|Philosphical SEO Questions|
Because of my prior training and indoctorination, I tend to attack a problem relentlessly by studing every think I can about it.
Let me tell you, SEO is a mind warp that introduces more confusion than not.
For instance, backlinking for google SEO.
The pie is split over whether well written social bookmarking, thoughtful blog posting (do follow or not)or an informing article submission is worthwhile. You have guys on both sides of the fence arguing both ways.
I try to defer to the super experts, but even then...opinion is often divided.
So I try to rehash the site...taking from 7 to 45 pages over 7 weeks, really, really trying to enhance user experience---having helpful original technical advice they can't get anyhere else, the lowest pricing, and a nice easy structure. My bounce rate is indeed lower, the depth of visit is higher, and it seems that there are higher conversions. I think I might have the richest industry website in my little niche now.
So fresh content helps with SERPS, but then you have all of these examples of webpages older than the hills with no new content placing higher.
We are told that spammy backlinking will bite you....yet the company that scores #1 has a 100,000 spammy backlinks (#2 has 500). How does this person win? I will say I am trying to take some of my helpful contact to other niche resource/blog pages to use and link, but I have yet any biters.
I don't know...my SERPS have just moved only 5 places for a particular keyword in 7 weeks. I look at my competitors closely, and for the most part I am baffled.
I am just trying to optimize my time---this is hard work---as to what to do next.
My thoughts on links are posted here: [webmasterworld.com...]
Hope it gives you some insight and ideas...
Thanks...I read your thread several times about the "rate of change" link building.
I suppose I just need to be patient and keep moving methodically. As of May, I have doubled the revenue since January (PPC started 2-18, and SEO/site overhaul started in Late March/April. I suppose I shouldn't be complaining. Lots of people are losing their shirts---no matter how hard they work. Lots more will. I lose perspective of the dicey microeconomic situation right now.
I had the google forum people look at my website---I fixed anything that could be construed as even remotely spammy.
I just need to be patient and think about others who are in worse situations than me.
SEO is the only type of marketing that the smart "little guy" has a slight egailtarian shot of using and getting success with. Think about it...if you do the work, and you are smart, then it's accessible---you cannot say that about any other marketing field.
Let's take a look at what you've done in *only* 7 weeks:
--from 7 to 45 pages
--really trying to enhance user experience
--helpful original technical advice they can't get anyhere else
--the lowest pricing
--a nice easy structure
--My bounce rate is indeed lower
--the depth of visit is higher
--it seems that there are higher conversions
--I might have the richest industry website in my little niche now
--doubled the revenue since January
Not bad, marycontrary, not bad at all.
The best philosophical SEO advice I can give is to concentrate on what you can control and don't obsess about what the other guy is doing.
There are always oddities when we look at ranking competitors' sites, the "100,000 spammy backlinks" for example. Are these actually contributing to the ranking? Have they already been devalued by the SEs? Are they offset by 400K quality backlinks or other factors?
Sometimes we just have to accept that we don't have all the answers and simply keep chugging along, imporoving our own sites.
And yes, in this business patience is a virtue. Sounds like you're on the right track so far.
You indicated that your main competitors have mostly spammy backlinks. If you create a superior website, you should be able to climb pass them eventually. You should also give thanks that you're not competing against sites like Wikipedia and Amazon, which would be much harder to pass. So look on the positive side.
You guys are right. Thanks for the input.
It is the uneven expectations and the delayed gratification that really mess with people's heads in this field. The tweak you made 2 weeks ago may or may not have bearing for SERP changes taking place today. You get a similar psychological response to casinos...this promotes "superstition" and a LOT of misinformation.
Now my partner, who is one of the most brilliant minds in the world (literally, modern day Edison, no joke)---gets his head screwed up by SEO---and is forbidden to touch anything because he thinks he knows "cause and effect" of SERPs. Seriously, his place is in the shop/lab...and not touching anything with the website or with SEO.
That's a big deal, I think. So many want to approach a search engine's index as if it were a garden variety database -- just enter the new data and see the results when you enter the next query. Well, in the 1990s it seemed almost like that but certainly not today. So cause and effect get blurry, especially with all the factors being measured, and we're off to the races with new mythology.
Another issue that many have trouble with seems to be scale. We just don't have experience with data on this scale, nothing even close. Some members here may work on very large projects - with millions of legitimate URLs and a churn of hundreds or thousands every week. And even that is not enough to grasp what Google is all about.
|So fresh content helps with SERPS, but then you have all of these examples of webpages older than the hills with no new content placing higher. |
The age of a domain is an important factor. Does the top ranking site have a lot of old, quality links? And links aside, is their content absolutely relevant to the search term, at least in the literal, algorithmic sense, i.e. keywords in all the right places without being overly so?
All of these may override what seems to be spammy backlinks because you are not penalised for who links to you -- a competitor could pay one of the spammy link builders to generate hundreds of links to a rival.
The #1 site might not be as "helpful" to the reader with the words they have used, but Google might treat their content as the most relevant. For example, a website dealing with a psychological condition could use clinical terms if the audience is psychologists but one aimed at humans dealing with that condition might contain more circumspect, thoughtful words. The latter might not rank because it lacks sufficient quantity or prominence of the keywords.
Thanks guys for your thoughtful responses...
In this niche, there is really not a lot of backlinks that a widget manfacturer can have...#2 has 500, #10 has 65. This company has 100,000...wow, have to admire the slamming the seo to the wall on that one...must have been a fortune, cause the company is not that big...I think it's just a couple people.
This is what I have done---I did extensive keyword research using keyword tool and the results from analytics. Each widget has specific technical aspects that customers really need to know about (and can find nowhere else), and I write about 100-150 words using each of those keyword synonym (some long tails) 2-3 times on that widget page. I don't see this on anyone else's site---I think long tails are trickling in. I have optimized quite a few keywords doing this.
It might be the age...we are 3.5 and the others are 4.5-6 years old.
And some other the backlinks are older. I run about 100, and started with 14 a few months ago. These are all highly relevant sites, with a variety of angles employed.
I just need to be patient. Thank you all again.
|The pie is split over whether well written social bookmarking, thoughtful blog posting (do follow or not)or an informing article submission is worthwhile. You have guys on both sides of the fence arguing both ways. |
The divide is quite easy to spot in most instances. For example, people selling article submission services say it is great and useful. Those not selling it say it is a waste of time and money. ;)