Calendar
Network
Feeds
WebmasterT
Well... I bet you display advertising sees the cut before SEO! Everyone starts with cutting the obvious stuff that didn't work well in a good economy and sucks the bag big time during the downturn. That means PPC gets it after display advertising and last to go will be SEO. I don't think there is a bias toward online it just has the best ROI. Advertising is partly being bought on the basis of job preservation. When you know there are giong to be cuts then... it's not just about campaign success... your job may depend on it. Basically the concensus seems to be the consumer has put their wallet away for the time being and it is going to be more people going after fewer customers who are looking closely at price. That is also good for online but... not much to hang your hat on since many will research online and buy it offline. ie:a target that isn't a target unless you have a huge off line presense like walmart.
@Jill, the Organization is OSEOP (Organization of Search Engine Optimization Professionals) with it's marketing site being SeoPros.org. To be honest even if this was a big deal I doubt we would waste $'s litigating it. Afterall this is just an api not a real functioning search engine. In that it's much like Rand's link spider. A search engine that uses another SE. They will look pretty stupid when we add the new search to SeoPros but... I'll leave that at that;-)
Do we wish people would quit highjacking the name because they can't be bothered to research the name they give a site? Well it's either shoddy research or it's intentional. Either way as long as they don't say they are SeoPros or members like some SEOprosdotUSA then... we're Ok with it. Otherwise we do seek counsel and in the future will be ruthless as this is beginning to get annoying beyond a slight nuisance to being a waste of my and other execs time.
Hmmm... the fact SeoMoz spends a lot of money here makes me very skeptical about who is saving who from what! Rand has credibility problems not just reputation management problems. Obviously he'll lie to cover his asse. There is a huge difference between a crawler that's blockable and one that just scrapes er "borrows" info from other places. I could do that... I was suspicious as soon as I saw the price tag and 30 Billion pages indexed! IMO, that should have raised a lot of flags... but then to the Randites aren't exactly the sharpest tools in the box or they would make better choices about where they go for info.
I'm the one who voted for lisa because when someone prove they are what they are perceived by many as then... nobody should be saving anyone from anything! I say lots of stupid things. I apologize and I learn a lesson the problemn here is Rand seems to be the teflon Don of SEO!
Beating expectations should be no surprise to anyone who uses adwords. IMO, they are eating everyones lunch by providing better customer service and a platform that is trusted even though Quality Score more or less makes it a rigged auction and bid system. Bottom line is I trust Google as an advertiser but wouldn't touch AdSense with a ten foot pole. There's a reason why the traffic acquisition trend line is going down. Part of it is due to the traffic generated by the Google Network, IMO, YouTube is a much maligned acquisition but it will be huge once advertsiers figure out how to use it. The other is the rigging of the auction sytem with QS.
I'm sorry google but when I have to optimize my adwords Landing Page then you have rigged the sytem for me because I do PPC on a separate non promoted site because I want to totally control the exit options. I had lots of 30% converters and it still added at least 25% to the cost, That has increased further. It's no co-incidence my advertsising costs have gone up significantly and the publishers (Adsense) are getting less of that ad $. QS baby! That's a black box I'll never trust. What happened after it was implemented tells me all I need to know. QS did improve the quality of clicks from the content network and has pretty much removed arbitrage which I thought would be a hit on the bottom line but it seems they are getting more revenue for ads and paying out less.
Google has no competition! To include the others in the same breadth with Google is to not have used all the platforms. Including Google with Yahoo! (where ROI goes to die) and M$ (just plain clueless about search) is to acknowledge the chronically inept and putting lipstick on a pair o' pigs to inflate management fees!
Good article but if a video isn't on YouTube then you are missing a ton of opportunities, especially if it is the video you want to promote not traffic to the site. I'd also argue IME, that having a well liked YouTube page is way more important then anything you put on your page to optimize it.
Hmmm... personally I think there are two PRs. One that is internal to Google which is the one actually used to calcualate results and one to make webmasters scratch their heads and provide a comic relief for Google engineers. I don't care if my TB PR changes unless that also changes the position in results. For instance SeoPros went from 7 to 6 and actually rose for some queries
I could easily do blackhat SEO, I choose not to do it, not because it is ethically wrong, it's not, but, because I don't see it as being in my clients best interest. why? Well ask the merchant who tricks the engines til October gets tossed and is bancrupt in January because he has a butt load of stock he expected to sell and the Bank wants their money.
A blackhat doesn't neccessarily know more or have special talents they are just willing to risk more for instant results. People like Shari and myself have been around long enough to know that is a strategy that never works long term and often results in higher costs. Blackhat SEO is not more effective it's a quicker way to the same goal, no more no less! Anyone who tells you differently is lying or are drinking their own purple koolaid.
Jill makes some good points but blaming increased customer confusion on industry terms is IMO, jumping to conclusions. It could be that the confusion is in the fact that what got you delisted two years ago is now a very effective technique. It could be Universal and personalized Search, which are by far the most complicated algos I've seen in my career, have a lot of people, some likely reading this, confused.
I use over optimized all the time because there is no other good way to describe a technique where the SEO eager to link to all "important" pages puts 150 keyword rich links on the home page to maximize optimization for those pages. Yes, it's over the top but it's not spam and does more damage than good. So if over optimized is unacceptable tell me a better way to describe that? Stupid comes to mind but... Fully optimized is subjective... to say it's either fully optimized or spam is not something I'd be comfortable making because nobody but a SE engineer knows what is or isn't optimized beyond an acceptable threshold and deemed spam.
I agree, sham certifications (which Bruce Clays are) and Codes of Ethics are why we have a reputation problem. Why is Bruce Clay LLC no longer in either SEOConsultants or SeoPros? The firm was removed from both. I can't say why I initiated removal from SeoPros but I do think it laughable they are accepted as authors of a "Code of Ethics" which is akin to alcaholics writing laws for DUI.
@aimclear... Sherpa was the same way when they started and they don't interview clients, GoldLine does. Talking to clients about the vendor and their "dependibility" is more liable to unearth what they really do. SEO's say one thing and do another.... seen that more times then not.
To me the discussion of this is just the usual "national enquirer" nonsense the industry has become because of linkbait. This kind of advertising is not new or innovative. But then you'd have to actually know about marketing to know that. I question if anyone in this biz less then 10 years actually understands that concept. Does anyone really think someone doesn't pay JDPowers for the car awards you see on TV. You also have to look no further than the RE section of your local paper to see this is a common advertising practice common to most "big $ industries". So... this could have been a big deal for the industry but instead of accentuating the positive lets show our true colors and slag the people doing it. Is it any wonder why we have a reputation problem?
Yes I work for one of the companies listed and I could care less if we paid or not... The important thing for us in our quest to land bigger more lucrative clients is the exposure. I just think this is the usual whining about paid anything amongst those that can't do so they whine about others doing it! Who cares the whole industry is being showcased... I remember when we would have rejoiced at being included paid or not!!
Jill, Correct but I was addressing this:
The initial "interview" was being done by a guy who came from the financial sector and knew NOTHING about SEO."
The guy who interviewed me for Sherpa didn't know SeoPros was an Org and didn't qualify for inclusion for that reason alone regardless of anything else. In fact the "interviewer"admitted to not being an SEO and added "it isn't rocket science". Which demonstarted both the knowledge of the interviewer and the respect by the publication for those who are SEOs. Did I blab that all over the place. No that happened during the inaugral and I didn't see the point in "bad mouthing" something that was good for the industry even though I thought it was complete BS! There was nothing to be gained other than my approval from those who thought the same way... personally I put the industry before myself because in the end that puts more money in my pocket as the industry improves its intergity and reputation. Unfortunately most in this industry would pimp the industry for a few links to their blog!
TheMadHat if the cookie does it then it's not cloaking since a crawler can't use a cookie. I totally disagree about using the userAgent only because if you are doing REAL content delivery the userAgent is the best way to know the capabilities of the Agent which in the new environment would also deliver content by the Device ie phone. Bad cloaking almost always uses an IP to identify a crawler. Like always if you aren't doing it for SE's you are greatly reducing risk... because that is the context the whole cloaking debate should be in not WH or BH just good or stupid manipulation!
IMO, Whitehat Cloaking is an OxyMoron much like Army Intelligence is an oxymoron!
I agree with Toprank someone has to be in charge of the strategy and oversee implementation or chaos will soon break out. I'm one who believes every company has strengths and weaknesses... so.... I'd disagree you get the best solution from a single vendor. It is also best if the client doesn't choose the subs they usually aren't qualified to make the decision. The problem is most SEOs have never done the self evaluation and think they do everything well... that is almost never the case unless it is a very large agency with very deep pockets hiring the best minds out there.
"In part recently, I wonder if the frenzy over links has kept our attention off design, as an industry as a whole."
Danny, the above is a very importatnt statement because that is a big part of the problem. SEO started out as primarily a webmaster discipline. Then a bunch of us started using direct/response marketing techniques to increase conversion and CTR's. That is SEO the rest is web promotion. To confirm it just look in any topical directory and you'll see link development is under web promotion generally SEO and SEM either have their own category or are under some sort of webmastering or marketing top level.
Frenzy is a nice way to describe SEO's obsession with links. Links have replaced competitor/niche content evaluation and content development because links are given way more credit for rankings than they deserve. The bottom line is nothing has really changed that much the biggest SEO myth is the myth that SEO is constantly changing because algos change. That is a fallacy because if you don't build sites that rank by exploitation of algos then when they change you are for the most part rising because the changes aren't the basis for your rank. Content and KW research are the basics for and the foundation of any good SEO campaign. Always has been and always will be. The rest is web promotion passing as SEO!
"yeah you come off sounding a little jaded and cynical, but that's what I enjoyed about your comment. well said. This is like 1999 SEO, when people used SSI instead of php... remember the .shtml extension?"
In 99 PHP was new. In fact I was learning programming and the teacher told me to concentrate on Perl and ASP, because at that time the support for PHP likely was a computer under somebodies desk working out of their home.
I totally agree with Jill! I used to validate and jump through hoops. When I stopped it had no affect at all. IMO, most of what's in that article is someones pet peaves for web development. All the code affects rank is IMO, an SEO urban myth that just won't go away because it's allowed to propegate unabated by authors that need to publish so... a borderline article that is a waste of time starts lookin' pretty good! Anyone who thinks removing a few table tags improves SEO is IMO, smoking something because there is absolutely no way to know that with any degree of certainty. Good HTML code should be a goal I just don't think good code is needed for SEO. If it renders it rocks!
Should we be surprised given that Yahoo sponsored search post panama is still where ROI goes to die! Robbed by the decade old affiliate network which powered GoTo and Overture and included such high quality traffic affiliates like the infamous Gator Network! Perhaps these click forensic guys could break it out and give us the real deal not the "headline grabber" which is probably including a lot of crappy networks like Yahoo! when they give industry invalid click data. I took a Google campaign and had a Yahoo! rep set it up. This campaign converted at 30% on G and about 10% on Y! until I killed 80% of the phrases and chopped the budget by 40%. Which is why Yahoo! knows if it is going to survive it has to do do something about the key piece of the monetization strategy that started with the purchase of Inktomi.
The biggest favor Jerry Yang did us all was to kill the M$ deal because invariably Y! will die and if combined with M$ would just kill it as well. Bad technology combined with spending like drunken sailors on leave does not turn two turds into gold. The most likely result is a bigger turd. ;-)
I am hoping by posting this that the author could explaibn in detail what a "reference" is exactly. The only way the numbers of offline references make sense is if they count my picking the Yellow Pages book up at my front door and putting it in the blue bin or the usage as a booster for small children and people of short stature. Otherwise, I find a hard time believing 320 million or so N. Americans are referencing it 13 billion times as that works out to a pretty high number of references for each man, woman and child. I've advertised on two YP providers and the online "references" make sense it's those offline references which account for, AIUI, 90% of revenue that I just can't wrap my head around. I also have clients that also are skeptical of the numbers based on the number of calls they get that they can attribute to YP.
Barry, IMO, recession is looming and the markets/speculators seem to grasp at any indicator to force the market and especially momentum stocks like Google, Apple, RIM etal down to reflect that. I've seen the Google Economist on BNN. After hearing his explaination of why G is recession proof I was bemused because... he has gotta' hope that... no one knows for sure about PPC advertising during a recession (what if it's 0 growth for 3 yrs?) because PPC was non to barely existant during any major downturn in the past.
"No there aren't. By the very nature of them being an SEO expert, they would not be dishonest or slimy."
Hmmm, can't agree with that Jill. I know one slimy expert but have more class than to out them unless someone asks aboout them at SeoPros. Then I don't say they are slimy only that I wouldn't recommend their services. Those are more traits of a personality then a trait of an expert but I do agree that slimy or dishonest would be the exception to the rule not the case where experts are concerned. That goes for the industry as a whole. However, coming from an industry that did kill itself (telmarketers) I can tell you that a few can kill it for everyone if it looks like nothing is being done about it.
Besides, whose an expert? Likely not the person calling themselves one. Once you stop learning or think you know it, then... the leaning stopsl Expert is a very widely used term in this community and at times it has 0 to do with what they know!
The Google stock decline is more about GOOG being a momentum play for investors than any indication of the business. Stock Price has nothing to do with the business and all to do with the market being, or close to, a bare market. GOOG is like AAPL and RIM suffering from multiple implosion as the momentum players sense the mo is gone. Declines in price are not an indicator of the business just like when it was around $700 that wasn't a true indicator of the business but more about investor sentiment. I go by the rule that the Stock Market is ruled by the "greater Fool" rule. At $700 there are just more fools thinking it goes higher.
I belive saying anything is recession proof is more about relativity to other businesses. Recession Proof is more about how a business holds up, IMO, all businesses decline some unless they are liquidators whom a recession is actually good for business. I do believe that this is a real opportunity to gain sentiment about search marketing as downsizing of ad spend will mean the dollars will go where the marketers know there is value. Sorry but... print. TV and radio just can't compete at that level with search. I believe Google thinks that makes them recession proof. Google actually employs an economist I saw interviewed on BNN in Canada. That was his argument but.... I think they are wrong on so many levels about that. They haven't even experienced a slowdown let alone the R word! A sowdown is negated by the growth of the net a recession will be
Yahoo! stock price will get murdered in the coming months because of the simple fact display advertising is a chronic under achiever and if you're not using it for branding then... an absolute waste of time and money. Not even Google will be able to put lipstick on that pig and pass it off as anything but... a pig wearing lipstick! I laughed my asse off at those in another pub that forecast a resurgence for display in 2008. Yeah right, only when users start seeing the ads while scanning the page does that change! Improved targetting helps but that means IMO, it is just a little more effective and still a gross under achiever in comparison to Search Engine Marketing.
I think it will also shakeout some of the wannabe/thinkiam search engine marketers so... that will be good for the industry and way overdue. The easy money is gone and many will start taking jobs they refused in the past just so they can keep the staff they got. That also will be good for the rep of the industry.
Imo, anyone who could teach a course at that level would do so at a pay cut so... I don't see it changing anytime soon. I disagree with the ever changing stuff being a problem. Basically what I do now is pretty much what I wrote about in 94 and how I do things today is pretty much the same as I did in 94. Then too, I'm not an algo chasing link ho spammin and jammin' my way to the top. If anything I've stopped doing more things then I've started.
Social Media would be an example! half the articles on spihn are likely about or include social networking components, but other then the web 2.0 technology is there really that much difference between how you would promote a community 10 years ago and a social site today. Not really, the technologies and audience change but the bottom line methods are not really that different. Figure out who your audience is and where they go and put your stuff in front of them in a conscientious attempt to not be intrusive or invasive which would be why Facebook is IMO, trying the patience of it's users. You don't treat your users profiles like an open book, it isn't and shouldn't be.
Algos don't really change that much IMO, that is just a myth perpetuated by those on long term contracts for short term service! For instance in 14 years I've only had one algo change bite me. It was the paid link BS and who could foresee a technique older than Google would be whacked the way that whacked evryone. It only really affected one site but... that was one too many.
Danny, the skin I have in this game is exact opposite to you. You can't have your business go in the shitter because some guy talks like he knows, when in the words of Kramer "they know nothing!". there are people held up as leaders and listed as a leader in Wikipedia the number one result for search engine optimization. The fact he or one of his devotees likely put it there is the part that really rankles me.
Danny, when the public sees us practitioners with a jaundiced eye you will benefit from it because the only alternative is to teach yourself. Where better to go than SMX for that?
Yeah, I'm ranting I think my livlihood is at risk because some of us can't see when we pi$$ in the fountain it's our water supply we're fouling. Having spent years in the telmarketing business and watched an industry kill itself off by allowing a few bad apples to flourish. Eventually the whole basket is seen as bad and everyone gets thrown out! if we don't clean this up the end is not pretty and ends with grown men crying because their kids don't eat. Been there done that and got the T to prove it. So crank up the "Don't Worry, Be happy" as we whistle past the graveyard playing nice!
Outsourcing is a huge trend in America, yet SEO is on a definite trend towards in-sourcing. Doesn't anyone else wonder why that is? I often do!
Eric, this is the first time I've read something of yours and thought "what's he smoking?". A lot of what you claimed aren't important like domains, C blocks etc. are indeed factors so saying its all about the author is well... misleading and oversimplifying! I agree with some of what you say about author... but if only people with a list of editors could do link building then you'd be swamped because that list is likely a list of one. Many of the things you said don't work, I do agree on their own they don't. When you use them all and submit to maybe 100-200 good directories (NOT 1-2000), do real research, not the research many do on Yahoo! (ie: who links to competitors). I agree author is important. I disagree it is the only consideration.
Google is so whacked right now that they think because I hide my domain information I'm hiding it from them. No, I'm hiding it from the Aholes who send my clients bogus domain renewals! Author I agree is a factor it is obviously no more important than having a link profile that includes a little of all the different types ie: it looks natural not contrived and promoted!
Remove Anti Virus software.... now that's just irresponsible advice
SEO... there is some kinds of SEO that definitely isn't needed
PPC... not all products are PPC worthy... maybe that has been his experience
Online Video... now that's just as stupid as saying you don't need images!!!!!!!!!!
WEB 2.0... 90% hype... most businesses don't need it, and/or implement it poorly
Story: Economic Downturn Cleaning House In the World of SEO