Is Content King for an Unknown Company?

[member22]

A lot of people in the SEO community say that content is king (to me it means that if you have a good content people while want to link to it which will then turn into social sharing around the community). Then more people will talk about you and link to you and you will get then better rankings.

From what I understand this is what google wants to achieve, they want to make sure a website comes up in the search results because they are a trusted resources that " real people " trust or have talked about... ( it is a like when a friend of mind recommends me a plumber , I go see that plumber because it is recommended instead of calling someone that I don't know but who is in a phone book ! )

My question, how can a company that nobody knows become " famous " and rank on the web ? If nobody knows that company nobody will recommend them or trust them ?

[JesterMagic]

A year ago I would say yes content is king but with the rash of panda updates and the penguin update I have to wonder. Content will only get your foot in the door, you need those backlinks from the big sites or those scrapper sites will just rank higher than you.

[taberstruths]

Yes but it is not a quick process. Your process of how natural linking is done to day is not quite right. You need to write great content, have real people share it socially, that then attracts the attention of those that would link to you, then you gain rankings.

If I was to start today, I would start by building my Facebook and Twitter following as fast as possible, including advertising for fans on Facebook. You can get them for as little as a penny a piece if you do it right. When you get over 20k, you start having social clout which makes other people link to you if you write good content. I get dozens of natural links per day from twitter papers (paper.li) other blogs in my niche, and I now have two major websites in my niche PR5 and PR6 who syndicate the posts I choose that include attribution links and anchor links. It took 1.5 years to get here.

[conroy]

Good point.

It may be that in the future instead of starting a SEO campaign you will start a social campaign and do the reverse. So, generate a ton of people following you as fast as possible and then let the organic rankings come after that. Probably what Google wants anyway in their ideal world.

So, instead of SEO(get links) -> get organic traffic -> get followers

it will be

Social blasts -> get followers -> Get links -> get organic traffic

[taberstruths]

That is how I see it conroy.

[Zivush]

Content is king? let's have a look at two companies:
An Unknown Company A writes top notch content.
An Unknown Company B writes stupid low garbage content.

Now, boys and girls answer me - Which company has a chance to succeed A or B?

[taberstruths]

Long term. A. Because you build your customer base on quality.

[santapaws]

zivush you gave a very narrow range there. Add company C who copies company A and then spends bucks on its external (natural :) )signals.

[JesterMagic]

At some point it will probably all get weighted the same by Google (SEO campaigns vs Social campaigns). Unfortunately there are plenty of black hat techniques out there to generate social buz.

[piatkow]

If nobody knows that company nobody will recommend them or trust them ?

There is a lot more to marketing that uploading a few web pages and waiting for custom.

[taberstruths]

Fake social signals are as easy to discern as an old woman with a bad face lift. Profiles that have few if no followers who tweet and share about anything under the sun with no rhyme or reason are easy to spot.

[JesterMagic]

Some people buy followers/likes which can make it more difficult for a search algorithm to figure out if it is real or not.

[taberstruths]

@Jester, You are right that some people do. The automated programs that the 5r sellers use are easily discernable. It is honestly stupid. You can get fans legitimately through Facebook for as little as a penny a piece. 500 fans for 5 bucks. Those fans will actually be interested in your niche. They will share and like your content more than once. You are dollars ahead doing it white hat but some people are just too lazy to actually engage with their customers.

[JesterMagic]

Do you mean driving visitors to your page through Facebook ads?

[Zivush]

Social Media traffic?
People are dreaming :-)
One of my site has almost 10,000 Facebook's real engaging fans.
I haven't paid a nickel for them to join the Facebook page, they were coming thru the site.
Guess how many fans visits the site every day from Facebook? ~35-50. Wow.
I won't tell you the total site's visits per day, but 35 is 0.0x % of the total traffic. The same goes with the traffic from the site's twitter and YouTube accounts.
However, social media networks contribute to the site's authority and trust.

Add company C who copies company A and then spends bucks on its external (natural :) )signals.

If that's what you think, why bother on working on the Internet? Just send yourself a termination letter.
Entry level is higher, but it can be achieved when no shortcuts is implemented. It surely a hard work but rewarding at the end of the road.

[taberstruths]

@Jester, that is an option but not optimal. You set up a Facebook Fan page for your website. Then get fans for a penny a piece. You engage those fans with different methods that drive them to your site and give you social signals for your pages.

[taberstruths]

@ Zivush, I have 30k facebook fans. I get between 1% to 2% of my fan base to my page every day from Facebook. Your problem is engagement with your fan base. You just can't post your articles and leave it at that. You must engage.

[claaarky]

But your content needs to be right before all this.

If your site is a turd, you're wasting your time shoving it in everyone's face. People don't like having turds shoved in their face, neither does Google.

Content in my book means everything including your banner, navigation, footer, the works, not just the bit in the middle. It all has to work together to achieve the goal of the site. If it doesn't, you won't get far.

[Zivush]

Your problem is engagement with your fan base. You just can't post your articles and leave it at that. You must engage.

That's what I do, they response positively, and I get 0.5%. It might depend on the niche.
Never mind, it is a fraction of the site's total traffic.
(BTW: I suspect GA is not so accurate but that's another story. )

@claarky,
I agree.
I have seen twitter accounts with more than 100k followers, still they have a poor traffic site.
Social media is as an add-on element, not the real thing.

[goodroi]

Value is king.

Online businesses need to provide great value. You can do this with or without content.

I strive to provide value for each and every interaction with one of my online operations. Sometimes I can provide value by providing great content, other times my value is by helping them find another quality online resources with no wasted time.

As for promoting a new or unknown company, providing great value will eventually work (probably slower than you like). People will refer you to friends, tweet about you, blog about you and in general expose you to the marketplace. Personally I would look to use multiple channels to promote a new business.

[scooterdude]

Question is can a new site, using "scrape able" editorial content, gain enough Google cred quickly enough to offset the impact of the scrapers?


Nowadays, Google pretty much enforces the status quo, so if you're all ready doing well, things are looking up, but if you're on the outside,

Most link strategies are now questionable, those unknown to google will probably be discovered when they inspect the next break thru ranker they did not expect, or manually promote :)

Interesting times indeed, I am trying a little of a lot of things,

[Sand]

Regardless of a site's size or popularity, it's hard to get search engine traffic without having content that's relevant to what people are looking for.

With that said, 'king' might be a bit of a reach. But in most cases, content will be your most valuable resource. I think of content like a natural resource -- it has potential value the moment you pull it out of the ground, but you need to form some relationships to actually get paid.

[seoskunk]

+1 agree with sand

[member22]

Thank you all for your answer, I agree with you that social is the way to go.

However, I was wondering if anyone had some advice in terms internal linking which I think will still be used as a signal in addition to external links.

Let's say I have 30 pages that talk about "watches" ( this is just an example ) and I have a homepage that is optimized for "watches" and that I want to rank on the keyword "watches".

Which anchor text would you use internally to link to the homepage from my 29 internal subpages ? I read that if I link 29 times with the keyword "watches" as anchor text I am penalized by google.

The issue I have is that whenI type ~watches in google to find synonyms for watches I only find 2 synonyms "heuer" for and "rolex" ( which is not a lot variety for 29 pages ). Let's say I don't sell any of those brands... it means than other than linking with the keyword "watches" internally I have no other choice... even though I know i will get penalized.

Did I get that right or I am missing something ?

[taberstruths]

broaden your anchor text. Shiny watches, watch bands, diamond watches, watch repair, the most common watches, watches that stand out. ect.

[member22]

I though I only had to use keywords that related to what my page was about and what I was selling ...

So let's say I don't sell diamond watches or don't repair watches can I still link my page with those keywords ? isn't that going to confuse the search engine ?

[tedster]

The issue I have is that whenI type ~watches in google to find synonyms for watches I only find 2

The tilde operator does NOT expose nearly all the semantic information Google has discovered and is using - not even close.

I would caution you about making many strategic changes to internal anchor text, especially if it's done to affect keyword rankings. That kind of linking really needs to be focused on the user's needs. Once in a while it can help Google find a better landing page for a keyword, but only rarely to obtain ranking for keyword that was not previously ranking.

Too many changes in this area seem to raise the alarm for Google. An occasional change can work out well, but if that one success stimulates LOTS of similar changes, then you can get into trouble.

[SevenCubed]

I read that if I link 29 times with the keyword "watches" as anchor text I am penalized by google.

Yes. But it's not a penalty. It will just filter you down in results. We really need to rethink the over use of the term penalty. A penalty is something that happens when you do something wrong -- a 10 minute misconduct penalty for unsportsman-like conduct. It is a predefined timeline you are not going to escape from no matter how remorseful you are about what you did wrong. Whereas a lowering in results through filtering is really not that you did something wrong but that you are not doing something right. So, it's just a punishment imposed by an over-bearing parent that says "you can come out of your room when you understand what you did is wrong" That was how I punished my children when they were young. I left it up to them to realize their mistakes and extricate themselves. (Of course I'd quiz them when they tried to walk out 5 minutes later!).

DO NOT link your keyword on every page. But do use it in an appropriate natural balance and sometimes link descriptive text next to the keyword that is in the same sentence, preferably no more than 2 or 3 words away.

To borrow taberstruths example:
Shiny <a href="example.com">watches</a>, <a href="example.com">watch bands</a>, diamond watches, watch <a href="example.com">repair</a>, the <a href="example.com">most common</a> watches, watches that stand out -- and do leave many instances of the word unlinked -- no more than about 2 links per 750 words -- your results may vary. Just reread what you've written, if it feels forced and unnatural then it will also be interpreted as such by goog's new shiny beast.

[member22]

Thank you for your replies it really helps. Sevencubed where does that number 2 links per 750 words comes from ?

There is one thing that you said that I don't understand but maybe you can explain. If I create a link you that says diamond watches, watch <a href="example.com">repair</a> and link to my homepage knowing that I don't repair watches I don't understand how it can help search engine and the user ( the user by clicking on repair is going to expect a page about repairing watches and this not what he or she will find ) and I am sure what will be the benefit for the search engine ...

By the way should the word repair be in my homepage if I link like that ?

How many times should I have the exact keyword in my external links is there percentage recommended or maximum ?

How is the value of internal links versus external ?

[member22]

and finally if want to rank on "diamond watches" if I have internal links that say "diamond jewelry", "gold watches" which are all synonyms are search engine going to think I am trying to stuff them or is it going to look natural ?