companydirectorylist.com  Global Business Directories and Company Directories
Search Business,Company,Industry :


Country Lists
USA Company Directories
Canada Business Lists
Australia Business Directories
France Company Lists
Italy Company Lists
Spain Company Directories
Switzerland Business Lists
Austria Company Directories
Belgium Business Directories
Hong Kong Company Lists
China Business Lists
Taiwan Company Lists
United Arab Emirates Company Directories


Industry Catalogs
USA Industry Directories












Company Directories & Business Directories

USA-SOURCE DISTRIBUTION; INC

SALISBURY-USA

Company Name:
Corporate Name:
USA-SOURCE DISTRIBUTION; INC
Company Title:  
Company Description:  
Keywords to Search:  
Company Address: 14 Larrabee Terr,SALISBURY,MA,USA 
ZIP Code:
Postal Code:
1952 
Telephone Number: 9785357310 (+1-978-535-7310) 
Fax Number: 9785357313 (+1-978-535-7313) 
Website:
energybid. com, intellinetservices. com 
Email:
 
USA SIC Code(Standard Industrial Classification Code):
731908 
USA SIC Description:
Distribution Services 
Number of Employees:
 
Sales Amount:
 
Credit History:
Credit Report:
 
Contact Person:
 
Remove my name



copy and paste this google map to your website or blog!

Press copy button and paste into your blog or website.
(Please switch to 'HTML' mode when posting into your blog. Examples:
WordPress Example, Blogger Example)









Input Form:Deal with this potential dealer,buyer,seller,supplier,manufacturer,exporter,importer

(Any information to deal,buy, sell, quote for products or service)

Your Subject:
Your Comment or Review:
Security Code:



Previous company profile:
OFFICE SPECIALISTS; INC
MERRIMACK RIVER FELINE RESCUE
CELLULAR MOBILE
Next company profile:
ROBERT J. FRANKE
WALSH COMMITTEE
FLOWERSANDMORE










Company News:
  • Is it correct to say only animals sweat, humans perspire?
    I think the link you gives explains the situation pretty well To a modern English speaker, sweat and perspire mean exactly the same thing, except that perspire is a little more formal and delicate But it sounds silly to this American English people to say that animals sweat but humans don't
  • Could you explain the difference between to draw and to pull?
    May I say that 'to pull' can be only for physical reasons or for physical reasons 'to pull' and 'to draw' are the same?
  • it is worth doing somethin = something is worth doing?
    It's worth noting that only that version has any real currency The three other permutations (with worthwhile and or to try) are all syntactically valid (and effectively, mean the same), but they're rarely used
  • word choice - Replacement for man in Man is the only animal that can . . .
    The human race is a poorly defined collective and not an animal, so the second form is probably best as Of all the animals, only the human race can make use of fire and finally in the third form humankind is a single word and plural Humankind are the only animals that can make use of fire But the statement is false in every case
  • Difference between infected with and infected by
    I found both these two versions are being used Infected with coronavirus Infected by coronavirus Cambridge Dictionary gives different definitions for them: to pass a disease to a person, anim
  • meaning - to reach the end vs to finish - English Language Learners . . .
    It's a bit of a bizarre construction, especially combined with 'lunch' but I'd say that what you've been told is true: to be " finished " is clear-cut, you're done with the object of the sentence to have " reached the end " is a little ambiguous, and while it might mean you're done, it may also imply just that you're at the end stage of the object of the sentence It would only work with an
  • Does word someone refer to both an animal and a human being or only . . .
    It could be used for (non-human) animals IF the user is implying that the animals have a "being" that is equivalent to humans For example, in fantasy literature or New Age Spirituality "He had the feeling that someone was watching him " could mean a wolf in the forest, if the writer is ascribing some level of sentience to the wolf, for example
  • word choice - Should I use who or which when referring to a . . .
    As a general rule, " who " should be used for people " Which " is used for things With animals, it depends on context Animals are often anthropomorphised in literature, and also in daily life (especially pets), and so may be referred to in the same way as a person Some examples in media referring to a specific animal by its species, not by its name, but using "who" include: The Cat Who
  • “to not do” or “not to do” - English Language Learners Stack . . .
    Specifically with the following sentence, which is more suitable correct? You don't count on humans to not do things they're used to doing You don't count on humans not to do things they'r
  • Usage of only to - English Language Learners Stack Exchange
    A point about the grammar "Only to" is not a grammatical unit (not a constituent) The "to" belongs with the verb "have" "Only" is a focusing adverb modifying the to-infinitival clause "to have some connection or relevance to the present time "




Business Directories,Company Directories
Business Directories,Company Directories copyright ©2005-2012 
disclaimer