Calendar
Network
Feeds
- 60
- Sphinn It!
Went Hot: June 10, 2008 - 10:41 am
Posted By: MattMcGee 124 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://seoblackhat.com) my network
Category: SEO
42 Comments
Who Sphunn This Topic?
-
TheMadHat
-
JulieJoyce
-
Wiep
-
DavidWallace
-
toddmintz
-
JohnWeb
-
Dan
-
MattMcGee
-
beussery
-
PPCblogger
-
SEOhack
-
markalves
-
Lyndon
-
rjonesx
-
bhartzer
-
danperry
-
evilgreenmonkey
-
dedmond29
-
Hobo
-
UtahSEOpro
-
claudieb
-
tonyadam
-
SearchBuzz
-
janecopland
-
casieg
-
SexySEO
-
planetc1
-
Menchov
-
theGypsy
-
gyutae
-
sza
-
floppy
-
blogdawg
-
SlightlyShadySEO
-
charlieanzman
-
thinkingserious
-
amyalcin01
-
mactep
-
meganion
-
yourseomentor
-
tynansanger
-
jameskm03
-
andymurd
-
VinceQuattrin
-
TrafficGuru
-
anglemona
-
neelakanthap
-
KenJones
-
tuftey
-
dao
-
thibaut
-
pancham
-
infiniteseo
-
Maing
-
nelsonjs
-
Disco-Stu
-
Rizoh
-
stvalentine
-
TerryCox
-
chyneclicks
Comments
"Want to sum up white hat SEO? It boils down to:
1) Site Architecture - Can be learned in 4 hours or less.
2) Analytics - Can you install a javascript and log in?
3) PPC - Even though we used to call that SEM . . .
4) Content - which is better handled by copywriters.
Alas! The Emperor has no clothes. There are no advanced white hat SEO techniques."
Sorry. Thats very primitive misleading conclusion.from the article:
That right there colors the article for me. It's incorrect, and if you can't see the clue in that Google pronouncement, you probably have no other options than pulling tricks.
it's only good linkbait to say stuff like that
Missed a couple of things there, such as the whole "social" side to WH, but Quadzilla's right. You can teach most people whitehat within a week.
you can teach people that they need links to get ranked, but it takes time to learn how to find sources for good links, it takes experience to know which links are worth your time, and it takes finesse (or good linkbait) to actually get the link.
I think advanced whitehat techniques are rooted in the basics but there are many ways to skin a cat, some are more effective and faster than others.
I agree that you can teach anyone WhiteHat SEO - it's more following a certain set of unofficial standards and practices than anything and is devoid of the creative and outside-the-box thinking that anything BH involves.
@DarkMatter
Yes you need to know good sources for links and such, but that's hardly a "skill", it's more about understanding and then trawling the Internet while keeping an eye out.
Keep voting my comment down all you stuck-in-your-ways whitehatters, you know I'm right. I'm not saying WH is bad, only there's not much to it. Unfortunately if someone sheds light on how simple WH is, you won't be able to charge $400ph anymore.
As someone who's been building links for almost 5 years, I think it is a skill. I'm able to identify and secure powerful links far more quickly than I could 4 years ago. If you think it can be taught in a week, you aren't doing it right. There's also plenty of room for creativity.
I'd say it's a lot easier to spam blog comments and cloak your pages than it is to actually tranform a crappy site into something useful, informative, or profitable. I build sites that won't churn and burn, but stand the test of time.
"I'd say it's a lot easier to spam blog comments and cloak your pages than it is to actually tranform a crappy site into something useful, informative, or profitable."
Transform a site into something useful and informative? That's not SEO. Why do all white hat SEO people insist that having a good content website is "SEO" it's not SEO. It's good web design.
I've also been doing SEO for almost 6 years and years mean nothing. I've met people doing SEO for a year who have blown me away.
I disagree. I've turned junk websites into authorities within their niches. At that point they enjoy a self reinforcing position in the SERPs, and other sites that try to overtake them using limited seo strategies like link building will usually fail.
Years can mean a lot if you spend them wisely.
Well, you disagree, I disagree. I'm pleased you've had success in your efforts. Yup, adding good content will encourage people to link to you, but I find it a stretch to call that SEO.
Each to their own, I'll do great content and my own type of link building to boot. Scripts can mean a lot of you write them wisely.
Most sites that I look at haven't done any of the obvious basic optimisation steps, let alone anything remotely advanced, nor anything to do with usability or accessibility.
They're too caught up in spamming for links, faking junk content, and spamming for links to realise that the actual site they have put online is, in most cases, crap.
You guys are funny. Lets do a case study!
1) Go to Google and type "loans"
2) Look at the link profile for moneyexpert
3) Tell me if you think they are a natural 23,000,000 backlinks
4) Ask why they are ranking in a million dollar search position...
Is it because of the beautifully sculpted nofollow? No, it's because they're scamming the hell out of the link system.
Now you please rank for "loans" with your beautiful content.
Black hat or white hat, I'm not letting anyone touch a site of mine that thinks it takes 4 hours to learn "site architecture".
markdigerati,
If what you wrote is correct. I'm just wondering. Why haven't you reported the said site to Google WebSpam Team?
How to report paid links Send comment HTML is disabled
I think you're missing the point, Harith.... Go on report the links, get all your friends to report the links. I guarantee you nothing will happen.
Do you really think Google has missed a site with 23M dodgy backlinks on a top $$ keyterm?
@markdigerati
you're right, I won't be able to rank for loans without blackhat tactics. But there's plenty of low hanging fruit that is far easier to extract a profit from. I'm not saying BH is not an effective strategy, it's obviously the only way to compete in certain markets. The point I was trying to make is that it's not "better" than WH. Just different.
The sites ranking for loans are in a constant battle for rankings, and most of those sites won't hold their postitions for very long. I know I'm not going to rank #1 for viagra with linkbait, but I can be #1 for lot's of other very profitable keywords that require less work to maintain. You can definitely make more money in a month with a BH loans site. But my WH sites have longevity, and that is the strategy I choose.
Bh has no longevity? I think you're speaking from rumour mill and what people would have you believe here rather than empirical evidence. How many blackhat sites do you have? How many blackhat sites have you tracked?
Among many others, I've personally seen moneyexpert in the top 3 for "loans" for over a year now. How is that not longevity? You've admitted that BH can deliver better ranking results than WH and quite frankly, I think a lot of people who don't bother getting into BH like to tell themselves it's not worth doing because they won't last. If you do it badly, no they won't last. If you do it well, they'll last ages - or if there are other "circumstances", like moneyexpert. Do you have any idea how much money it is worth to rank in the top 3 for "loans" for 12 months? You're going to honestly tell me that your businesses strategy is better than a £x,xxx,xxx per month key phrase ranking for a year? Let’s face it, if anyone here had a BH method which stood them a good chance of getting that ranking, even for weeks, let alone months, now going on years, they'd drop everything and do it.
I also fail to understand how whitehats always seem to think blackhats are totally incapable of making a "good" (content/design) website, if they wish too. Without going over old, old, old ground, I think it's pretty obvious to say that the best SEO is the one that can practise both WH and BH to a high level.
If it's a subject you are interested in, I can give you examples (with archive.org to back it up) of numerous, competitive, very well ranking, nicely design, but *totally* blackhat sites that have been in top 3 positions on Google for over a year.
Yes a bad blackhat will get banned, it's no different to a bad WH never ranking in the first place.
I'm not having a dig at you, just giving my point of view. I'd like to thank you for your polite response.
@DarkMatter
"But my WH sites have longevity, and that is the strategy I choose."
Well said. White Hat SEO is a long term successful strategy.
@markdigerati,
"I think you're missing the point, Harith.... Go on report the links, get all your friends to report the links. I guarantee you nothing will happen."
My friend. Nobody has claimed that Google WebSpam Team is running a 100% perfect operation. Matt Cutts mentioned several time that their system isn't perfect and he encourage people to report spam to GOOG.
However, I have a very encouraging experience in reporting spam sites. You should give it a test drive, at least ;-)
I'm no fan of search engine spamming, but honestly Harith, you're making the rest of us want to barf with your Google ass-kissing...
puhleeze...enough already.
Jill
I intend to continue preaching and supporting ethical SEO :-)
I get the point I think.
4 hours to learn on site structure? I suppose it depends on who's teaching you or who you're listening to.
@ harth and g1smd
both of your post are good.
Why am I not surprised by the tone of most of the comments. Sphinn caters to the BHs.
Jill I wonder what you mean in your comment to harth in regard to "Google ass-kissing..."? Do you mean that people who attempt to stay within the guide lines are "ass kissers"?
Connie, sorry, not sure what you mean by "harth."
"2) Analytics - Can you install a javascript and log in?"
If you only track analytics using javascript then you need to study Analytics 1.0 because it's well known, due to javascript security issues, there is a reasonable percentage of surfers running without javascript.
If you're not aware of this it's because you're only doing javascript analytics...
Alas, the Emperor doesn't track all his visitors or know what in the hell he's talking about..
@Jill - on come on, you're a Google ass kisser too. You sell services to train people on Google Analytics and Adwords. If that's not Google promotion and ass kissing of the highest caliper, I'm not sure what it is.
Goolge asskissing seems to be THE way to make it in SEO. Skill is secundary.
"Goolge asskissing seems to be THE way to make it in SEO. Skill is secundary."
Spelling comes third. ;-)
@IncrediBILL
I thought JS enabled visitors, at least uptake rate of 99.9% now? How many visitors would you say don't have working JS?
Also, how would say not tracking 5% of visitors have such a appalling effect on your website? Analytics are used for comparison, trend finding and site evolution. It doesn't matter if you have 1000 or 1000000 visitors as long as you can identify the trends and data you need. More users just means more accurate data.
Spelling comes third. ;-)
No, reporting others for doing something that is standard practice for you is third.
Spelling is 8th right behind the daily routine of "great cat pics" comments on Matt's blog.
Commenting on the cat pictures isn't as bad as snitching which comes in second behind search engine ass kissing which ties for first with people who think link building is "hardly a skill".
Real link builders don't need scripts. :)
@debram
Please explain to me how "knowing good places to get links from" is a skill.
"Real" link builders? I think it's time to get off your big moral white horse and hit the ground hard. Please refer to http://sphinn.com/story/51880#c44609
I class "real" link building as that which gets results. Not whatever is currently in fashion. Oh, I'm doing some "whitehat" linkbait btw, can you Digg my story Debram? Hah.
@ Harith
"My friend. Nobody has claimed that Google WebSpam Team is running a 100% perfect operation. Matt Cutts mentioned several time that their system isn't perfect and he encourage people to report spam to GOOG."
You're still entirely missing the point here, so I'll end this conversation here.
"However, I have a very encouraging experience in reporting spam sites. You should give it a test drive, at least ;-)"
That's nice, but I don't feel like I need to police the web. Sure, I'll snitch on someone if I'm in competition with them, otherwise I have better things to do with my time. I'll let the web-hippies do that while clutching their W3C books.
@markdigerati - depending on your site, JS disabled varies but I'd say it's an average of 5% on my site and that's assuming those were really humans and not automated tools.
I run with JS disabled, most of my buddies do too, so does my wife and everyone else using NoScript on Firefox so it's a fast growing trend IMO and you can tell by the decline of ad impressions while the traffic levels stay the same.
To combat the problem I use a lot of server side embedded ads now and the humans typically download the graphics, so you get a number of embedded ads downloaded vs. javascript ad impressions and that's the difference.
Mark - .. white moral horse eh? Hmmm, I think you'll find most link builders ghost riding these day. ;)
I know and understand competitive markets need to be more aggressive and use more aggressive tactics to secure links, and I'm totally ok with it. It's a doggie dog world out there and in order to survive, you need to be smarter, faster and have more insurance than the next guy. That's never been an issue for me.
But the thing about not needing skill to build links? I just can't agree with that one. I don't think you can make a blanket statement like that about building links any more than you can flatly say PPC is easy. Everything has levels of complexity and range, linking isn't any different.
If all you're doing is surfing around doing utility type linking then yes, you are totally right. But if you're in this to make money, be around long term and be successful, good linking is really about good marketing and good marketing is always a current trend.
Ok this old web-hippie is taking her linky ass back to work. Still think snitching sucks though. :)
"doggie dog world"? Lmfao and there was me thinking it was "dog eat dog" world!
No you're right, the "regular" phrase is dog eat dog - but doggie dog is something Snoop Dog says all the time, it's one of those silly things you pick up and say as a result.
don't you all get the E! channel over there? :)
What's a Snoop Dog? Yes we have E in England, we also call it "The Love Drug".
"You're still entirely missing the point here, so I'll end this conversation here."
What was that, a bluff?
To continue and try and get markdigerati to keep talking, but not in public, let me suggest there is a HUGE difference between loans and car loans. The searcher profile and the intent, the stage of the search process... all quite different.
Has Google backed away from quality control on the "loans" SERP given the competitiveness of that SERP? Sure looks that way. Is it justified? Sure... "loans" is too broad for high quality scores, right? The mantra for paying customers is "be specific and convert targeted traffic. The real money is in the long tail....buy keywords" I'm sure you know that drill.
So why are we worried about the massive amounts of untargeted, low converting traffic for some dumb ass search query like "loans"? The people who enter "loans" into Google are ignorant, unrefined, early in their search and far from ready to "buy". Skip those, and go after "used car loans in Peoria Illinois" where you might get fewer hits, but they are all looking for "used car loans".
If you feel the urge to agree with me, go ahead and keep busy typing into Sphinn. If you disagree, don't worry about it. I promise. If you're markdigerati, let me know if you're ever in Seattle. I'll introduce you to the concept of a growler.
I don't recall this conversation being about which term would make the most money. I was simply citing an example of a term that is hard to rank for that would be very difficult just using whitehat. I have many more examples if you wish...
I'll probably be in Seattle August/September.. I can't wait to see your growler.
"1) Go to Google and type "loans"
2) Look at the link profile for moneyexpert
3) Tell me if you think they are a natural 23,000,000 backlinks"
Update: Moneyexpert no longer ranks in the top 300 for loans, and he only ranks #3 for his own site name now.
This thread has ruined Moneyexpert's life.
In.co.uk at least (to which I was referring) moneyexpert is still #1 for "loans"
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=loans&btnG=Search&meta=