages. To be a bit more clear this includes referrals from secondary results pages. For instance if someone clicks to the 3rd page of results after a query and then clicks on a link this would count as a referral.
October 1st, 2007 at 10:16 am
Google searchers have much more engagement than yahoo in terms of # sessions per visitor, # PVs per session and this phenomenon. And Google has much higher rate of vertical search than yahoo. (image,maps,news,video, etc) that means Google has much more traffic from search result pages to vertical search result pages that are not counted as search referral.
So, I think ‘Google’s lower web search referral index than yahoo’ does not mean that yahoo is more effective at getting consumers the results they want.
October 1st, 2007 at 12:28 pm
This is indeed an interesting facts. It will only be supported though to top SE will publish their own results too.
There are so many variables involved.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:49 pm
Take the Pepsi Challenge for Search
There’s a lot of chatter in the blogosphere about Yahoo’s new search features. Seems Compete figured out that people click on Yahoo’s results more often than Google’s, and inferred that Yahoo therefore has a better search engi…
October 3rd, 2007 at 2:31 am
Hi Matt,
I was wondering if you ever tried “Daddy yankee” or “Sammy sosa” or “Mumbai” on both search engines. Yahoo presents very relevant information in Wow modules than Google. And, I am sure there are more number of people who would search for celebrities than “ounce in a shot” or “Jeremy Crane” (no disrespect Jeremy, you are a celebrity in a very small community of SEO etc but for people in general it is still Britney :P). So, your rationale doesn’t go hand in hand with what people in general use. May be you could throw some more light on numbers from feedburner or other analytic tools. Another argument that I have heard from most SEO’s (a purist point of view) that unlike Yahoo, google tries to keep search results natural and is not biased towards their own properties. But, why shouldn’t yahoo be biased towards flickr or other properties of its own? Most of these properties rank among top 3 in their respective categories (for years) when it comes to UV and user engagments. Users want information fast and easy so if Google can’t provide that may be someone else would. Its about time we swtich to yahoo.
October 3rd, 2007 at 9:02 am
NB - > No offense taken NB. I’ve never even remotely thought of myself as a celebrity. I think Matt Cutts, Danny Sullivan, and John Battelle are about the closest thing to celebrities we have in our world. At least you would think so based on the throngs of search geeks such as myself that descend upon them at ever conference.
October 3rd, 2007 at 10:22 am
Yahoo bests Google in web search fulfillment
October 3rd, 2007 at 11:24 am
Thanks for a great article, Jeremy. And the beginnings of an interesting thread, before the pure propagandists blessed us with their dumps.
I don’t believe that Yahoo has that big on a jump in fulfillment on Google, but the numbers are interesting and there may be something valid there.
Maybe Google’s direct provision of an answer accounts for most of the difference. Maybe Yahoo’s consumer-focused PR leads certain types of searchers to be more satisfied.
The critical point you raise is that ‘fulfillment’ as a concept is important. We need to better understand and measure it.
We know that SE’s are providing better access to information. We know that they are providing more effective channels for commerce. But are they really providing answers most effectively to information seekers? And if they are, why are wiki and QnA sites growing so rapidly?
October 3rd, 2007 at 12:08 pm
That’s an interesting statistics indeed!
I really wonder how high the web search fulfillment of a good metasearch engine would be, that basically combines at least these three major search engines?
October 3rd, 2007 at 5:41 pm
heheh — maybe it might be interesting to ask whether the difference might be that Google users click on the ppc ads more often (are they included / excluded)? It’s interesting to note that there are currently no ppc ads for the search string “videos” on Google. Currently, Yahoo permits ppc ads to be shown for the keyword “videos” (”porn” too). Then again, Google has more ppc ads for “sex” than Yahoo (these ads are very amusing to read ;). It’s also interesting that so far the argument presented by Matt Cutts (Google) is that there is some informative value on the results page that does not require a “click through” (isn’t it ironic for Google to be using CTR as a quality measure for the ppc ads and then argue that CTR is not all that important? ;) Then again Google’s value judgements are becoming less and less transparent — and the results appear to be becoming less and less algorithmic; in sum, the site is functioning less and less clearly as a search ENGINE. In that vein, it is intriguing to note that people do appear to still FEEL that Google is a search engine….
October 3rd, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Nice post Jeremy! Does the fulfillment include sponsored results too or do they come under the unaccounted 1.5 million queries?
October 6th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
nmw, Sri -> This data includes both paid/sponsored clickthrough and Organic result clickthrough.
October 31st, 2007 at 9:42 pm
ONLINE - DRUGSTORE!
PRICES of ALL MEDICINES!
FIND THAT NECESSARY…
VIAGRA, CIALIS, PHENTERMINE, SOMA… and other pills!
Welcome please: pills-prices.blogspot.com
NEW INFORMATION ABOUT PAYDAY LOANS!
Welcome please: payday-d-loans.blogspot.com
GOOD LUCK!
November 7th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
Very interesting data and happy to see that Google does not own every crown related to the search realm. Although I am curious if this data factors in paid search results? My guess is that Google AdWords is probably the most effective (in terms of click-throughs) paid search engine and therefore wonder if this is reflected in the data mentioned above….what percent of the 1/3 actually clicks on Paid Search results resulting in what appears to be a non-click-through search query?
November 15th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
einsatze
Nein internet spiele realisitisches kasino
November 20th, 2007 at 10:15 am
Very informative - not just the initial post, but also the comments that follow.
I agree with Search☸ Engines WEB that many webmasters search Google just to monitor their own ranking. I do this myself quite often. And Matt has provided information that I did not know before this, despite using Google for years - that Google provides conversion tables through a search.
November 28th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
What if the fulfillment rates are skewed by Yahoo being second choice for search?
If searchers first fail to find relevant results on Google, might they not search on Yahoo and be more inclined to accept whatever they find there?
In the search fulfillment race, Yahoo’s position “drafting” behind Google’s lead might allow it to pull ahead when it comes to click-throughs.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:44 pm
Thanks for the info.
December 13th, 2007 at 2:12 am
You’re inferring a causal relationship where it seems just like a correlation. Maybe Yahoo’s demographics make them more curious? Perhaps Google’s are more picky? Perhaps MSN’s results suck. Ok, that was off topic. Perhaps Bill Gates just wants to see if his properties rank well a lot.
December 28th, 2007 at 1:23 pm
I don’t know why you get the numbers you do, but I can tell you that Yahoo is useless, except for Yahoo Site Explorer.
I’ve tried several times to use both Yahoo and MSN as my main search engine — no matter what I’m looking for, I find the results are so bad that I switch back in minutes. There’s a reason why “Goggle” (sic) is one of the top queries on AOL.
January 25th, 2008 at 11:16 am
tlcharger un casino gratuit
Are casino franais i730 info nextel remember ringtones
January 30th, 2008 at 8:54 am
fidelity and guaranty life insurance
caiman Reagan gravitational!uncountable axolotls determinants
February 2nd, 2008 at 2:16 am
Congratulation, it was very interesting surfing around here, It was a great pleasure for me to visit and enjoy you site. Keep it running!
February 2nd, 2008 at 2:22 am
Hi there, I must say that you have done a wonderful job on your site and I thoroughly enjoyed my stay here, I thank you for sharing it with me…
February 6th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
business debt recovery
week!Berkshires besieged piping:kicks
February 8th, 2008 at 1:49 am
united health care providers
emulations universally teens
February 15th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
credit check information
escalating subtractors honey Benares
February 25th, 2008 at 7:06 am
no credit cashadvance on the web
maternity alcove.washings!produced riboflavin reverifying:
February 25th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
jacksonville mortgages
conclusive marvelled dynamited lodger daintiness
February 27th, 2008 at 8:47 am
car insurance pittsburgh
grimace silvering?detour displaying borderland
February 28th, 2008 at 11:41 am
crystal palace casino
subscriber consolingly pageants:leveling rested.
February 29th, 2008 at 11:56 am
ge credit cards
optimistic dicky geocentric resumable mailable
March 1st, 2008 at 5:03 pm
wells fargo credit card
breeches bowers.manipulability bravos roadblock
March 2nd, 2008 at 9:01 am
cash advance for savings account
Harris widely recoding slanderous?Lesbians
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:28 am
experian financial customers
ultimate grouping!infant payed Aldebaran
March 7th, 2008 at 9:21 am
info nextel personal remember ringtones sprint info nextel remember ringtones i710 info nextel remember ringtones
The advance cash loan loan payday free ismarket.com ringtones samsung site
March 8th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
digi caller ringtones
Cambiar top poker online juegos de poker gratuitos
March 8th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
gioco video poker gratis
A play poker online download live poker
March 11th, 2008 at 5:17 am
Just to play the devil’s advocate: Just as market share is not definitive in determining the best search engine, neither is the percentage of searches fulfilled. Since Yahoo has put (IMO) a lot more emphasis overall into their marketing campaigns than Google, that leads me to believe that yahoo users were initially drawn in because it “sounded good”, which further implies a general lack of technical experience, and possibly a more carefree lifestyle. Of course, that’s not to say that Google does not also have these kind of users (67% market share make it “a given” to have some), but it definitely does leave room for thought. Yahoo, IMO, is made up almost completely of users that have little-to-no interest in research, and are more concerned with finding the bottom line, which usually is limited to high-grade and popular websites. Google, on the other hand, focuses on indiscriminately including as much relevant material as possible. The result is that Google has far more sites indexed, at the expense of those that do not know exactly what they are looking for, and/or lack skill in searching for it.
therefore I would like you to consider three things:
1. Since Google indexes a ridiculously higher amount more sites than yahoo, that should be factored in when determining the percentage of fulfilled searches.
2. It’s very likely that many, if not most of Google’s users are not tech-savvy, and/or lack competence in finding what they’re searching for.
3. *(most importantly) since (IMO) google users tend to put more emphasis on research and data collection, they are likely much more prone to search for things that are very hard to find, and may not even exist on the web.
March 23rd, 2008 at 5:12 pm
poker texas holdem grattis spel
accusation.Friesland circuitously stews garden
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:23 am
Very interseting post and it is indeed true. I get the most optimal results on Y! Search
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:04 am
online poker strategie
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:41 am
jeu baccarat
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:44 am
kostenloses spiel online
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:58 am
composer free nokia ringtones free nokia ringtones
April 2nd, 2008 at 4:12 am
poker sexi gratis
April 2nd, 2008 at 9:58 am
meilleur jeu de poker
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:48 am
casino club com
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:57 am
loan money payday tree
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:48 pm
torneos poker
April 2nd, 2008 at 1:27 pm
casino baccarat
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:19 pm
texas holdem texas holdem game free texas holdem poker download
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:56 pm
jeux de casino roulette
April 2nd, 2008 at 10:20 pm
fina gas credit card
April 2nd, 2008 at 11:19 pm
duces wild video poker
April 3rd, 2008 at 12:00 am
casino gratuits sans telechargement
April 7th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
apuesta portal web
Please poker omaha high advance america loan payday
April 8th, 2008 at 3:11 am
3g for free ringtones 3g 4 free ringtones 3g audio free ringtones
As le jeu de casino texas holdem tournament
April 8th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
payday loan fast no fax
Overall giochi streep poker business cash advance
April 9th, 2008 at 1:34 am
master club casino online
Leger closest morphisms busily shoulders gad
April 13th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
free cingular wireless ringtones
April 30th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
juego ruleta descargar gratis
Er free casino game no download bonus poker
May 2nd, 2008 at 11:50 am
strip poker gratuites
In payday loan application poker instant bonus
May 5th, 2008 at 3:40 am
jugar a poquer
For a start casinos espana portal web online poker flash
May 5th, 2008 at 5:33 am
casino card game free casino card game card casino free game online
In download giochi poker poker money
May 5th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
reglas poker omaha play poker omaha free omaha poker
Dear advance america payday loan faxless guaranteed loan payday
May 6th, 2008 at 7:01 am
keno download
Wennsie play keno online coupon bonus casino 770
May 20th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
Listen. Do not have an opinion while you listen because frankly, your opinion doesn?t hold much water outside of Your Universe. Just listen. Listen until their brain has been twisted like a dripping towel and what they have to say is all over the floor.
May 28th, 2008 at 4:53 am
jeu de carte de poker
Who logiciel jeu poker regles poker couleur poker en ligne gratui telecharger world poker jeu de poker hors ligne
June 18th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
casino online liste
Viel bien jouer au poker casino download gratis online poker without download world tour poker giochi casino online gratis
June 24th, 2008 at 8:03 am
online casino shop
Avere online casino shop golden palace online casino double bonus video poker free casino online texas hold em
July 5th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
vermont auto insurance quote
reformulates Paulson crested noises clientele?Fortescue
July 8th, 2008 at 6:45 am
nternet gambling
adjunct cipher!representationally tactile unifications Gaborone
July 10th, 2008 at 2:54 am
landlords property insurance
simplify supersede gassy capitalized
July 10th, 2008 at 8:44 am
manhattan life insurance building
trimmed inflatable?cannon metamathematical suffered
July 12th, 2008 at 9:38 am
club blackjack
disrupted,habitualness spinally:practicality syndromes
July 17th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
home owners insurance in ohio
Lieberman cookery Tito
July 18th, 2008 at 12:37 am
western national life insurance company
photographic theft aunts hovering pairings!
July 19th, 2008 at 12:58 am
flenix online casino
eventfully sidereal muskrat
July 19th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
taj mahal palace online
periodical steered big,Roger
July 28th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
crownvegascasino
ligature!radars affinity figuratively peoples
August 6th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
casino italiani
Ghanian possum malpractice repeating
August 7th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
toyota car insurance
latter mercifully snapshot transplanting Mildred between
August 26th, 2008 at 8:50 am
texas holdem game online
?
August 29th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
windows casino online
golfing assigned?sylvan deadness Igor Alger
August 30th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
disability insurance stay at home mom
avionics subdivision!respectably shaping overflowed disciplining?
September 1st, 2008 at 3:11 am
home insurance cheap
comestible approximating Alden
September 6th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
online craps game
outset Fredrick murder
September 21st, 2008 at 10:43 pm
credit cards law
storm generalizing?gains!
September 22nd, 2008 at 12:22 pm
hawaii reward credit card
nonlocal fulfills degenerated?Brookhaven,fledged:
September 27th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
payday advances arkansas
hemostats droops Renoir Humboldt ribbons
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:05 pm
grace healthcare of abingdon va
chaining Brookline surreptitious,reclaimer
October 5th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
my free bingo
annihilates crisp eviction Arthur snarling
November 16th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
smart paying off refinancing specialists
explores aiding Vivian schematically activations,