Sorry this site requires JavaScript to be enabled in your browser. See the following guide on How to enable JavaScript in Internet Explorer, Netscape, Firefox and Safari. Alternatively you may be blocking JavaScript with an advert-related or developer plugin. Please check your browser plugins.

SEOmoz is right, more than that: The key phrase SEO company is not the exception. Take a look at the more generic terms SEO and search engine optimization and you’ll quickly realize that the Google results there are even less relevant.
Comments21 Comments  

Comments

Avatar
from NickWilsdon 2244 Days ago #
Votes: 6

Well yes, but then you seem to be asking Google to do more than just rank the sites, you want it to be listing results editorially? Making sure only the well known or good companies are found in those SERPs.I can’t see Google doing that - it would open up a whole can of worms in terms of their editorial control and the extent to which SERPs are publications. When I first got into the scene I got a decent showing on one of the main SEO terms. Fact is, it never brought any meaningful traffic. There’s a reason we call them "vanity terms". I soon stopped bothering with the work there and focused on raising the profile of e3internet in other ways. I’d guess that is a similar situation for other "well known" companies in this space. Most of their work comes through referrals and they are too busy to bother with those SERPs. The R.O.I. just isn’t worth it. That’s my take on it though.

Avatar
from onreact 2244 Days ago #
Votes: -6

I think the problem is that the Google algo is flawed right now favoring old sites and sites with too targeted anchor text. Also they seem not to be able to grasp relevancy in a semantic sense. A site like SEOmoz or SEO Book or even my blog ;-) linked from numerous relevant and topical sources even wothout the anchor text in question should rank higher for the keywords they are displaying.Right now Google favors outdated "authority" sites while my blog still is nowhere to be found just due to it being "only" 1 year old and not doing "link building" with targeted anchor texts.

Avatar
from sza 2244 Days ago #
Votes: 9

I find it strange that, after so many years and seeing so many SERPs, you and many other people in SEO do not realize that Google’s basic ranking approach is quite simply not suitable for ranking companies.Their algorithm can be great for ranking information available online, where the number and quality of links pointing to a specific content usually coincide with the quality of that content.With business sites, real quality is not something either on-page or off-page factors will reveal.Businesses whose worthiness is judged by insiders on the basis of professional experience, product/service quality, price, delivery, deadlines, warranties, after-sales, client service, people working there etc. is judged by Google on the basis of incoming links et al. The result? A wholly distorted way of ranking.Everyone realizes this fact in his own business segment, where he knows companies very well. That’s why you are outraged by SEO-related results. You can be sure that the guy who’s working in some other business also looks at "his" SERPs scratching his head in bewilderment, seeing companies at the top that do not deserve to be there.However, for those industries you don’t have much of a clue about (and this includes about 99% of them), you’re probably just as pleased with Google’s results as anyone. You don’t have the insider knowledge, so seeing a couple of topic-relevant companies will make you feel that you have just received a decent, reasonable set of results from your favorite search engine.That lack of insight on the user side is what lets Google off the hook even while it shows literally hundreds of millions of seriously misranked SERPs daily, created by an information ranking paradigm that’s fundamentally inadequate for this task.

Avatar
from jfj3rd 2244 Days ago #
Votes: 6

@onreact...<div></div>"A site like SEOmoz or SEO Book or even my blog ;-) linked from numerous relevant and topical sources even wothout the anchor text in question should rank higher for the keywords they are displaying."<div></div><div>You sound like any number of my clients when you say what I quoted you on.  Your not entitled to better rankings simply because of who you are; no one is.  Though I do agree that Google does tend to favor older sites which in itself can be an issue.</div><div></div><div>@sza</div><div></div><div>I almost exclusively work with real estate related websites and before that I worked in the vacation rental industry and before that timeshares.  All three industries I have marketing related experience and I get frustrated with SERPs in those industries just as I would anywhere else.  Some websites ranking for client targeted terms simply amaze me beyond belief.</div>

Avatar
from neyne 2244 Days ago #
Votes: 1

i think it is quite a flawed approach to judge the algorithm according to the results for SEO related phrases. It is like judging the average human physical constitution by measuring data taken from Olympic games participants. no fair

Avatar
from footinmouthdisease 2244 Days ago #
Votes: 1

Why isn’t anyone pointing out the obvious???????????????RANKINGS DO NOT MATTER!RANKINGS DO NOT MATTER!How many blog posts are there, how many articles written, how many sphinns? The SERPS for the term SEO COMPANY are a reflection of the new SEO order! We’re focusing on ROI, Conversion, and Traffic. Of COURSE the results pages are going to be skewed towards old minded companies that use certain anchor text to get rankings for vanity terms. If there was real value in ranking for Seo Company, Search Engine Optimization and SEO, don’t you think that the brilliant minds of SEO, our brand name super heroes would be all over it? The value isn’t there, the market has evolved!The only other answer is that they are all a bunch of windbags who can’t use their "SEO skillz" to rank for those terms... I personally don’t beleive that, and I beleive that we shouldn’t be surprised by these results, they are the effect of a re-focus of SEO from obsessing over rankings, to concern about conversion!

Avatar
from JohnHGohde 2244 Days ago #
Votes: 1

So, what is the problem?Well, if you want to advertise to the world that your SEO Company is NOT very good at getting results, then please SEOmoz continue on.  Otherwise, I would suggest going for the long tail.My SEO blog covers these topics in depth.  Plus, my search facility works better than Google’s.Personally, trying to go after "SEO Company" sure doesn’t float my boat.  I have done considerable research in Google, and searching on "SEO Company" sure has not been one of them.

Avatar
from RyanU 2244 Days ago #
Votes: 2

I wonder if SEOmoz’s clients would appreciate the possible increased scrutiny that could result from their "outing" other SEOs.

Avatar
from Gab 2244 Days ago #
Votes: 1

@Bill: By the same reasoning, they could type seo information, seo articles, seo blog etc. Having bid on SEO blog in AdWords, in North America, I can tell you that it’s got hardly any volume (~50 searches a day) and isn’t worth the effort to rank.Other terms are worth it, speaking from experience. The problem is that you get a bunch of tire-kickers and garbage leads for every decent one. Also, mentioning prices in the meta description or even title tag doesn’t seem to deter the cheapasses.

Avatar Moderator
from incrediblehelp 2244 Days ago #
Votes: 0

Not really any news here.  These results have stunk for some time and they probably wont change as long as back links rule (in Google) the fashion they do now.To be honest you can find plenty of other industries and niches where websites appear in the top ten that simply dont belong.

Avatar Moderator
from hugoguzman 2243 Days ago #
Votes: 3

Is it just me, or does this post (and Rand’s) come off as nothing more than a case of sour grapes?Google’s algorithm is far from perfect, but it is the by far the best option available and has by far the biggest share of voice.If you don’t like the results it serves up - for "SEO company" or any other term - then go use another engine. If you think that your site is worthy for top rankings - for "SEO company" or any other term - then work hard to get there (and be prepared for year’s worth of effort if the term is highly competitive).Or, do what the rest of us do; build relationships, prospect for new opportunities, continue to educate yourself and your team, make the rounds within the SEO community, and do great work for your existing clients.And eventually, you’ll have so many clients and prospects that you won’t even care about whether or not your site shows up for a generic term like "SEO company."Or if you have access to a lot of cash...just take a short cut and buy the company that owns one of these spammy legacy sites that occupies a top spot :)

Avatar
from shaunoakes 2243 Days ago #
Votes: 1

Google doesn’t care much for SEO related terms anyway, and in my experience, neither do web users. I worked at a company which ranked for "internet marketing", and despite the high volumes of competitors, it never brought the deluge of visitors one would have expected.

Avatar
from yetanotherben 2243 Days ago #
Votes: 1

Alot of sense in what hugoguzman said.  Nice and simple, and very very grounding.Cheers for that.Ben M

Avatar
from onreact 2243 Days ago #
Votes: 0

I have to admit, this is quite a funny thread. Rankings are indeed just a factor or a secondary metric. If there is no ROI then the metrics do not make sense. You can’t convince me though in thousand years that it does not matter that not a single valuable resource or site is ranking in the top 5 for  SEO company, SEO AND serach engine optimization. Especially as most people new to the topic will find and check out exactly those few and then assume that SEO is a load of crap.It seems the "I don’t care" mindset is very common. It’s truly bizarre that of all industries out there the SEO industry is not capable to optimize their search results.

Avatar
from johnandrews 2243 Days ago #
Votes: 1

The silliest part of this is that so-called SEO companies and consultants are actively drawing attention to the SERPs where we know SEOs attempt to manipulate the rankings. It’s silly to think a real SEO would point to a SERP and say it’s not fair or not right or not the way it should be.

Avatar
from Halfdeck 2243 Days ago #
Votes: 0

"real SEO" is just a figment of your imagination.

Avatar
from onreact 2242 Days ago #
Votes: 0

john: This is exactly what noobs ask me "but isn’t SEO manipulation?" No, it’s optimization.

Avatar
from johnandrews 2240 Days ago #
Votes: 1

@onreact: one noob’s expert is another expert’s noob.If I want to "maniplate" the rankings in a SERP I can. If I want to "optimize" a web page I can do that to. I don’t think any one here is qualified to state that SEO is not manipulation but is optimization.@halfdeck I have no idea what you mean, but that’s ok. When i say a "real SEO" I mean a person who is dedicated to the art of ranking web pages at the top of competitive SERPs. Those people don’t point to SERPs and highlight how unfair or incorrect they are. Cue the debate about whether or not a person selling SEO services and believing that all you have to do is "make good content and make sure the basics of SEO are in place"  is a "real SEO". I’ll abstain.. I don’t care to argue about that.

Avatar
from Halfdeck 2240 Days ago #
Votes: 1

@johnandrews: "Those people don’t point to SERPs and highlight how unfair or incorrect they are. "<div></div><div></div><div>John, no need to draw me a map. I’m not disagreeing with your key point.</div><div></div><div></div><div>SEOs often try to separate themselves into the fake/real camps, then claim they belong to the latter just because they say META keywords waste time or they won’t sell directory submission services. Those bars are set below the ankles.</div><div></div><div></div><div>A "real" SEO may sometimes whine about the state of the SERPs. Graywolf sometimes points out wacky search results on Twitter and he whines about YouTube/Wikipedia/IMDB/about.com etc dominating Google results - so does Aaron Wall on occassion, to argue that organic SERPs are skewed to favor informational sites (to push transactional sites to buy AdWords) and Google-owned real estate. Does their criticism of how Google ranks sites make them "fake" SEOs?</div><div></div><div></div><div>A link monkey who crunches competitor backlinks 24/7 will unearth a ton more crap tactics working than someone who just blogs about "good content." So when you do find competitors being "bad", do you play it like McCain and make an idiotic promise not to go negative (does playing "nice" or being oblivious about various link sources make you a more "real" SEO?) or do you play it like Obama and keep all options open, including snitching to Google about a competitor on a blog Matt Cutts reads?</div><div></div><div></div><div>If publishing one short blog post on SEOMoz produces results cheaper and quicker than launching a linkbait campaign...well then the debate isn’t about fake/real its about character and excellence. In this case, Rand’s motives are transparent and his tactic will not work because Google isn’t going to go out of its way to devalue a bunch of links that aren’t passing that much juice to begin with.</div>

Avatar
from johnandrews 2239 Days ago #
Votes: 1

@halfdeck thanks for clarifying. I see quite a difference between a pro commenting on an observed skew or bias, and someone pointing to a SERP and noting all the specific ways it is unfair. I wasn’t even thinking of Rand in this thread, but now I do see how you are viewing this disussion in light of Rand Fishkin’s public attacks on competitors. Clearly that’s a different problem.For the record I do consider whining by anyone to be "non-real" SEO. Understandable because we are human, but not helping make it better for anyone. Understanding why certain sites are ranking of course is quite valuable. The SERPs define themselves... the definition of Google SEO is to do what Google will reward with rankings. To work the SERPs is to accept what they are and work within the constraints, even if the constraints are hand-driven, biased, or even random (the toughest case of all, right? Even that’s not impossible to SEO... you play the odds in that case).Rumor has it that private spam reports are much more effective than public ones... much easier to whack quiety with the G-stick. So then you have to wonder why people like Rand Fishkin go out of their way to snitch on their competitors in public, using the highest profile available to them. Almost looks like a power trip.

Avatar
from johnandrews 1988 Days ago #
Votes: 0

title looks like a spam attempt, and article lacks logical basis.

Upcoming Conferences

Search Marketing ExpoSearch Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.



Join us at an upcoming SMX event: