24 Jul 2009 @ 3:29 PM 
 

Rate Beer vs. Beer Advocate: The ratings war!

 

Earlier this week, I had my first try of Westvleteren 12, the so-called best beer in the world. No doubt, it was awesome; indescribably wonderful. When I checked later on, though, I noticed that while it was listed #1 at Beer Advocate, it was listed #2 at Rate Beer. Interesting.

It got me to thinking about the differences between the two sites and how much they agreed with one another. I started to take a closer look at what was listed at both sites.

As Andy Crouch noted earlier this week, there is a distinct lack of lagers on each of these lists, and an abundance of barrel-aged and/or hop heavy and/or alcohol heavy offerings. They’re also both heavy in rare, small-run, and hard-to-find beers. I suppose it’s all very American. Bigger is better and if it’s hard to get it must be awesome. Sounds like a recipe for eBay, if you ask me. But that’s not my focus today. That’s for my “please make more session beer” column later.

What I found fascinating was the agreement between the two lists. First of all, I found it interesting that more than half of the beers appearing on one list do not appear on the other (52). In Rate Beer’s case, 6 of the Top 10 beers they have listed do not appear in Beer Advocate’s Top 100 whatsoever. Only 1 of Beer Advocate’s Top 10 does not appear in Rate Beer’s Top 100.

So I cut myself down to looking at only the 48 beers that appear in both lists. Of those 48 beers, there is very little close agreement. Only one matches right on. Pizza Port Cuvee de Tomme ranks at #95 on both lists. The next closest agreement is the aforementioned Westvleteren 12. Only 27% of the list (13 out of 48) were in what I would consider close agreement (within 5 places, plus or minus, of the other list), whereas 38% of the list (18 out of 48) were more than 20 places apart.

I also threw a couple of scatter plots together.

Beer Advocate vs. Rate Beer

They’re both the same scatter plot, sorted two different ways. Scatter 1 is sorted by BA rank (thus stripe of blue up the middle) and Scatter 2 is sorted by RB rank (thus the strip of red up the middle). You can see from these that, of the beers that both sites ranked in the Top 100, Beer Advocate tended to rank the beers higher (lower in number: Rank 1 = The Best).

The number of times that the following words appear in both lists combined (if a beer appears on both lists, the word was counted once):

Bourbon: 10
Barrel: 16
Aged: 15
Imperial: 19
Stout: 31
Ale: 10
IPA/India Pale Ale: 7
Black: 7
Hop/Hoppy/Hoppiness, etc: 6
The suffix “-ation”: 8
Lager: 0

You’d almost think that stouts, and especially bourbon barrel aged ones were the most popular craft beers on the market, and not IPAs.

What final conclusion can we draw from all of this? It’s hard to say. Since they have two different ranking systems (5 point scale vs. 100 point scale) it’s difficult to draw any specific comparisons. Mostly, it’s an interesting look at the tastes of the user base at both sites. I wonder how many people rate at both sites and how their ratings compare given the different point systems.

I also put both lists together (where the beers match) and came up with a mean average of scores to give the overall Top 48 beers. Here’s the list:

BA Rank RB Rank Mean Rank Beer
1 2 2 Westvleteren Abt 12
5 3 4 Three Floyds Dark Lord Russian Imperial Stout
2 16 9 Russian River Pliny the Younger
7 13 10 Russian River Pliny the Elder
12 8 10 AleSmith Speedway Stout
15 7 11 Three Floyds Oak Aged Dark Lord Russian Imperial Stout
11 15 13 Rochefort Trappistes 10
4 24 14 Three Floyds Vanilla Bean Barrel Aged Dark Lord Russian Imperial Stout
10 22 16 Westvleteren Extra 8
16 19 18 Lost Abbey The Angels Share (Bourbon Barrel)
3 34 19 Deschutes The Abyss
24 14 19 Three Floyds Dreadnaught Imperial IPA
18 25 22 Surly Darkness
25 20 23 Bells Hopslam
8 40 24 Founders Kentucky Breakfast Bourbon Aged Stout
21 28 25 Stone Imperial Russian Stout
26 23 25 Port Brewing Older Viscosity
23 27 25 Russian River Consecration
33 18 26 AleSmith Barrel Aged Speedway Stout
17 39 28 Dieu du Ciel Péché Mortel
20 37 29 Russian River Supplication
36 31 34 New Glarus Belgian Red
19 50 35 Founders Breakfast Stout
6 65 36 Portsmouth Kate The Great Russian Imperial Stout
43 30 37 Struise Pannepot
22 52 37 St. Bernardus Abt 12
30 49 40 Russian River Temptation
69 12 41 Lost Abbey Isabelle Proximus
27 69 48 Firestone Walker 12
37 61 49 AleSmith IPA
39 60 50 Kuhnhenn Raspberry Eisbock
49 54 52 Lost Abbey Cable Car
78 29 54 Great Divide Oak Aged Yeti Imperial Stout
53 64 59 Stone Brandy Barrel Double Bastard
44 88 66 Cantillon Blåbær Lambik
54 83 69 New Glarus Raspberry Tart
46 94 70 Ayinger Celebrator Doppelbock
62 78 70 New Belgium La Folie
52 98 75 Surly 16 Grit
75 77 76 Stone Ruination IPA
60 93 77 Tyranena Devil Over A Barrel
83 71 77 Southern Tier Choklat
58 97 78 Russian River Beatification
81 89 85 Oskar Blues Ten FIDY
80 92 86 Ølfabrikken Porter
86 90 88 North Coast Anniversary Barrel-Aged Old Rasputin
97 91 94 Struise Black Albert
95 95 95 Pizza Port Cuvee de Tomme
Tags Tags: , , , , , , ,
Categories: industry, marketing, media
Posted By: erik
Last Edit: 24 Jul 2009 @ 03 35 PM

EmailPermalink
 

Responses to this post » (43 Total)

 
  1. Sarah says:

    Fascinating. I wonder if the prevalence of specialty, hard-to-find beers has something to do with the fact that it is easier to rate something when you have a small sample size to compare it to. I imagine picking your favorite barrel-aged bourbon stout is much easier than picking your favorite IPA or Porter because there are fewer out there to pick from.

  2. erik says:

    Maybe.

    It’s not like people are rating “This is my favorite beer,” though.

    Ostensibly, they are rating each beer objectively as they taste it, not technically in comparison with other beers.

    Bearing that in mind, it’s even more fascinating that this list is so far removed from drinking trends.

    I may followup on this if I can dig up some of the style consumption stats that I was looking at during the CBC.

  3. Jules says:

    Typical.

    Like most ratings by “experts” all three lists (BA, RB, and the combo) are huge TGA lists (read: snobby and esoteric). I am no expert but I am certainly more interested and attuned to so-called best beers than the typical Joe drinker, and I’m hard-pressed to find a singl beer I’ve heard of, let alibe tasted. Ridiculous.

    I’m not asking for the budweisers of the world to be on there, but parsing tfe duTinxtions between these two lists strikes me as absurd when they are so far afield if the everyday and semi-serious beer drinkers experiences.

    Snob city! Shouldn’t ratings at least partially be about inspiring people to seek out new things? How is that possible shen these lists are dominated by specialty brews unattainable by most people, at least without some serious legwork.

    Ugh.

  4. Chelle says:

    Interesting comparison — at the end of the article, you mention the website users: in both cases, is it strictly the users who rank the beers, without editorial input? I wonder how different the two processes are, and the populations doing the judging.

    Like the prior poster, I am not familiar with most beers on the list, and I do wonder where you can get most of them: I pulled up the menu of a nearby bar that has 300+ beers, & apparently, they carry none of these. I’m beginning to think there’s an additional category of beer fans between the Bud Light drinkers & the consumers of these rated beers — where do the Sam Adams/Magic Hat/Harpoon/Flying Dog/Brooklyn Brewery drinkers fit?

    Finally, I have to ask: so how was the Westvleteren 12? Did it live up to the hype? Where would it rate on your own list?

  5. erik says:

    I really appreciate this viewpoint, and I’m glad you both brought it up.

    It is strictly users that rate the beers.

    I suspect that most of the people that are rating these beers are Sam Adams/Magic Hat/Harpoon/Flying Dog/Brooklyn Brewery drinkers most of the time. I have a hard time imagining any beer geek sucking down Pliny the Younger three nights a week. For one thing, it would get expensive. While a lot of these beers are great treats, I wouldn’t count many of them as “frequent drinkers.”

    My suspicion is that there’s a disconnect in a lot of people’s minds between “this is a great beer” and “this is the beer a like to drink.” Some of it almost definitely is going to come from a rarity standpoint, like Westy 12.

    Speaking of Westy 12. Was it a great beer? Absolutely. Is it the best beer I’ve ever had? No. That claim still goes to Grant’s Perfect Porter which 1) no longer exists and 2) is only rated by others at a B+.

    So, going back – part of me feels like a lot of these ratings are almost knee-jerk reactionary in some way. In many ways, craft beer is still very young. Beer geeks are really just starting to come into their own. There has yet to be a generation that has attained drinking age with a beer selection that isn’t 90+% macrobrew, so I think a lot of this is sort of proving-ground geekiness. By rating these beers the highest, they prove once and for all that they’re not into Milwaukee’s Best Dry.

    Not to say that any of the beers listed in that “Top 48″ aren’t great beers. I’ve had many of them and they’re fantastic. But they aren’t the beer that I’m going to pick up and bring to a party to share with my friends. They’re the beer that I’m going to covet at home until I have an incredibly special occasion and open.

    Which one of those is “best?”

  6. First, I miss Grant’s stuff. Their Hefe, Imperial Stout, and most of their stuff was really good. I think the one of the flaws of the beer advocate system is simply rarity. They tend to hype up stuff that few people can get. Who can challenge it when they can’t drink it? For me, Founder’s KBS is a perfect example. I think it is good but it doesn’t crack my top 100. It’s almost esoteric in approach. I find myself disagreeing with them all the time. I think your article is good and does raise some good issues about ratings. Ultimately, the rating of beers is pretty subjective. That’s not to say that you can’t see whether a beer is well made or not but preference plays a major role. If you have a rare beer fetish you tend to rate those beers higher (I think).

    You also raise a good point about asking where the normal beers are at. There a ton of American beers on those lists and very little outside. Furthermore, there are few world classics and styles. A well done world classic is often better than a huge stout…again, proclivities rule the day. Nicely done!

    • Damon says:

      Man – I don’t get it. I’m looking at the arortwk right now and you’ve drawn all the characters with six fingers… And deleted the sex scene!I thought we were mates!Seriously tho – nice work. And spot on with the Bone guy – that’s exactly what I had in my head.I’ll email you or text you or Facebook you or something in a minute with my new script. You don’t mind redrawing it all do you?

  7. Eugene says:

    Just to set it straight RB ranks Westy 12 as #1 as well.

  8. erik says:

    I was working off of this list (Best of 2009) which ranks it as #2.

  9. BD14 says:

    The truth is, the trading forums have as much to do with the spike in perceived value as actual tasting and ratings. Case in point is the recent release of Duck Duck Gooze by Lost Abbey. Before anyone tried it, it was demanding some of the top 50 beers in trade value. Now sure, past performance, description of what the beer will be, etc. can factor into it… but in many cases it has become no different than the futures market on Wall Street.

    The other issue is when a brewery has an incredibly small amount of bottles being released – say 800 or less – then depending on the bottle limit, only 100-400 people will receive any. If these people are planning on trading these beers – it behooves them to make sure the rating is high. They may not be lying, but it certainly isn’t subjective. If they give it a B, it won’t fetch the same as if it was an A+.

    Anyway, I guess my main point is that alongside rarity and quality, there is a third economic effect changing the way people evaluate value beers – the ability for that beer to turn into another beer. Why would a person tell the world the thing he has to trade is no good?

  10. will says:

    Instead of the ranking as the statistical comparison, you should convert the actual RATINGS to a standardized z-score and then see how well they match up.

  11. erik says:

    That’s a great idea, I’ll see if I can get a statistician to help me with that.

    Edit: Upon reflection, this is a ton of work for me and would actually be a lot easier for the people who actually run BA and Rate Beer who have actual access to the databases involved. They can get the info with the touch of a button. It’s a huge amount of leg work for me to dig all that stuff up. … Unless somebody has a lot of time on their hands and feels like gathering that information and sending it to me – then I’m happy to work out the statistics!

  12. […] week the blog Top Fermented had a fascinating analysis of two of the most popular beer rating websites around: BeerAdvocate and RateBeer. Top Fermented crunched some numbers and compared and contrasted […]

  13. Steve says:

    I have drank quite a few beers on those lists over the years, its not that difficult if you’re a beer enthusiast and watch for different beers when you travel (and have a wife who travels and brings you beer). However, I pay very little attention to the actual rankings on those and other site as there’s no way to know how the reviewers are determining the score they gave. Are they judging that beer to style? Comparing it to other beers in the same style category? Reviewing the beer as it stands on its own? Although there is no “wrong way” to taste a beer, a lot of people have a difficult time identifying what they’re tasting and experiencing and then putting that into words. I’ve read reviews where the reviewer gave a beer a low score but indicated they “don’t like that style of beer anyway”. How can you rate a beer if you don’t like the particular qualities that it’s supposed to have? I’ve also read positive and negative reviews for a beer, but the reviews had the exact same score on them. The “herd mentality” comes into play on these sites as well. The more “mystique” a beer builds and higher the score, the less likely some people are going to give it a bad review for fear of being ridiculed. Still other just want to build the number of reviews they have on the site and consequently, put very little effort into writing a review and determining the score (quantity over quality). I agree that most of those beers should probably be on the list, but where on the list is rather subjective and quite frankly, I would never want to rank them against each other, just enjoy them.

  14. Edward says:

    A better measure of the correlation between the rating is to examine the correlation between the ratings instead of between the rankings. A small change in rating may cause a substantial change in rankings.

    The correlation betwen the WR on BA and the Score on RB for the 32 beers that appear on both the BA top 100 list and the RB top 50 list is only 42.30%, which is significant at the 5% level but not at 1%. This means that the variation in WR about its mean “explains” only 17.66% of the variation in RB about its mean.

  15. erik says:

    Well! As someone on a thread at Beer Advocate (where, I see, you also posted this comment – thanks for posting it here, as well) pointed out, the rankings aren’t even weighted the same between the two sites. They really need to be normalized to be comparable:

    BeerAdvocate ratings:

    Appearance 20%
    Smell 20%
    Taste 40%
    Mouthfeel 10%
    Drinkabilty 10%

    RateBeer ratings:

    Appearance 10%
    Smell 20%
    Taste 20%
    Mouthfeel 10%
    Overall Impression 40%

    No doubt, there’s a lot of good statistical analysis that can be done with the information between these two sites, if you have access to the data. On the other hand, it’s ALL user-generated. So all you’re really getting is opinions with no standard collection mechanism.

    I might rate Westy 12 in comparison with every other beer I’ve ever had and you might rate Westy 12 in comparison with just Quads, a third person might rate it in comparison with all other Belgians, and a fourth just in comparison with Westvlerteren’s other beers. It’s all completely subjective information, making the end result a little suspect, anyway.

  16. […] a rather provocatively headline, “Rate Beer vs. Beer Advocate: The ratings war!,” Top Fermented takes a lengthy look at how the top-rated beers at Rate Beer and Beer Advocate […]

  17. I know it’s fun for many people, but I don’t like rating beers with points. This is not a football league or a tennis circuit where all participants play under the same rules and conditions (at least on paper).

    Beer is a much more complex thing. You can’t compare Three Floyds Dark Lord Russian Imperial Stout (just to take one at random from the list) with BudÄ›jovický Budvar SvÄ›tlý Ležák or Fullers London Pride. Even though they are all called “beer”, they are three completely different things brewed with a different purpuse in mind.

    That said, I do believe ratings are affected by how hard to find, expensive (two things that increase the perceived value of just about anything) and strong a beer is (stronger beers are usually more flavourful than weaker ones), to which we could add how high the IBU is as well.

    To me, the rankings at both BA and RB or any other similar site are an excercise in futility.

  18. Joris Pattyn says:

    The reactions on the article are probably as interesting – when also predictable – as the article itself.
    The age-old reproach (snob, eclectic, own interest, etc.) come up immediately. Somewhere, there is talk about herd-mentality. Forgetting that the reaction is typical for somebody feeling left out of the group – green grapes… Also the reminder that a list ought to urge people to drink outside the sixpack at the cornershop, is exactly opposite to the rest of the reproach.
    Is it different in the wineworld, for instance? Who’s had Romanée Conti? Château d’Yquem?
    As a regular contributor to Ratebeer, and one who gives sh*t (pardon my French) about the “Best of…” lists, I keep repeating: RB and BA are tools. Take out what you like, what is instructive to you, and leave the rest. I often rate easy-drinking beers very highly, and I’m far from the only one. But whining about “I can’t get those, and have to run to Timbuctu” is just – as said: green grapes.

  19. Marc Smith says:

    Where is Founders Devil Dancer triple IPA??? That is one Hell of a great beer. !2%, firey red color, tasty hop flavor, and is a very smooth drinkable beer. BUT WATCH OUT, it will mess you up! Thats the trick, to have that much alcohol and not get the liquor style burn as you drink it. GET SOME, GET SOME!!!

  20. Scott-TheBrewClub says:

    Its interesting to see what beers float to the top of the big review site ratings, and it’s also interesting to see the difference between the two lists.

    Still, I haven’t had most of them but might consider it something of a ‘to-try’ list, especially the ones that appear toward the top of both lists.

    Reminds me a bit of the Car magazines where they would always be test driving and rating $100,000 super-cars. I would imagine most of the readership have probably never even seen one, let alone use the review as a guide on their next Ferrari purchase!

    Nice work in putting this together!

  21. Common consensus can be bad even for people who love beer. I think there can be a degree of pressure associated with “following the herd” (to wax Kierkegaard). People are afraid of being considered to have a low beer I.Q. when they rate so differently. I’ve said elsewhere that I vehemently disagree with how highly Kentucky Breakfast Stout is rated on their list. Point still being that preference plays a major role and that one only finds out by trying a beer for oneself.

  22. Best Beer says:

    It is easy to rate all the beers if you have all of its sample and tasted it, and for Me it only depends on the tasters choice of taste on beers.

  23. […] I recently came across an old blog post comparing ratings of beers among users between two of the top beer review sites Rate Beer and Beer Advocate.  While this blog post and the stats the blogger compiled are over a year old they still hold water and are worth thinking about.  This post can be found here. […]

  24. Alex says:

    This is an interesting comparison.

    As far as the differences, part is based on how the two sites score. BA uses a metric where the number of reviews is taken into consideration. So an A beer with 100 reviews will beat an A+ beer with 50. BR will rate the A+ beer higher. The other part is because of the users. For example, I found out about BA, and I liked it. The way the site was laid out, the purpose behind it, and the way it looked all appealed to me. As such, I became a regular BA user, and have very rarely used BR. Because of that, my tastes would influence BA, but not BR.

    As far as the “snobby” comments, the rarity of the beer is all in relation to where you live. I may be lucky in that I’ve lived in Boston, live in NJ, work in Philly, and had a friend near Baltimore. As such, I’ve been able to buy 50 of BA’s top 100. Some are certainly rare, like Westvleteren 12, and expensive at $10 for a 12oz bottle. Others are common and affordable, such as the offerings from Stone, Rogue, and Samuel Smith. Bell’s and Great Lakes have limited distribution, but are cheap enough to be every-day choices. The Stone IPA, #57 on BA, is easily available and affordable.

    In regard to the comment “they aren’t the beer that I’m going to pick up and bring to a party to share with my friends”, is some cases that’s certainly the case, say with a $10 12oz bottle of Pennepot or Black Albert. But many others are great for just that. An easily available $7 22oz bottle of Stone RIS? That’s something you’d pick up on your way to a party. Have a special gathering? That’s the perfect time to crack open the $30 750ml bottle of Angel’s Share, since the beer is so strong it’s designed to be shared among friends.

  25. Kirk says:

    What’s with the judgmental questioning of beer ratings on the aforementioned sites? — “Are the beers rated as compared to only the particular style?” “Are the ratings on rare beers inflated because of a snob effect?” etc, etc. Take it at face value: beers are rated one characteristic at a time which results in a total rating. That’s how I rate beers and I’m sure most others do as well. Do you really suggest that as a rater is concentrating on the aroma of a certain beer to come up with a score they are thinking about how rare the beer is? Why aren’t there as many lagers on the list as barrel-aged, hop-heavy beers, high alcohol, imperial/double styles etc? Because they are not as full flavored and would score lower points in aroma, flavor, and other rating categories. If that is considered an “American” viewpoint – than the ratings are still valid because that would be the majority of the raters. I see nothing strange with the top lists on either site.

    • erik says:

      Wait.. it’s okay for beer sites to judgmentally question beer, but it’s not okay to judgmentally question the ratings?

      You can’t be sure how others rate beer. Your experience is your own. Everybody else could be rating beer based on how much gold foil is on the bottle. You could be the outlier.

  26. Les Argen says:

    Thanks for this article, and the discussion below (for those of you still following it three years later).

    I thought this quote from Erik sort of undermined his argument:

    Not to say that any of the beers listed in that “Top 48? aren’t great beers. I’ve had many of them and they’re fantastic. But they aren’t the beer that I’m going to pick up and bring to a party to share with my friends. They’re the beer that I’m going to covet at home until I have an incredibly special occasion and open.
    Which one of those is “best?”

    If you covet them for a special occasion, there’s probably a reason for it. We tend to save (what we consider to be) the best for special occasions, be it beer, wine, food or clothes to name a few.

    Also, the different rating given to different styles is not necessarily wrong – it’s reasonable to argue that some styles just are better than others – lagers, for example, are usually less complex. For this reason, I like that Rate Beer tells you what percentile the beer is in overall, but also what percentile it is by style. So, eg, Effen Lager is 29th percentile overall, but 98th percentile for lager. So, if you like lagers, you’d be able to tell that Effen is rated very highly in that category.

    • erik says:

      Hey Les,

      I think your first point is fair. I think that what I was trying to get at all those years ago is what would be considered “best”? The beer that I only take out to friends once in a great while or the beer that I ALWAYS take out to friends?

      As to your second point, it’s notreasonable to argue that some styles are better than others. It’s just your opinion. It’s not empirical truth. I do like that RB tells you where things fall within the style.

      I’d also note that RB has changed their math since I wrote this piece and now has weighted averages rather than straight up scores and may have even added in “within the style” since I wrote this. It’s been a while. A long while. Almost 4 years.

      Without actually re-reading this post to see what I originally took exception to, what’s been bothering me the most lately about the RB and BA “Top Beer” lists is that the ratings don’t appear to be weighted in the lists based on the number of ratings so that something can score very high with just a few rankings, whereas something that many people have had has the disadvantage of having more people rate it with a wider range of scores. I know that there’s a mathemagical way to account for that.

      • Les Argen says:

        Hi Erik, I like to leave it 18 months between posts! Thanks very much for taking the time to respond. Is there a way to be alerted when you make new posts?

        Re your second point – fair enough, you’re right that it’s just my opinion that certain styles are better than others, but I would say that the weight of opinion on that subject is worth taking into account when you consider how many ratings there have been for each style on a site like rate beer – it doesn’t provide empirical evidence, but it’s certainly very good evidence as to weight of opinion.

        Re the number of ratings, it’s an intriguing one and I THINK I’m in favour of it. At the moment RB doesn’t provide an average rating until there have been 10 ratings, so to extrapolate that more subtly does make sense (on the other hand, is that unfair to a hard to find beer? I mean, the reason I’ve rated Sierra Nevada Pale and not Pliny the Younger is because I can’t get my hands on Pliny the Younger over here in Australia).

        Regards,

  27. These are really fantastic ideas in concerning blogging.
    You have touched some fastidious things here. Any way keep up wrinting.

    Here is my webpage :: avid pro tools 11 crack

  28. Blondie says:

    That’s an apt answer to an intterseing question

  29. Nice post. I was checking constantly this weblog and
    I am inspired! Very useful information specially the ultimate part :) I deal with such
    information a lot. I used to be seeking this certain info
    for a very lengthy time. Thank you and good luck.

  30. Tova says:

    Very good blog! Do you have any tips for aspiring writers?
    I’m hoping to start my own blog soon but I’m a little lost on everything.

    Would you recommend starting with a free platform like WordPress or go for
    a paid option? There are so many options out there that I’m totally confused ..
    Any suggestions? Cheers!

    Check out my web-site – Tova

  31. Hi there to all, how is all, I think every one is getting more from
    this site, and your views are fastidious for new users.

  32. wonderful publish, very informative. I’m wondering why the
    other experts of this sector do not realize this.

    You must continue your writing. I’m sure, you’ve a huge readers’ base already!

  33. It’s not my first time to visit this site, i am browsing this web site dailly and take fastidious facts from here all the time.

  34. A cosmopolitan city with all the basic amenities and a growing Industrial,
    Commercial and Educational hub is the definitely an investors’
    paradise. Let me explain the five wealth generating conduits
    that real estate provides:. Old Pier Beach – Initial Investment: $34,806; Starting Level: 1; Weekly
    Starting Profit: $1,650.

  35. Great blog here! Also your web site loads up very fast!
    What web host are you using? Can I get your affiliate link to
    your host? I wish my site loaded up as quickly as yours lol

  36. Hey this is kind of of off topic but I was wanting to know if blogs use WYSIWYG editors
    or if you have to manually code with HTML. I’m starting a blog soon but
    have no coding know-how so I wanted to get
    guidance from someone with experience. Any help would be enormously appreciated!

Post a Comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

\/ More Options ...
Change Theme...
  • Users » 49234
  • Posts/Pages » 200
  • Comments » 1,787
Change Theme...
  • HopsHops « Default
  • BarleyBarley

About



    No Child Pages.

Shirts



    No Child Pages.

Tour



    No Child Pages.