Forum Moderators: open
Akandian_rain, if you plan to stay away from "long legs", you will be severely contraining your business to a select category of businesses. What will you do after you have one client from each business category?
Your job is to optimize your clients' website to your maximum. And you will have to pick up clients with conflicting interests.
How do you answer the question about
"this site outranks me all over the place how do we beat them" and it is the other one you are marketing.
good luck we're all counting on you.
I would take both Coke and Pepsi on the very same day.
/Ove
Wimmin. ;)
It also might depend on how targeted/niche the market is. Are there only 10 keywords with any traffic or are there enough to do similar but not same.
These are two realtor's who share the same affiliation (i.e., Coldwell Banker, or Remax, or 21st Century, etc.) in a fairly small market. This means that even if I never spoke a word about who my client's are, they could still find out about each other.
However, because it's real estate, high competition is expected. And at the end of the day there tends to be enough business to go around.
We have a similar situation with our presence in the local automotive industry.
My point is that the SEO is gaining all this insight on MY nickel, and I would resent them using that information to solicit business from direct competitors using information gathered while I was paying the nut.
My 2 bits.
I would stay away from it if I were you. If you shy away the competitor that wants to engage your services, tell your current client about it. He may be grateful for your loyalty and give you more business. Customer service is a priority in business.
He dreamed that he stood in a shadowy Court,
Where the Snark with a glass in its eye,
Dressed in gown, bands and wig, was defending a pig
On the charge of deserting its sty.The Witnesses proved without error or flaw,
That the sty was deserted when found;
And the Judge kept explaining the state of the law
In a soft undercurrent of sound.The indictment had never been clearly expressed,
And it seemed that the Snark had begun,
And had spoken three hours before anyone guessed
What the pig was supposed to have done.The Jury had each formed a different view
(Long before the indictment was read),
And they all spoke at once, so that none of them knew
One word that the others had said.`You must know-' said the Judge, but the Snark exclaimed `Fudge!
That statute is obsolete quite!
Let me tell you my friends, the whole question depends
On an ancient manorial right.`In the matter of Treason, the pig would appear
To have aided, but scarcely abetted,
While the charge of Insolvency fails, it is clear,
If you grant the plea "never indebted."`The fact of Desertion, I will not dispute;
But its guilt, as I trust, is removed
(So far as relates to the cost of this suit)
By the Alibi which has been proved.`My poor clients fate now depends on your votes,'
Here the speaker sat down in his place,
And directed the Judge to refer to his notes,
And briefly to sum up the case.But the Judge said he never had summed up before,
So the Snark undertook it instead,
And summed it so well that it came to far more
Than the Witnesses ever had said!When the verdict was called for the Jury declined,
As the word was so puzzling to spell;
But they ventured to hope that the Snark wouldn't mind
Undertaking that duty as well.So the Snark found the verdict, although, as it owned
It was spent with the toils of the day.
When it said the word `GUILTY!' the Jury all groaned,
And some of them fainted away.Then the Snark pronounced sentence, the Judge being quite
Too nervous to utter a word.
When it rose to its feet, there was silence like night,
And the fall of a pin might be heard.`Transportation for life' was the sentence it gave,
`And then to be find forty pound.'
The Jury all cheered, though the Judge said he feared
`That the phrase was not legally sound.'
Lewis Carroll, The Hunting of the Snark - The Barrister's Dream [literature.org]
While not talking to one client about one´s other clients is certainly very wise I´m not convinced that that´s a satisfactory solution to this problem. Exclusivity may be required because it is stated in the contract explicitly. But it might be inferred from other clauses in the contract. Keep in mind that trying to take up mutually exclusive positions may not be legally sound.
CHARGED FOR !
ya got a bidding war to start.......
I'm surprised Blue Eyes didn't demand an exclusivity clause in the original agreement.
Blue Eyes likely doesn't realize just how much of a conflict of interest it would be if she hired an SEO who had other clients in the same industry. If she understood anything about SEO, she would know to ask for exclusivity right out of the gate ... but the whole thing is a mystery to most site owners.
I know of a company which offers web site building, hosting and SEO, to my entire industry. They also own a "directory" for the industry, cross linking their sites all over the place. They are nothing more than a cartel. They have their hands in almost everyone's pocket (except mine) and they are getting away with it!
It amazes me how stupid people can be. They have managed to sell a bill of goods to these people, claiming "strength in numbers". Of course, these people fall for it because they don't understand the whole "internet thing". What this particular company has managed to do is make people invest a lot of money in pretty web sites, hosting packages they don't need, maintenance programmes they don't need and few of the sites deliver the goods.
Their SEO technique has been to optimize each site for one or two keywords (out of about 20 in the industry) and then promote PPC programmes all over the net. Its a sham! They even managed to convince one client to buy 4 different web sites promoting the exact same thing. I recently spoke to the owner of those four sites (for which he paid handsomely) and he was not aware that you could optimize a site for more than one or two keywords! Selfishly, I didn't feel it was in my best interest to enlighten him.
My point is that if I were Blue Eyes and innocently hired you without being aware of the very real conflict of interest, I would fire you the second I finally did realize it ... and would likely consider litigation.
The loss of word of mouth promotion for your company which can be easily attained from a happy client, would be enough to make me think twice about doing that to anyone.
By all means, charge for exclusivity as has already been suggested. Put a time limit of 2 to 5 years on that exclusivity agreement. If at any time the client decides to quit you, then you only have to wait for that time limit to run out. Then you could actively seek out the competition with a clear conscience.
True. But then whatever I learn while working for Long Legs would benefit Blue Eyes, as well as the other way around. In a sense, another client in the same industry allows me to indirectly extend the work I do for you.... without you having to pay for it.
You are optimizing a website to beat all other websites within those search results. This is the main focus of your campaign. Then, once you have those rankings, you are going to optimize another website with the goal of beating all other websites within the same search results. This doesn't work.
Then, once you have those rankings, you are going to optimize another website with the goal of beating all other websites within the same search results. This doesn't work.
Exactly. How do you beat yourself at a game of chess? You will have to cheat one side or the other because you know the moves in advance. Not only does it not work ... its very underhanded.
[edited by: Liane at 8:23 pm (utc) on Sep. 17, 2002]
I have seen clients who not only try to make call with different identity to see if you are working with good will or just for making money, but who also asks their friends to make such calls. If I recall correctly, one PI Laywer in Texas wanted be an exclusive lawyer in his state and payed good money for it - but for last 8 months, we are constanly getting atlteast one call a month from different PI Lawyers in Texas. Do you think this is a coincidence? I doubt it.
Most time selecting clients within different states is easier then same state. While in your situation, you are talking about same town. Remember - they might be good friends / member as same associations / went to same school/ living in same area/ [.... had same girl/boy frind..? ]...etc anything could be possible.
Here is a self-test. Ask yourself, what would you do if you were *Blue Eyes* and found out the truth?
It sounds like the most people are leaning toward monogomy with a pre-nup... why is this always the case :)
Phoo... take 'em both. I see realtors all over the place around here who obviously had the same designer (I'd like to know who, so I could hunt them down and slap them... lousy sites), and 'group' sites for affiliated realtors, with one big company site, and separate sub-sites for each agent's listings. I'd imagine if they're promoted at all, it's probably by the same person.
For independent relators, I'll see them putting all the local area MLS listings on their site and pitching themselves as a "buyer's agent", while simultaneously "featuring" the properties they're selling themselves...
The way I've seen realtors do business, if realtors in your area are anything like they are here, promoting two realtor's sites wouldn't even be in the same category of cutthroat.
This is right to the point. Do you forget what you did for the first site when you optimize the second?
I had one client that was a management company that ran a half-dozen different brick and mortar outlets all going after the same search terms. It damned near drove me crazy. Ultimately, I had to have the client draw up a priority list about who was first in line for a term, who was second, etc... not that I could really cut it that fine, but that I had some way of dealing with what was a whole bunch of otherwise irreconcilable conflicts.
No way you can really do your best for competing sites. If I were made a very attractive offer and had no exclusivity arrangement, I'd be very up front about it with both clients, but I don't know how I'd handle it myself.
However, depending on the clients industry, reach and intentions, you may be able to take them both without compromising yourself.
Although they are competing with each other, they are mostly competing with all the other sites in the SERP.
We have a few sites where it works quite well to both customers advantage. In all cases they know about each other - in some they came as referrals from their 'competitor' (friendly market they are in, eh!)
In these cases we get some SEO advantages as what we learn on one can be appplied to the other.
In your particular case, I would say the key question is whether they are targeting "fancy widgets townname" or "fancy widgets"
I like the idea of charging for exclusivity
Totally different situation.
