Google and all that

[easy]

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about Google, which was brought to my attention in the thread asking for feedback on my new website in the IT forum. I thought it might be beneficial to start a thread here just to clear up some issues.

Firstly, it is possible to guarantee a listing in Google, as my site does. I agree that there may be some tiny chance of failure, but if you know what you're doing, you can get sites into Google within a week.

Our previous success at this means we are happy to offer a money back guarantee, so we have nothing to lose, and neither does the customer.

But getting into Google still doesn't necessarily get you found by possible clients. My business has been optimising sites for years and we know that you need a well crafted site that makes sure search engine robots pick up the key phrases you want to be found under.

There are many site optimisers out there that claim to be able to do this - sadly, most don't know what they are talking about, and dont understand that the structure of the web site folders is vital.

One other point - I read somewhere that there is a difference between optimising for Google and, say, MSN. Well, maybe. But if you get into one, the other will pick you up.

OK, so I'm not exactly sharing any secrets so far, but if you have a web site that is struggling in search engines, remember that the three most important criteria are links, links and links. If nobody links to your site, it will be ignored.

And yes, that is a plug for my new site, because that is exactly what www.takemebaby.com does for its customers.

If anybody does want any advice on Google, please ask. I'll gladly look at any site to see if I can help.

[c2webdesign]

Of course it is possible to guarantee a 'listing' in Google - don't think I've seen that being disputed - it's quite easy so long as you have a site that is reguarly spidered - simply add a text link. You'll be picked up usually within a week.

Optimisation isn't necessarily about 'getting in to search engines' but appearing as high as possible for your keywords. Keywords are often the item that is over-looked. Many people 'guess' their main keywords instead of researching WHAT people are actually searching for.

Do agree that links has to be high on the agenda with any SEO campaing - the more links from TRUSTED, POPULAR AND RELEVANT sites the better! - and by ensuring the websites linking to you use a text link showing your main keyword.

Dean
C2 Web Design
http://www.c2webdesign.co.uk

Web Design | Online Marketing | Search Engine Optimisation

[SmallBizSoftware]

and don't forget that page rank doesn't automatically mean good SERPS results or vice versa

[easy]

c2webdesign

I agree with everything you say apart from the need for text links. We achieve excellent results with image links that are otherwise hidden from the casual browser. PM me and I'll show you a classic example.

[Stephen]

otherwise hidden from the casual browser
Is that a good idea?

Will you post some search results for sites you've been involved with? I'd like to see them!

[c2webdesign]

I would be quite interested to see, particuarly as the main emphasis on backlinks is the anchor text.

I can't really see the main point of 'hidden' image links.

Firstly the spider has no anchor text to see, so although you gain a backlink, you do not gain the weight of a backlink under your keyword....

....plus visable text links will also bring you added advantages of click throughs from other visitors.

I'm not saying it's impossible to help your position with background colour images linking to you (if that's what you mean) but well written, varied, text links from your referers will give it more weight.

Dean
C2 Web Design
http://www.c2webdesign.co.uk

Web Design | Online Marketing | Search Engine Optimisation

[Enigma121]

C2, easy,

You are getting into a classic Black Hat / White Hat SEO debate.

Hidden links via images or text are a Black Hat SEO technique. It's naughty, but may work well at the moment.

Trouble is Google in particular lothe such techniques and frequently modify their engine to impose a penalty on sites that are caught doing this sort of thing.

You've got to weigh the risks against the benefits.

[Ravenfire]

Ive always been under impression that not all links are good links? Arent you supposed to exchange mainly with those that have a connection in some way to your site and if they dont have a connection then they need to have a good PR, otherwise its just not worth it??

[bitsnstuff]

That is what I thought Ravenfire, but this morning I got this sent to me - http://www.linkmetro.com/LinkPopularityGuide.pdf - which was supposed to claridy the issue, but has now confused me. It was send by the owner of Link Metro, because apparently too many potential link exchanges are being rejected.

Kate :lol:

[Rob]

Yes, you should be aiming for links with sites that have a connection with your product or service. Linking to a totally unrelated site can often work against you.

The best type of link to have is one pointing to your site but which you don't reciprocate i.e. the other site is telling the SE's that your content is so good they are recommending it to their visitors without you having to send any back.

Avoid so called 'link farms' and directories that are packed with casinos, online pharmacies etc etc.

SE's are looking for quality sites with good content - searchers who are happy with the results are therefore more likely to come back to that SE. It's back to basics for the SE's - 'we give you quality results for your search query, you keep coming back to us'.

[easy]

Will you post some search results for sites you've been involved with? I'd like to see them!

Happy to oblige Stephen

Try looking for "chiropodists in Norfolk" and despite the problems with Norfolk in Virginia, plus the local competition, I hope you find it easy to get to Randells Footcare.

Try also "damp surveys". A company called Horton Levi gets a great deal of work from people that do.

A search for "grp plant containers" helps Europlanters make a significant part of their revenue on-line.

[c2webdesign]

Europlanters are the ONLY website in the top 20 that actually has the phrase 'GRP Plant Containers' on their home page.....and only has 11,000 'competing' websites.

The fact you have this in the Title tag, and the only keyword phrase on a home page (with little competition) will usually give you a very high ranking anyway - but where does your 'hidden' image links come in - Google only identifies that Yahoo's Directory links to Europlanters?

It can take less than a few weeks to achieve a top position for very few competition (11,000 websites)....Special Days Lakeside holds top two places for 'Flowers Lakeside Thurrock' in Google and we managed this only a few weeks after launching

If you are using 'tricks' to deceive the search engines to give your sites better rankings - they will (eventually) find you.

On the other hand Freebie Town currently does quite well from the phrase 'Latest UK Freebies' with a competition of just under 1 million websites(currently residing 4th). There's no 'hidden' tricks or images - just good text based backlinks from related websites.

Not trying to be 'tit for tat' but at the same time its important to stay clear of black hat SEO because if -no strike that - WHEN Google find you the penalties can be very harmful for a very long time.

Dean
C2 Web Design
http://www.c2webdesign.co.uk

Web Design | Online Marketing | Search Engine Optimisation

[Belladonna]

My problem with your viewpoint is that noone can "guarantee" rankings in search engines.

Afterall, Google could change it's algorithm tomorrow.

In fact Google's own guidelines state that if a SEO expert says they can guarantee you rankings - run a mile!

My second issue is that the search phrases are very very important and that optimising a site for a search phrase that is not searched for is a totally pointless exercise.

see: http://www.digitalpoint.com/tools/suggestion/?keywords=chiropodists+in+norfolk&country=uk

This would suggest that no-one searches for the phrase "chiropodists in norfolk".

There are so many 'experts' on SEO out there - and whilst I will never tall a client that I can guarantee them results, what I do tell them is: "we have not failed yet"!!

[TWD-Tony]

Yes, you should be aiming for links with sites that have a connection with your product or service. Linking to a totally unrelated site can often work against you.

I'm going to have to jump in and argue that point...

While it's a well known fact that relevant links are worth more than random links, there is no such thing as a link that will "work against you". All inbound links are good - just some are better than others :wink:

If anyone is wondering how I can make such a bold statement then let's take the following situation...

Bare in mind that Google has always stated that there is NOTHING that a competator of yours can do to lower your ranking...

If you own flower shop "A" and are competing with a similar flower shop in the same town called "B" - If there were such a thing as devaluing or "BAD" links then it would be very easy for the clued-up webmaster of flower shop "B" to add links to your website at all these "BAD" websites... Hence lowering your Google ranking.

Also bare in mind that if Google allowed links that lowered a site's ranking then a whole new business would emerge selling links from bad website's to the highest bidder... :(

Hope this helps!

Tony

[Ravenfire]

I have two links section on my site, one that I use with link metro and dont always have a particular connection to my site and another main link section that consists of sites that do link to main. Is there any disadvantage to having two links pages, one is html the other is a php?

I got that as well Kate but thought to myself that they are bound to say it as they are running the company..lol! The amount of Link Requests I am getting at present is just silly and I dont have the time to add them all!!

Toni

[easy]

Well, one thing is for certain. A thread on Google certainly gets people debating.

Can I just comment on some of the things said:


My problem with your viewpoint is that noone can "guarantee" rankings in search engines.

Fully agree - I'm not saying ranking can be guaranteed. It is extremely difficult, takes a great deal of time and patience, and just when you think you have won, your rankings plummet. But a listing can be guaranteed. And if the person giving that guarantee is offering money back if it fails, I can't see any harm in trying it.


Europlanters are the ONLY website in the top 20 that actually has the phrase 'GRP Plant Containers' on their home page.....and only has 11,000 'competing' websites.

Not sure the point you are making here. My client gives me a key phrase that he wants Google to pick up on. This phrase brings his site up at No. 1 above 11,000 other pages. Sounds like a success to me. I notice you haven't commented on, say, "damp surveys".


You are getting into a classic Black Hat / White Hat SEO debate.

I've never heard this expression before so don't really know what it means. But others seem to think it refers to evil tricks that will somehow upset Mr. Google in the long term. Maybe you are misunderstanding my meaning about using images as links. I am saying that these are just as effective as plain text links. For example, most buttons on most web sites are image based links, but Google has no problem in finding them. However, if you don't want to cover your site with links, you can use a graphic that does not publicise the fact that it is a link, ie it is invisible to the casual browser, but is still just as readable by Google.


but where does your 'hidden' image links come in - Google only identifies that Yahoo's Directory links to Europlanters

I presume you are doing a search in Google for who links to Europlanters. Sorry, but that is one of Googles few failings. If you want to know who links to a site, then put the url in quotations and do a normal search, eg "www.europlanters.com". In this case you will find well over 100 pages link to Europlanters.


This would suggest that no-one searches for the phrase "chiropodists in norfolk"

I guess they just have healthy feet in Norfolk. But if they did need help, my client would be listed first!

Long may the debate continue, but in the meantime, don't get paranoid by Google. Its job is to list sites - we just have to point it in the right direction. And remember, its not a human, it can't read and it does not pass judgement. The stories of black listed sites and "relevant links" are just that.

[DuaneJackson]

My problem with your viewpoint is that noone can "guarantee" rankings in search engines.


Exactly my opinion.

As for Black hat techniques, they are great for short term benefit, but you will always get found out.

[Stephen]

For clarification, your point about Google's "failing" is by design. A search for 'link:www.europlanters.com", to take your example shows 3 links. However, these are the links Google consider to be most valuable.

The "link:" syntax has a sister, "*:domain" (e.g. *:www.europlanters.com), which returns all of the sites in Google's index that link to the domain (regardless of link text). In your case, it returns pretty much the same value.

As I say, not a failing of Google; it's intentional.

Oh, and I'd have thought anything, as you say, "invisible to the casual browser" yet visible to search engines probably wasn't a good idea for ethical (white hat) search engine promotion.

[easy]

Stephen

The "link:" syntax has a sister, "*:domain" (e.g. *:www.europlanters.com), which returns all of the sites in Google's index that link to the domain (regardless of link text). In your case, it returns pretty much the same value.

Many thanks for that - an interesting clarification.

[Belladonna]

Not sure the point you are making here. My client gives me a key phrase that he wants Google to pick up on.

I am quite shocked by this statement. Do you see your job as being generating enquiries and leads via the internet or as someone who simply gets sites listed by google for any phrase given to you by your client? I will never, ever rely on the client to give me the keyword phrases to be targetted. I use them as a starting point yes, but the phrases that are selected are only selected after having performed thorough keyword research.

Whilst I know how hard it can be to educate clients on the use of the correct keyword phrases, there is absolutely no point in them ranking #1 for a phrase that is simply not used. Why bother - might as well have the most fantastic marketing material created for you then lock it in a draw.

The difficulty is often that the client has an indepth knowledge of their own business, but their potential clients do not.

Long may the debate continue, but in the meantime, don't get paranoid by Google.

To be honest, all of these points are applicable to all Search Engines. You are right people should not get paranoid about Google, or any other search engine, but if they are offering SEO services they should be paranoid about generating sales leads and enquiries, or whatever else the site is attempting to generate.

If I am absolutely honest, and this is not meant to be a personal comment, but as I work with web designers on a consultancy basis, I genuinely believe that SEO should be left to SEO specialists and Web Design to Web Design Specialists, and Web Development to Web Development Specialists. They are all huge subjects in themselves and there is a direct correlation between them all and they can have a huge effect on the success of a website.

[easy]

I'm giving up on this.

I started this thread to try and help people, but, unless I'm being overly sensitive, people seem to be jumping down my throat, calling me unethical and being "shocked" by everything I say.

Of course we should advise clients on key words etc, that is how we reach the criteria on which we promote the site. At the end of the day, if the client is not getting results, the client will go elsewhere.

I was asked for examples and I gave them. Now I see why David Cameron is not answering the drugs question!

And as for a graphic link that is not visible to the casual browser, it's no less 'ethical', black hat or purple bowler, than a keywords tag or robot.txt file. All are sort out by Google, non are visible to the viewer.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.