| 8:17 pm on Jul 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|just ask the website that is ranking above you |
... if you can still afford the postage for all those emails!
| 8:29 pm on Jul 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|How are you going to spend your time after quitting Google? |
Probably not posting in a forum called "Google SEO News and Discussion" :)
| 9:04 pm on Jul 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
I gave up about 18 months ago.
| 9:14 pm on Jul 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
No, sir, you are a player.
| 9:16 pm on Jul 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
One of the sites I am involved in successfully "quit" Google.
About 3-4 years ago, Google accounted for anywhere from 60-70% of the site's traffic. Plans to move the site to its own domain (it was then just a blog of the main company) were stopped for fear of losing part of that big Google traffic resulting from the domain move.
In June this year, the blog finally moved to its own domain.
The big difference? Google now accounts for only 1% of the site's traffic that nobody even cared that the site lost 45% of Google traffic after the move.
From 60% to just 1% of a site's traffic (when overall traffic increased 5x) -- that's how to quit Google.
| 9:25 pm on Jul 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
My site was killed by Google several years ago. Nothing I tried worked so I gave it up.
I've built several hundred since then, some junk, some good, some superb. Some cost me money, some make me money. It took a lot of work and investment but that's business.
If Google wasn't so evil I'd have made millions or possibly even billions. I'd have lived myself to death ages ago with all that money so thank heavens that they are a shower of unethical &*%$Ģ&*%s
| 9:54 pm on Jul 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
Well let's see, there's...
- direct mail (still works - my top online client still sends out an 80 page catalog every month) and
- you didn't mention social media - I use a lot of that myself.
- People in some industries actually still publish magazines and journals, and they love actual knowledgeable guest articles - no links, but loads of authority there.
- Pretty easy to self-publish a Kindle book these days too.
- Offering affiliate programs or bonuses to your existing users for sales or referrals can work.
- Writing nice things about another website and linking to it can often get you a link (that actually brings traffic) back, as I have found.
- If you're in local, you can engage with your local tv stations and newspapers via social media, and make sure they know who you are and what you specialize in, for links and potentially TV and web interviews. Plus then you become their go-to person anytime they need an expert opinion on something related to your niche.
- Create an organization for your niche. One of my clients decided to do that; he published standards and offered memberships to qualifying companies, and boom - he's now the authority in that niche (and it's a cutthroat niche too)
- Sponsor something. Particularly if you're in local.
- Private by-invitation-only niche-specific discussions/forums. People love to be in exclusive clubs, and all Google issues immediately disappear if Google can't even see it. I participate in those myself, and thinking about starting my own.
- Survey your users. Offer them something to give you honest feedback on your site and what features and benefits they'd like to see in the future. If you're in B2B, like I am, ask them what you can do to make their job easier.
That's all I have time for at the moment.
| 11:43 pm on Jul 22, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|It is impossible to rank in Google anymore, just ask the website that is ranking above you and they will agree. |
This is one of those Poe's Law things, isn't it?
| 2:27 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
No problem. Searchers and their great-grandmothers are all switching to Bing anyway. (I know because I've read that time and time again on Webmaster World.)
| 2:57 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
I don't think it's impossible to rank -- Getting the organics back to 10 on a page and having them show above the fold for an increasing number of searches is a different story though.
Being in the top 10 just isn't what it used to be for a number of queries based on quite a bit of what I've read/heard/seen.
As far as possible solutions go there are some really good ones mentioned in this thread I'd encourage people to explore, even though I'm not sure they're Google SEO -- Maybe indirectly they are via name/brand recognition equating increasing the number "navigational searches" for a specific resource? Hmmm...
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 3:16 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
Yeah, they're not technical specifics on how to rank. Since G has close to omnipotence... it wouldn't be hard for them to see who gets the vast majority of their traffic from search engines (which would seem to me to be a bad signal of a site), so these alternative methods may be a very real ranking factor and leverage (but ultimately a side benefit tbf).
Suggestions are a lot more 'real world' nowadays I see. My own primary work for the past couple of years has been about user retention and ROI based on what is known about visitors/members and serving content to suit them.
I'm not quitting... but maybe an email shot to SEO's in a few years time to a local job site may be in order :o)
| 3:18 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
Not to be a party pooper, but since this is supposed to be the #1 spot for Google experts I will bring this up. Why haven't any of the Google guru's mentioned that the OP (an admin also) mention of Google's USA market share of 68% as inaccurate? Last time I cared to look, Google had upwards of 90% of mobile search. Was it even as much as 95% a year ago? So your 68% figure is off. Way off. If our traffic is more and more mobile, then certainly you are selling Google very very short in terms of USA market domination. Intentionally understated? No idea. I'm far from smart and I expect people here to know this better than me.
So I think it's a disservice to newbies who see a 68% market share and think to themselves that heck, Bing and others might make SEO a worthwhile venture. Ah, but when you consider the climb of mobile visitors and the fact that Google slays the mobile search competition, you fail in your efforts to make a case. Sorry.
It's not about quitting Google as it is quitting the dream of being the president, a centerfold, a rock star, a mayor. It can happen sure. Some of those special folks are here talking about the promised land. Terrific to stay positive. However, SEO now should evolve to understand that page 1 real estate for your link is UNDER ATTACK. Not for everyone, but clearly it's an indicator that it's time to quite chasing your tail. Learn to write, that's great. I'm sure somebody out there will enjoy your content, but monetizing it from "free traffic"? That's so 90's now.
However the portal called the internet by which your content can be found? It's shrinking really fast and when giants have 90%+ of the market share that dictates how fast the real estate fades. I would suggest once Adsense loses more relevancy, so too will the organic page 1 results. Just my theory.
Clearly the SEO community is upside down. It's late July and there are 2 pages of Google SERP updates. Sure, it's holidays... I don't buy it. People know the scoop. Most people are talking about their exit strategy. Face it.
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 3:30 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
>Google's USA market share of 68% as inaccurate?
I just Googled "google us market share" and it gives me a fat knowledge box from searchenginewatch dated 20th May, 2014 stating 67.6%. Any other references?
| 3:45 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
References? How about the hearings with the US Government a little while back? I think that's likely quite accurate regarding their mobile search market share. It's quite puzzling to me why I know this, yet apparently others do not. I'm not saying that it's part of the spin cycle, but certainly there is a level of ignorance out there regarding it. Perhaps it's a half truth. I mean sure if you don't specify their mobile market share then you are accurate. Then again, that would be like comparing sales of mp3's vs cassette tapes today. Do I care about the cassette tape sales or is the real relevant stat regarding the Goliath mobile user and mobile search. If you knew that Google was at 95% of mobile search today (not saying that it's exactly that high), but beyond 90% say, wouldn't that possibly change your outlook on attaining organic search ranking and traffic? One company dominating to that extent and all the while trying to answer your inquiries directly which is further reducing click through rates and page 1 real estate?
[edited by: MrSavage at 3:47 am (utc) on Jul 23, 2014]
| 3:46 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|- Speaking at relevant seminars and conferences |
That's an excellent point and I will expand on it. From my experience attending (non-SEO) industry conferences, you can promote your site without speaking at those events. Exhibitors typically are a mix of retailers and news type destination sites. Both have needs you can fill and vice-versa. It's important to be at your best for socializing and to be prepared with business cards. A really nice business card.
| 3:57 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|Perhaps it's a half truth. |
Yup -- I got the same number brotherhood of LAN did for May and June, but only a couple sites mentioned the comScore number they reported (67.6%) didn't include mobile where Google is estimated to have about 85% market share and overall desktop searches have declined while mobile is increasing.
|These figures do not include mobile search, which is an increasingly large share of overall volume. Mobile now drives more than 30 percent of total US internet traffic. |
According to StatCounter, Yahoo has a 9.3 percent share of the US mobile search market. Google dominates at 85 percent and Bings share is 5.5 percent.
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 4:31 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
There it is, fair play in pointing it out. I imagine the unique mobile users that aren't already in the Desktop category would nudge the total over 70%.
All the more reason to hedge bets on other traffic sources.
Also, fair play to Danny Sullivan's site being in the knowledge box when clearly comscore is the source of the facts there.
| 4:42 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
Google is making big websites more bigger and we small websites don't rank at all.
They say get quality back links, but from where we should get those links as no one wants to link any more OR every incoming link is nofollow.
| 5:52 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
"Google is making big websites more bigger and we small websites don't rank at all."
Amazon didn't reach #1 on so many queries because it had killer traditional SEO.
It is ranked #1 for so many queries because it has a killer business model and killer value proposition.
Maile Ohye (creator of Webmaster Tools) says that the BIGGEST SEO mistake that websites make is not having a unique value proposition.
| 5:59 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
"Yup -- I got the same number brotherhood of LAN did for May and June, but only a couple sites mentioned the comScore number they reported (67.6%) didn't include mobile where Google is estimated to have about 85% market share and overall desktop searches have declined while mobile is increasing."
It is weird. Those tablets are the weirdest of all. No keyboard and yet it is still quite big. Must be trying to get people off the proper computers in favour of TVesque corporate control. Computer is too powerful for Joe public to have and to use. On the Alex Jones show they were saying the whole mobile devices thing was to get people ready for implantable devices and a world full of zombie transhumanist androids. Thats basically how I look at the mobile visitor. Not really a real visitor.
[edited by: iammeiamfree at 6:12 am (utc) on Jul 23, 2014]
| 6:09 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
This thread seems to be going all over the place...so I'll just include this here to keep it going: [marketingland.com...]
Google may be dominating in some areas, but social media referrals via Google+ is not one of them.
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 6:21 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
Yes, apologies for picking up on the traffic % remark and taking the thread in that direction.
I think the spirit of the thread is rightly to consider the opportunities outside of Google too. We can safely agree that Google is in a dominant market position (in many countries).
| 6:49 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
That wasn't meant as s knock against you, just meant as a general comment. The market position in the the US is much higher than reported with regard to search stats. The Google+ usage stats touted are absolutey false.
| 7:21 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
When people talk about "mobile" in this forum does that include "tablets"?
|Martin Ice Web|
| 9:35 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
I like to face it from a users view.
As i think of pre panda results, yes i saw many MFA sites and low content sites but had not to make more than 2 tries to find the needed information.
With panda/penguin all this changed. Big brands and still many low content sites are dominating the serps. But as if this was not worse enough all this sites donīt give me the information i need to find. Big brands ( esp. amazon ) are only give the manufacturers description. Did you ever get the chance to call amazon and get more information about a widget, no way to do so.
With domain crowding and IMO query crowding ( near queries show the same results ) I now need about 5-10 tries to find my information.
Lets face market share: if i make my results worse so that users need more tries this certainly pushes up market share. Quality instead of quantity!
To the OP:
-sending out mails is in germany a very dangerous thing to do if you donīt have the permittion to do it
-donīt go after private shoppers ( ecom ) they are lost to amazon and google will see this soon as this will be the place for poeple to find items
-google is killing all sources inb serps that will send you traffic by links ( my traffic from linked websites is down by 80% ) so this is not working
-for ecoms have a lot of give aways - this gernerates repeated customers
| 10:18 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
|Clearly Google is not a winning option for any website. That is why we should all cut our losses and quit this big waste of time called Google. |
It is and will continue to be winning option for a certain types of website, mostly AdSense funded established blog/article type sites and large brands.
It is no longer a winning option for small mom and pop sites who want to concentrate on onsite user experience, value for money and real world customer service instead of spending their restricted time writing long on and off site articles about their boring but nessasay service/product no one will read much less link. (Paul the plumber, Clair the cleaner).
|like a whiny baby for their free traffic and made a real brand through actual marketing efforts. |
Free traffic? Google traffic is never free, I think you mean earned traffic? :)
| 10:55 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
If you want to discuss the finer points of market share please head over to [webmasterworld.com...]
For this discussion I think we can all agree that Google has a big piece of market share and get back to the main focus.
How are you going to spend your time after quitting Google?
| 10:57 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
But what will all those poor SEO people do then? How will they make money if they cannot sell their "you too can rank in Google" get rich quick ebooks and services for the low price of just $999.99?
To paraphrase a quote from the early 20th Century, your business may not be interested in Google but Google wants your business - but it doesn't want you.
[edited by: jmccormac at 11:25 am (utc) on Jul 23, 2014]
| 11:04 am on Jul 23, 2014 (gmt 0)|
I'll just answer the OP's declaration re: quit.
I won't have to. I never joined since there's more than one fish in the sea and as large as G might be, it ain't a Mako.
If you aren't diversified your'ed feathered. (Of course that's really the other f word...)
| This 138 message thread spans 5 pages: 138 (  2 3 4 5 ) > > |