Forum Moderators: open
[directmag.com...]
I had not seen that earlier post. Very interesting comments.
Thanks for pointing that out!
Earlier: [webmasterworld.com...]
The meat of the Web page is on the first third of the page because the crawling engines place a lot of emphasis on what they first read on the Web page.The cost? $79,000 for both sites.
“They had to pick me up off the floor when I heard the figure,” Noble said. “But when I realized if this works for 10 years, then the price is amortized over all those years and it's not so bad.”
Oddly, the company that paid $79k is still advertising under that exact phrase they provided in the article. And only 23,500 sites come up for that SERP.
And...the Overture ad links to a page that does not exist.
Has anyone looked at the website since 1997? It doesn't even have a background color as my medium grey comes though on the page! :O
The SEO's site while nice looking in Flash is PR0'd.
Does anyone think this article is a bunch of bunk and PR for the SEO?
Who'd like to speculate what that SEO company did for $79k? They didn't redesign the website, that's for sure.
And their domain expires 16-jul-2003
You'd think after $79k paying for a few years of domain registration wouldn't be the place to skimp.
I say god bless that SEO company if they got close to $80k. They have very good sales people. ;)
Sure, in terms of ROI if the company who paid feels it's worth it then it's worth it. I'm just trying to see what they got for that amount and not finding it.
Something smells funny.
AW
Does anyone think this article is a bunch of bunk and PR for the SEO?
amazing what a simple press stunt can achieve :)
Shak
amazing what a simple press stunt can achieve
YES.
And notice there are live links to the client site, but not the SEO site.
I really like the part about the client being shocked by the price, but no mention of competitive quotes or why they picked that SEO.
Why is that SEO's domain PR0, and on a shared server if they can sell high end solutions?
Hmm. Good stuff though for us up and coming SEO's. As always Slick wins over substance. ;)
AW
Those that can examine the site on an advanced level will see some subtle things on www.nnoble.com that, if detected by the search engines, could cause the site to be punished.
Another sign that questionable practices can be found on a mirror site at www.norman-noble.com which is registered to the SEO firm in question...
Those that can examine the site on an advanced level will see some subtle things on www.nnoble.com that, if detected by the search engines, could cause the site to be punished.Another sign that questionable practices can be found on a mirror site at www.norman-noble.com which is registered to the SEO firm in question...
I looked at the code and really couldn't find anything. I only looked at the index page though. Can you be specific?
I think sites should be punished for using FP and font tags anyways. ;)
AW
If you looked at the code at www.nnoble.com, there is not much out of the ordinary to see by looking at the code for one page.
"You must find new eyes, Grasshopper! Your new eyes will show you all the small secrets hidden in the big picture."
:-)
;-)
TJ
They don't rank very well for any two word keyphrase I could find. $7900? One change to the site and it could bump them up 50 SERPs places. My price? $79.
No. $79,000 for two websites.
I actually e-mailed the company and gave them this thread and generaly asked if teh article was accurate. Plus, I reminded them their domain expires July.
...all for free. ;)
AW
I guess I should be looking for the top bidders at overture and offering them SEO services...
I can't believe that they didn't get any competitive bids. Obviously they have more money than sense.
Yes, it's great that those kinds of budgets are getting tossed around the SEO industry - however, the risk of that imploding on us as a whole is too big at this point. There has to be some accountability and way of making the "Buyer Beware".
Once these techniques are caught (and banned - see google thread on Spam) then the client is basically screwed- sometimes even for months and their business suffers, and they also have a sour taste about SEO's in general - and are then reluctant to spend MORE money with an SEO to fix the problems because they got burnt so badly on SEO #1.
That hurts the industry as a whole, and we'll continue to perpetuate that 'black magic' stigma.
The big companies then opt to spend their money all in other advertising vehicles because they know it works and aren't as confused by it. and they're likely to go straight to the PPC's without using any of our services to manage.
Actually, that's another interesting point you bring up. In my experience, some of the companies who have had this happen to them don't necessarily get into the lawsuit, even though they all consider it and they should sue. Though i think some consumer reports are starting to get filed with the appropriate agencies.
but you'll never guess why they don't sue- it's usually because the CEO or whomever made the decision to hire the SEO firm is too embarrassed that they made such bad choice without having done the proper due diligence. there's also very little evidence to take to court, though some, and you'd have to get the engines to testify.
and another problem - some so-called SEO's have such "impressive" client lists with big brands they maybe have done this for once in the past (though they may no longer work with them) or that company didn't know what they were doing wrong either, so there's no credible references to come up with. and there's still no professional organization..but that's another issue.
Just as if you hire a contractor to work on your house and they don't follow code, they can be help responsible.
All the search engines post their rules, all the forums warn about spam, and most of the SEO resource sites also carry this information.
As long at the work the SEO does is ducumented and there is log file history for before, during, and after the SEO's work, I think you could put together a pretty clear picture of what happened and why, and show the disregard for good business practices...
Of course I'm not a lawyer.... :-)
