Can any SEO company be black hat free from google view?

though they claim it to be whitest of white.

[AjiNIMC]

I am not a SEO expert. Thank God I left this field some months ago.

Can any SEO company be black hat free? For that matter can any SEO expert (so called) be black hat free?

All claim to wear only white hats (with white shirts, white trousers and white shoes), is it possible?

Thanks
AjiNIMC

[jd01]

I think my point was reading and understanding those documents give a good 'big picture' view of important variables considered by search engines. Most people don't understand the processing logic necessary to run a large scale search engine and return accurate results in < .5 sec. (I know I don't.)

I think if you look at a website from a detached view point and review link architecture, page elements, and basic site structure you can achieve a very usable, indexable, rankable website without creating 'spam'.

It sounds like you are running a large site? My guess would be you lose focus on the topic of a specific page or section through poor use of link text within your own site, and do not take advantage of some technology to assist people linking to you in finding the right terminology (or 'key word phrases') to properly and accurately define your site to visitors and search engines.

If you have all the resources (programmers, etc.) above at your disposal and there are others ranking above you, I would have to say, yes an SEO company does a better job of communicating the point/purpose of a site than you are.

I have a site right now that sucks, it's sucked for 15 months, but about 30 days ago it started to not suck so much. What's the difference? Just the navigational structure and look of the site (still not quite complete). The basic content is the same as it has been for over a year. Since the 'onsite only changes' traffic is up 30%. Set a record yesterday. No adwords, etc.

If you hire an SEO company and they go on a directory submission, link request 'spam' campaign they are probably not helping you. But, what if the SEO company notices the relative age of your documents is 'fresh' compared to the relative age of the top ten documents in your niche and recommends you serve last modified dates and update pages less often? (Does page update frequency relative to the update frequency of other pages matter? I don't know, just an example.)

Some SEs have a tough time crawling more than 2-3 levels deep, do you think a good SEO company would be able to 'flatten' a site where you can go six levels deep and over fifty clicks without repeating a page better than a team of graphic designers or MySql experts?

I think SEO(s) can be 'white hat' from a SE's perspectives.

Justin

[jd01]

Just wanted to note +30% on the site I mentioned is for a 30 day average. Day 1 to Day 1, 30 days ago is much higher.

Justin

If you only have 3 alexa users and one falls asleep while clicking on the 'next' arrow of a site, how many page views per user will alexa cap the average at?
(It appears to be 100 but I haven't put too much time into research.)

[AjiNIMC]

[webmasterworld.com...] , I think this is the loophole "assuming that most of the links are natural".

[Deester]

If the client understands what's involved in ranking and is willing to pay the money to build a site up properly then yes, SEO can be blackhat free.

[jd01]

I think it is very natural to make sure you properly emphasize the key focal points of a resource to help SEs properly identify them through the use of controlables within a given website, including links, link text, and site navigation/structure.

I believe Google even recommends something to the effect of:

Make a site with a clear hierarchy and text links. Every page should be reachable from at least one static text link.

As far as 'natural' links to a site?
Is a visitor more inclined to naturally link to a page/site where linking is made easy, or are they more inclined to naturally link to a page/site where extra effort is necessary...

I have an idea the 'natural completion percentage' of a given task somehow relates directly to the difficulty presented by the task itself, and a higher percentage of people are inclined to 'naturally complete' a task which readily presents them with a 'quick solution' than a task which requires 'extra effort'.

If a visitor wants to link to a site why not help them out if they need it? No schemes or tricks involved. Help is there if they need it EG 'click here' to link. They can link or not link whichever they prefer. Not sure how that's 'spam' or 'scheming'?

Which is the 'easier to use' more 'visitor friendly' resource:
One whose authors have thought through a visit from a visitor, web-based perspective, or one whose authors know a subject well?

If all websites were made to be 'equal', sites, pages, documents would be ranked based on the credentials of the authors, not on any other standard. Unfortunately (or fortunately) SEs must attempt to direct their visitors to 'good destinations' as well as 'good information' based on multi-site and/or multi-visitor patterns and characteristics.

I think, like it or not, 'black hat' or 'vanilla white', as long as there are SEs there will be people advising on how to rank in them.

Justin

Are any SEO companies 'white hat' from Google's perspective?
It depends on what you call SEO.