Forum Moderators: open
If you speak to all the best Internet Marketing Pros they tell you SEO is a waste of time longterm, everyone in the industry has lost their position at somepoint from what I gather - or am I wrong?
I want to hear from anyone who has had long term success with SEO say for 6 months or longer....
Everything hinges on whether the average user (and despite everything else I do actually USE the search) will get the results they seek. I just don't think the results are quite right at the moment and until they are, the future of SEO AND Google rather hangs in the balance. Chicken and egg possibly.
Quite seriously thinking of using this... now which engine shall we promote?
The only one that could purchase G and put all those people out of a job? ;-)
1) Relevancy is relative
Current SERPS are not less relevant - they are less specific. Being less specific, it means that they are relevant for a higher proportion of any interpretation of the search phrase (Added: Also, a variety of websites gets a place in the spotlight on page1).
The reason the pattern is hard to see, is because Google has a high number of features [google.com] and advanced operators [google.com] - any and all of these might be at play here - and then some. (Added: level of competition for searchphrase seems to have some influence as well)
2) There are means to narrow down your search
Example: blue dotted jumpsuits <-- broad results
Try any of these specific results if you're not satisfied (Added: please do try them, and take note of the differences, i'm not being arrogant here, just offering advice):
Q1: "blue dotted jumpsuits"
Q2: blue dotted +jumpsuits
Q3: +blue "dotted jumpsuits"
Q4: blue dotted jumpsuits -green
Q5: blue dotted jumpsuits blue
Q6: blue dotted jumpsuits blue dotted
Q7: blue dotted jumpsuits -green -overcoats
Now, stop that "-gimmiebacktheold" (or "-mt-tb.cgi") nonsense, please. More info here:
1) [google.com...]
2) [google.com...]
3) Words in search terms matter
Search for blue. Search for dotted within results. Search for jumpsuits within results. For each of these keywords the searcher could in fact be uncertain, as to if this was the proper word. Search for blue within results again. Do look at the search box - did you know what you were doing?
4) There is no SEO filter or conspiracy
There might be all kinds of filters, including such that should filter adult content and/or spam. These might still need fine-tuning (Added: In the case of spam, i still think much could be done. Some spices may still need to be added to the "sauce"). Of course Google (as a company) also would like people to spend on AdWords.
Still, as others have pointed out, there are several money-searches still returning highly optimized sites. Some optimized sites are not broad/good/spammy/bad/lucky/whatever enough to be in the broad search, others are - that's basically it.
5) Recognize that Google is a Search Engine
It's not a marketing tool, meaning - it is "pull" and not "push" (if that makes any sense to you all). The Google SE team (as opposed to the AdWords team) has one objective only: To make these SERPS better for users.
Not the sub-category of users that are also webmasters, and not the subcategory of user-webmasters that also do marketing, specifically not those also doing SEO. I believe Google SEO is helpful to Google on numerous occasions, eg. it can deliver very targeted results for specific searches thanks to SEO.
Still, Google's business is "understanding users" - if your business is also "understanding users", you will do good in Google. Short term AND long term.
I will have nothing more to add to the "current SERPS" highjacked subject of this thread. <-- i do mean that.
/claus
[edited by: claus at 2:11 pm (utc) on Nov. 25, 2003]
playing straight into the hands of..<!-- include Major Search Name engine --> one feels ;)
NOT!
aspdesigner,
* many of the searches people are finding us on via Google are not relevant to our site. (the random sprinkled keyword thing) It's nice to know we are top-10 for things we aren't even relevant for, but I'm sure it's got to be p*'ing-off some surfers!
Funny how that works ;)
Bad News: Client of ours no longer comes up for locality, state services/keyword offered/keyword that is now showing 376,000 results compared to previous #5 position (nor does any companies related to the service offered).
Good News: They hold the #2 position for state very broad keyword out of 1,260,000 results (site is not really at all relevant to this term).
Their traffic is up, but it is irrelevant traffic. It is doing very well for terms it could never have achieved before this update (and shouldn't) with many 1st page listings with up to 7 million results – trouble is they are irrelevant terms.
I do not believe this update will stick – it can't IMHO. The only way it can stick (conspiracy theory ..ha) is that if Google is making the serps irrelevant so people must click on AdWords or they are going for bragging rights "Our number of searches has gone up 10-times since this update", which may be true since people repeatedly search trying to find relevance ;)
Right now I believe AllTheWeb is showing much more relevant results, and I'm saying this without checking sites positioning that we are connected with in any way.
i find it strange that you comment that google is for mr. joe public and not webmasters/seo's yet you comment on how advanced search options should be used to narrow down results.
is that what joe public really wants? do they want to perform 3 searches before they find what they are looking for?
i have designed my website so users can find what they want quickly and with the minimum of clicks. i believe google should do the same.
From other posts I have read in the past few months it was very clear that anchor text was about the only thing you needed to rank well.
For the future, if another feature seems to have the same power as anchor text did (pre Florida) it would be a good idea to use it sparingly. In other words, don't put all of your eggs in one basket, which is what I think has happened to many people.
This is what makes Brett's theory work so well. If you develop content, work on links, work on usability and even a little 'strategic' copy, etc. you won't get slammed by a single new filter. And your users will like it too.
I had a site get hammered, but only for one keyword combination. The one in the anchor text, in the title, in the H1 tag, in the content. But because of the rest of my work, I'm sitting above all of my competators for every other keyword combination.
I don't know if SEO should be used for Google over the long run. As GG has said over and over, design for your users, Google likes that. Can your users tell what your site is about? Can your users find your site while 'surfing' through your topic in general? Can your users quickly find items or information on your site? Well then GoogleBot can too.
It seems that Google is trying to design a search that will basically save you the 'surfing' time and let you jump right into the middle of the wave. So go Old School and design like you did before the search engines really came about. (but leave out the 'blink' tag please)
Pretend that the only way to find your site is to get links from other sites. Try to get links that people will follow. Don't be afraid to give links, it's what makes the web go around, if your site is a dead end then the chances are that people won't come back.
If you got hammered with this update then I hate to break this to you, but you were doing things wrong. It's unfortunate because I'm sure your site was relevant, but it's time to get to work and clean up your mess. Change your Title, H tags or whatever it takes to get past this filter then think of a way to diversify your keyword anchor text so that it won't be a problem in the future.
* Hopefully that gets us back on topic ;o)
* we're getting a large # of hits from other SEs as well, especially MSN
* many of the searches people are finding us on via Google are not relevant to our site. (the random sprinkled keyword thing) It's nice to know we are top-10 for things we aren't even relevant for, but I'm sure it's got to be p*'ing-off some surfers!
Also The_Contractor
Ditto 100%
This is exactly what we are seeing. Google traffic for our large-ish 10,000 page sites is normal or increased, but conversion rates have plummeted.
It is simply low quality, largely irrelevant traffic.
Also we're seeing significant action from MSN for the first time.
No they don't, and they'll vote with their feet.
>>If you develop content, work on links, work on usability and even a little 'strategic' copy, etc. you won't get slammed by a single new filter<<
I would agree with that up to this point.
>>but only for one keyword combination<<
Mine was actually 2, but that is beside the point. The point is that, if that is what 90% of the people using a SE that makes up an 80% market share uses, well. What then?
>>design for your users<<
Did that. It didn’t make any difference in the long term.
>>So go Old School and design like you did before the search engines really came about.<<
Well, that is the only way I know how to design. I have hardly any graphics, no PHP, no ASP, etc.
>>If you got hammered with this update then I hate to break this to you, but you were doing things wrong<<
I hate to break this to you, but it depends on what you main KW’s are and who also uses those kw’s. But this isn’t about people falling a few spots. It’s about falling a few HUNDRED or THOUSAND spots.
>>but it's time to get to work and clean up your mess.<<
Unless you know a mess exists, you should not point fingers.
>>Hopefully that gets us back on topic<<
People need and will vent. It’s just a question of where and how.
Well this should change but at the moment the questions are when and how.
