Maxi Media Matters - www.maximediamatters.com

bla bla bla.

We check campaigns using the Google Diagnostic Tool, this tells us if the adverts are showing and is the definitive way of testing key phrases to ensure they are showing adverts in the positions you are targeting.

I cannot comment on the "checks" you made but unless they were done using the diagnostic tool then your findings must be in doubt.

The real reason we separated company was because of the abusive emails we received from you. We work with many companies and, of course, there are problems sometimes and mistakes are made but we always work through any issues and resolve them to everyone's satisfaction. In your case, however, there were no such problems.

There are always 2 stories to every tale as I am sure you are aware because of some of the bad reviews for your business, Eagles Guest House.

Simon Stephens

I perfectly understand that a rogue company have to disprove "allegations" from its arrogant customers that have the guts to CONTROL their campaigns, nevertheless two e-mails and two phone calls were exchanged during that day: And I CLEARLY maintain that the sentence:"I haven't time to focus on only one client" It's better that we part" was said on our last phone call.

Answering that I was showing up on first page on HER computer was enough is a bit thick to swallow, and definitely not a good reason enough for me to say that this campaign was a pure scheme. 4 other checks on those keywords throughout UK and North Europe shows MY results consistent. They are despite The "satisfied clients that you might have. The truth is this on the web SEO companies flourishes and take Money over thousand and thousand of small businesses that are not computers specialists. I receive phone calls EVERY DAY about it.

Members of the public just realise that a google page IS NOT INFINITE and that amongst those companies some lies to you...... I unfortunately found two of those.

The internet advertising MARKET is not regulated yet!!!! there are more black sheep than you think.

Firstly no evidence was provided to us of his findings when it came to viewing his adverts. We were able to provide evidence to the contrary of what he is claiming but he did not wish to accept it.

He had almost 1000 unique visitors to his website during the time he was our client and we can prove that those visitors came from the campaign we were running for him.

Following many conversations with him regarding his concerns we decided that it would be best to part company but his claim that a representative of the company said "I haven't time to focus on only one client" It's better that we part" is false.

He found it very hard to understand the dynamics of continual searching without clicking through and maybe this has led to his frustration even though myself and another colleague tried many times to go through it with him.

We have been established since 2007 and have no bad press on the internet apart from this post which is untrue and unfounded. We have many hundreds of satisfied clients.

We wish him all the best but felt it was necessary to put the record straight.

Simon Stephens