Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Search 500 index_travel
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Search 500 index_travel

247

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
247
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVELWHERE IS THE FORTUNE 500 FOUND IN NATURAL SEARCH?MAY 8, 2007
  • 2. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................................3 Implications and Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................................4 Analysis...............................................................................................................................................................................................5 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................................................9 Media and Content Inquiries .............................................................................................................................................................11 Glossary of Terms ..............................................................................................................................................................................12 Appendix ...........................................................................................................................................................................................13© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 2
  • 3. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this index is to quantify the natural search visibility of the 12 Fortune 500 travel companies, compare these companies on the basis of natural search visibility, and compare the visibility of all competitors in the given online keyword landscape that comprises the Search 500 Index: Travel. For the Search 500 Index: Travel, iCrossing analyzed natural search engine position data for the following U.S. search engines: Google, Yahoo!, MSN, Ask, and AOL. Natural search visibility was assessed and scored based on iCrossing’s patent-pending index, which weighs the value of natural search engine market share. Known as the Brand Scorecard, companies are ranked on a scale of 0-10 where a score of 2 indicates insignificant visibility, a score of 5 means moderate-to-high visibility, and a score of 8 signifies high visibility in natural search. Please see the methodology section for more details about the ranking system. An appendix with a full list of both keywords and URLs is available upon request. QUESTIONS WE ASKED How visible are Fortune 500 travel companies in natural search? Does leadership in the traditional marketplace translate to leadership in natural search visibility? What strategies can Fortune 500 travel companies implement to improve their natural search visibility? KEY FINDINGS In general, Fortune 500 travel companies are doing an adequate job achieving natural search visibility. + All 12 Fortune 500 travel companies demonstrated some natural search visibility, as opposed to the significant gap we found in the automotive sector (please see the Search 500 Index: Automotive published in January 2007). + Overall, the search visibility rankings of Fortune 500 travel companies were consistent with their Fortune 500 rankings, except for Harrah’s Entertainment and MGM Mirage, both of which dropped three positions compared to their Fortune 500 rankings. + Airline companies have been more effective to date at gaining natural search visibility than hotel/ resort companies. + There is room for improvement for Fortune 500 travel companies, as most did not rank well in the overall search visibility list for this keyword set. + Online travel agencies significantly outpaced traditional hotel/resort companies in natural search visibility. Of the top 100 highest ranking sites in this industry, 63 percent were online travel agencies, demonstrating their importance and prominence in the overall travel industry. + Fortune 500 travel companies with a large Web presence (many distinct domains) did not necessarily do better than those with fewer domains for this keyword set, underscoring the importance of the quality – not the quantity – of websites. Fortune 500 travel companies, especially hotel/resort companies, which demonstrated relatively poor performance in this study, have invested significantly in websites built on multiple domains. For the key competitive terms considered in this study, the presence of local-specific micro-sites did not have a significant effect on the results; that being said, the long tail of search cannot be underestimated but was not included in the scope of this study.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 3
  • 4. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007IMPLICATIONS AND Based on the results of the analysis, iCrossing recommends that Fortune 500 travel companies increase their focus on improving their natural search visibility. Specifically, we recommend thatRECOMMENDATIONS these companies: + Re-evaluate their competitive set based on the accessibility of information available through natural search and come to recognize highly visible companies as direct competitors in their space; + When considering a partnership with or buying media on the sites of relevant online companies, make sure those companies have an effective natural search visibility strategy; + Remember that a few focused and well-designed websites may work more effectively than multiple scattered websites: keep most of the properties under the main domain and strive to adequately pass on the relevance to the properties under the .com umbrella (e.g. create links leading to the properties on the main website); + Conduct in-depth, search-based competitive analyses to derive as many insights as possible from the strategies and tactics of industry leaders; + Do not simply copy the traditional industry leaders, especially if they use flawed technology. Instead, make sure any online strategies adopted are search-friendly.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 4
  • 5. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007ANALYSIS After analyzing a set of 110 keywords (based on a broad range of travel terms that comprised travel agency, airline, vacation, hotel, resort, and other travel-related information) and a comprehensive list of URLs that represent Fortune 500 travel companies, iCrossing found that the majority of Fortune 500 travel companies are doing an adequate job in terms of achieving natural search visibility. Based on the travel companies’ Brand Scorecard results, all 12 Fortune 500 travel companies analyzed appeared in natural search results. They ranged from a low of 2.09 (MGM Mirage) to a high of 3.62 (American Airlines) on a scale of 0-10. This finding indicates that most of the travel companies on the Fortune 500 list have paid attention to their natural search engine strategies. Still, when looking more broadly at websites that rank for this set of terms, we found that the competitive landscape of the travel industry is significantly different in terms of natural search rankings than that of the traditional Fortune 500, with none of the major players even breaking into the top 20 for natural search visibility. This means there is still a lot of room to improve for the majority of Fortune 500 travel companies. Search Visibility Ranking as Change in Rank Among the Fortune Fortune 500 Fortune 500 Compared to Other Fortune Scores 500 Travel Companies Based Ranking Travel Company 500 Travel Companies on Search Engine Visibility 1 1 American Airlines 3.62 Same Rank 2 2 United Airlines 3.41 Same Rank 3 3 Delta Air Lines 3.01 Same Rank 4 4 Northwest Airlines 2.85 Same Rank 5 5 Marriott International 2.78 Same Rank 6 6 Continental Airlines 2.69 Same Rank 7 7 Southwest Airlines 2.50 Same Rank 8 10 Starwood Hotels & Rsrts. 2.49 2 9 11 US Airways Group 2.19 2 10 12 Hilton Hotels 2.19 2 11 8 Harrah’s Entertainment 2.16 3 12 9 MGM Mirage 2.09 3 Overall, the natural search visibility rankings of Fortune 500 travel companies were consistent with their Fortune 500 rankings, except for Harrah’s Entertainment and MGM Mirage. Specifically, Harrah’s Entertainment and MGM Mirage both decreased by three positions. Airlines have done a better job than hotels/resorts on natural search visibility. This is probably due to the comprehensive online booking systems airline companies have adopted and their increasing popularity among consumers. Most of the hotels/resorts/casinos showed lower natural search visibility even though they have multiple websites. We did a deep dive on local websites of two Fortune 500 hotel companies and determined that their micro-sites did not help increase the overall search visibility for the brand within the keyword list used for this report. Their search visibility scores remained the same with or without the local websites. This may be a result of the fact that we focused on broad and popular terms for this analysis versus the longer tail of local search. However, we can safely recommend that a more effective overall strategy would be to create a localized presence among the main domain for the brand.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 5
  • 6. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007 To support the above conclusion, we analyzed a few major items that play a role in determining how successful a site could be for natural search visibility. These factors include: + Number of pages indexed by search engines + Number of links from .gov sites + Number of links on other webpages pointing + PageRank (the value of a page to the site determined by Google) + Age of the domain + A DMOZ directory listing + Number of links from .edu sites + A Yahoo! directory listing What we found in this instance is as follows: % of the Sites Fortune 500 # of Pages # of Links Domain Age # of .edu Links # of .gov Links PageRank Listed in Yahoo! Hotel Company A and/or DMOZ Main Domain 16,300 294,758 13 14,400 565 8 33 Average of Local 42 630 7 12 0.75 4 100 Websites % of the Sites Fortune 500 # of Pages # of Links Domain Age # of .edu Links # of .gov Links PageRank Listed in Yahoo! Hotel Company B and/or DMOZ Main Domain 34,000 245,430 10 1,230 74 8 27 Average of Local 75 1,410 6 9 0.40 4 100 Websites Comparing the online strategy of main domains and local websites to their resulting natural search visibility, we deliver the following conclusions: First, the size of a website (as indicated by the number of pages indexed) is important, especially if all those pages are unique and offer something useful because the engines view a larger site as a more valuable resource than a smaller site. Second, the overall link popularity of a site is by far the most important element in creating a trusted, powerful website that can be considered an authority in its industry. The more quality, relevant links a site has from trusted sources, the greater their authoritativeness, weight and of course their link popularity becomes. Generally speaking, the most authoritative links are going to come from educational institutes (.edu links) and government sites (.gov links). Besides these, the two most powerful links that every site should strive to include in order to target highly competitive terms are links from the DMOZ and Yahoo! Directory. Another factor with significant bearing on the level of trust and quality attributed to a site is the age of the domain. This should be measured from the first time that content placed on the site could be found, not simply the day it was registered. Generally, the longer a site has been in existence and available as a resource, the more authoritative that resource becomes. Nevertheless, using a content-rich (indexed pages), popular (incoming links), trusted (.edu/.gov links), established (age of domain) site over a less optimized site will enable this and most other sites within the travel industry to rank well. iCrossing recommends that travel companies avoid smaller micro-sites and concentrate on building out local pages for the different properties from the main domain. In some cases a brand may want to use additional domain names. We recommend using them for vanity purposes to show a cleaner URL, but suggest they all permanently redirect to the primary domain for the brand.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 6
  • 7. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007 In the overall search landscape, quality matters far more than quantity. A few focused and well-designed websites may work more effectively than multiple scattered websites. The relatively poor results for hotel/resort companies suggest that they have not focused their attention on building natural search visibility for local hotel sites within their networks. Another problem we have noted is that most of the industry players copy each other. They use the same content management systems (CMS), the same platforms and the same site structure. If any of these elements happens to be unfriendly to search, it then gets propagated throughout the whole industry. For example, iCrossing noted that companies in the cruise industry historically have used the same flawed technology for their websites, and as a result they did not rank well as an industry. PERCENTAGE OF FIRST PAGE RANKED TERMS FOR THE TOP 7 FORTUNE 500 TRAVEL COMPANIES Delta Airlines 7% Southwest American Airlines 11% 29% Marriott 11% Continental 12% United Airlines 16% Northwest Airlines 14% HOW DID THE FORTUNE 500 FARE AGAINST THE MOST VISIBLE WEBSITES IN THE NATURAL SEARCH LANDSCAPE FOR TRAVEL KEYWORD SEARCHES? In general, the list of the most visible websites returned for travel keyword searches shows online travel agencies are more visible than any other type of travel-related companies. The least visible companies are hotels and resorts. The top 100 naturally-ranking websites for this keyword set consisted of 63 travel agency sites such as Orbitz and Cheaptickets, 14 travel-related information sites such as about.com, 10 hotels/resorts/cruise sites, six airline company websites, three general information sites such as Wikipedia, three vacation home rental sites and one movie site (www.imdb.com). Sixty-three percent of the top 100 were online travel agencies, demonstrating the importance and prominence of online travel in the overall travel industry. Indeed, according to a recent report released by eMarketer, U.S. customers spent $79 billion on online travel last year, and spending in this category is predicted to grow at around 17 percent per year for the next five years, totaling $146 billion by 2010 (http://www.emarketer.com/Reports/All/ Emarketer_2000387.aspx?src=report_head_info_reports). As search becomes an increasingly important marketing strategy for this industry, the race to achieve natural search visibility will have greater bearing on companies’ bottom lines.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 7
  • 8. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007 KEYWORD ANALYSIS REPORT: TRAVEL INDUSTRY Total Search 500 Ranking Search 500 Travel Websites Google* Yahoo! AOL** MSN Ask.com Rankings 1 www.orbitz.com 112 28 58 23 1 2 2 www.cheaptickets.com 108 20 43 21 1 23 3 www.expedia.com 102 28 26 29 8 11 4 en.wikipedia.org 97 19 16 15 21 26 5 www.priceline.com 77 20 34 17 NR 6 6 www.travelocity.com 71 24 9 23 NR 15 7 www.hotwire.com 59 13 29 13 NR 4 8 travel.yahoo.com 42 11 17 11 3 NR 9 www.smartertravel.com 42 18 NR 15 5 4 10 www.tripadvisor.com 40 9 4 8 6 13 11 honeymoons.about.com 36 14 6 9 5 2 12 www.vacationidea.com 34 11 1 12 5 5 13 travelwithkids.about.com 34 10 9 6 4 5 14 www.sidestep.com 32 13 1 14 3 1 15 www.hotels.com 24 3 12 3 1 5 16 www.shermanstravel.com 24 NR 22 NR 2 NR 17 www.cheapflights.com 23 9 1 9 3 1 18 www.vacation-hotline.com 22 6 6 5 4 1 19 www.lowestfare.com 21 1 NR 1 NR 19 20 travel.state.gov 21 5 5 3 4 4 Executed on March 27, 2007. Results represent first page rankings for 110 non-branded keywords * Results provided by third party engine ** Contains results from Google NR - Not Ranked on the first page Most Fortune 500 airline companies ranked on the list of the top 100 most visible travel websites, including United Airlines (26th), Northwest Airlines (29th), Delta Airlines (31st), Continental Airlines (36th), American Airlines (37th), and Southwest Airlines (68th). These results are consistent with what we found about the visibility scores for these companies. Again, hotels and resorts did not perform well for natural search visibility for this keyword set. Only Marriott (30th) appeared on the list in the hotel/ resort category.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 8
  • 9. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007METHODOLOGY The methodology employed in the Search 500 Index is based on the iCrossing Brand Scorecard, a patent-pending iCrossing process, and the iCrossing Keyword Analysis Report. The main purpose of this index is to demonstrate the natural search visibility of Fortune 500 travel companies, compare Fortune 500 travel companies on the basis of natural search visibility, and compare the visibility of all competitors in a given online keyword landscape. For this report, we analyzed search engine position data from the following U.S. search engines: Google, Yahoo!, MSN, Ask, and AOL. Following a rigid methodology, the Search 500 Index has shown natural search visibility and rankings for both Fortune 500 and other websites within the travel category. The goal of this report was to demonstrate the natural search visibility for key revenue-driving companies in the travel industry in relation to newer, less traditional competition based on natural search engine visibility. SEVEN STEPS WERE USED IN THE PROCESS TO CREATE THE FINAL REPORT 1. Identification of Fortune 500 travel companies iCrossing generated a list of travel companies based on the categorization used by the Department of Labor and Industries and the classification system employed by the Fortune 500. In this issue, the travel companies on the Fortune 500 (2006) list were selected based on their categorization. Their respective websites were also collected for their natural search visibility analyses. A full disclosure of the website addresses used in our analysis follows. iCrossing welcomes suggestions for additions to the list in order to ensure maximum data accuracy. 2. Identification of non-branded keywords pertaining to the travel industry For the travel industry, we generated a set of 110 keywords based on comprehensive keyword research. The majority of the keywords are broad, travel-related keywords. They are also non- branded and non-localized terms. The main purpose here was to ensure that the results of the analyses displayed as little bias as possible. The keyword list will be updated frequently based on industry trends as the project proceeds. Given the importance of the keyword list to this process, we open up our keyword lists for debate and welcome feedback to iteratively improve the analysis. In addition, iCrossing would be happy to provide an estimate for delivering this same type of analysis for a custom set of keywords on a per-project basis. 3. Creation of the Keyword Analysis Report (KAR) Using the keyword list generated from Step 2, we created a Keyword Analysis Report to find the most visible companies in natural search. The keyword analysis report (full version available upon request) shows a category’s true natural search competitors. It displays which websites have the most first page natural search rankings on popular search engines for the same set of keywords that were included in the Position Analysis Reports (also available upon request). 4. Creation of the Position Analysis Reports (PAR) We created Position Analysis Reports for Fortune 500 travel companies to enable us to compare at a keyword level how each Fortune 500 company ranked in relation to other Fortune 500 companies within the same industry. The Position Analysis Report reveals the rankings of the company’s website(s) in each major search engine (i.e. Google, Yahoo!, MSN, Ask, AOL) based on the designated keyword set. iCrossing generated a Position Analysis Report for each company within the travel industry on the Fortune 500 list. 5. Creation of iCrossing Brand Scorecards Based on the Position Analysis Reports, iCrossing generated Brand Scorecards by aggregating the rankings of the companies on the first through the third pages of the major search engines. We calculated and assigned to each company a specific score that appears on the Fortune 500. The score demonstrates the natural search engine visibility of a company on the scale of 0-10. Where a score of 2 indicates non-significant visibility, a score of 5 means moderate-high visibility, and a score of 8 signifies high visibility in natural search.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 9
  • 10. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007 This patent-pending index weighs the value of the natural search engine’s market share, the page, the actual ranking, and the estimated monthly search volume to calculate the relative score for each URL. For example, the algorithm gives a higher weight to a term with a high estimated monthly search volume and a correspondingly high ranking than a term with a high ranking but only a small number of estimated monthly searches. In addition, regardless of the estimated monthly search volume, the formula also generates the score in a proportional manner with the associated page rank and position to properly score the keywords and prevent one single word from radically skewing the results. 6. Analysis of natural search engine visibility and identification of key competitors in natural search Analyzing the visibility of Fortune 500 and websites visible for this keyword set, iCrossing identified key competitors within the travel industry in terms of natural search. We then analyzed this information and generated implications and recommendations. 7. Creation of Industry Index Report The Search 500 Index report was written and refined based on the analyses and results contained herein. METHODOLOGY FLOWCHART DEFINE IDENTIFY KEYWORD ANALYSIS POSITION ANALYSIS REPORTS REPORTS 1. Identify Fortune 500 companies. 2. Identify non-branded keywords 3. Create Keyword Analysis Report 4. Create Position Analysis Report pertaining to the travel industry. (KAR) based on identified keywords (PAR) to find out the online positions to find highly visible websites. of Fortune 500 in search. Define Identify Create Create Industry Keywords KAR PAR Build Analyze Create Scorecard Visibility Reports 5. Create iCrossing Brand Scorecards 6. Analyze search engine visibility 7. Analyze data and create report. for each Fortune 500 company to and identify key search competitors analyze ranking. within the travel industry. SCORECARD ANALYZE REPORT© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 10
  • 11. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007MEDIA AND CONTENT CONTENT USAGEINQUIRIES The content and statistics contained in the main body of this report may be used in publications and presentations provided there is attribution to iCrossing, Inc. — Search 500 Index: Travel. The complete appendixes for this report can be obtained by contacting iCrossing at search500index@icrossing.com and may require acceptance of a Non-Disclosure Agreement. ABOUT THIS REPORT iCrossing’s Search 500 Index series is designed to provide iCrossing clients, marketers and members of the media with analysis of new developments, trends and competitive activity in search engine and interactive marketing. The report is derived from iCrossing’s experience and expertise in performing search analytics and providing search marketing services for clients in the travel and other industries. DISCLAIMER iCrossing performs natural search optimization for American Airlines and works in some capacity with Hilton Hotels and Marriott International. These relationships in no way influenced the research methodology or the report findings. ABOUT ICROSSING iCrossing is a different kind of digital marketing company. Driven by customer insight, the company creates programs and engaging experiences designed to help brands be found, help them talk to their customers, and help them achieve marketing success. Through a proven combination of talent and technology, iCrossing helps its global client base – including 40 Fortune 500 companies like The Coca- Cola Company – find solutions to their digital marketing challenges. Founded in 1998, the company has 350 employees worldwide. iCrossing is headquartered in Scottsdale with U.S. offices in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, New York and San Francisco, and U.K. offices in London and Brighton. Find out more at www.icrossing.com.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 11
  • 12. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007GLOSSARY OF TERMS SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL iCrossing has titled this report the Search 500 Index: Travel. The report has several goals: analyze all industries from a natural search visibility standpoint; identify how each individual industry ranking compares to the ranking of the current Fortune 500 list; and if the industry rankings do differ, determine which companies should be considered the industry’s true online competitors, thus affecting future marketing strategies. A keyword set of broad, product-and services-specific, consumer-orientated, non-branded terms will be used to analyze each industry. Each keyword list will be included with its respective industry Search 500 Index. FORTUNE 500 The 2006 Fortune 500 list will be used to identify companies within each industry vertical. The Fortune 500 is a ranking of the top 500 United States corporations as measured by gross revenue. The list is compiled and published annually by Fortune magazine (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/ fortune500/). FORTUNE 500 TRAVEL There were 12 travel companies represented within the 2006 Fortune 500, which have been extracted from the full Fortune 500 list for analysis in this report. BRAND SCORECARD Based on the Position Analysis Reports, iCrossing generates Brand Scorecards by aggregating the rankings of the companies on the first page or first through the third pages of the major search engines. The score demonstrates the natural search engine visibility of a company on the scale of 0-10. Where a score of 2 indicates non-significant visibility, a score of 5 represents moderate-to-high visibility in natural search, and a score of 8 signifies high visibility.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 12
  • 13. SEARCH 500 INDEX: TRAVEL MAY 2007APPENDIX The complete Appendix for this report can be obtained by contacting iCrossing at search500index@icrossing.com and may require acceptance of a Non-Disclosure Agreement.© COPYRIGHT 2007. ICROSSING, INC. | WWW.ICROSSING.COM ATLANTA | CHICAGO | DALLAS | NEW YORK | SAN FRANCISCO | SCOTTSDALE | U.K. 1.866.620.3780 13

×