"Instant Search Engine Rankings"

[SteveGibson]

I just read something that may be interesting or may be utter nonsense:

"Jiggling the Web for Instant Search Engine Rankings (http://www.jigglingtheweb.com/)"

Any of the SEOs on here know anything about these techniques? Do they really make a difference?

Steve

[UKSBD]

Slightly over complicating things, but it's the tactics SEO's have been
doing for at least 2 or 3 years

I particularly like to use it for breaking news stories or better still,
stories that you know are coming up.
Can quite often get a new post ranking high in 5 minutes for exact
phrases, key as always, title of the post.

[big bad bernie]

Search for the highest ranking keywords, there are lots of tools around that help with this.:redface:

[Clinton]

I had a quick read. I'm not an SEO but I've got several website properties and employ people to implement various techniques.

Social media has been increasing in its ability to move a page very fast up the rankings. A large part of what's said at that link is what I've found to be true. Long before social media Google was keen on "freshness" and sites with fresh content benefitted more than sites without. Now Google (and Bing) have a deal where they actually pay Twitter to be able to crawl Twitter feeds. For the SEs that's a cool way of keeping their finger on the pulse.

I've benefitted from this "jiggling" but there's one important fact that the article omits to mention. Such "buzz" driven ranking gains are usually breathtakingly fast - minutes sometimes - but they tend to be very shortlived. More often than not the energy expended in making those quick gains aren't justified by the returns.

For long lasting success in SERPS the old rules still apply - good content, good inbound links... that kind of stuff. And some of the spammy, "blackhat" tricks still work too.

[sirearl]

As Clinton say.s Ling does quite a bit of social networking and results are fast for non competative terms.

But I don't think I have ever seen a blog or social site topping the rankings for the money stuff.Not absolutely sure on that as I have as yet not looked at every result.:D

Again I would say the effort to get a decent rank using these methods can be far more than conventional SEO although I agree much faster indexing in general.

I would also say that social sites do not bring in so much targeted traffic.?

Earl

[david9108]

I wish understood what all that article meant...I'd like to move up google a bit quicker!

[irishguru]

Instant rankings only happen if Google crawler bot visits your website often. For this to happen you need to update often. It is best taken advanatge of by updating often and ensuring the bot is on our site often.

To the poster above I have just summed up what it means. Enjoy.

[I, Brian]

I just read something that may be interesting or may be utter nonsense:

"Jiggling the Web for Instant Search Engine Rankings (http://www.jigglingtheweb.com/)"

Any of the SEOs on here know anything about these techniques? Do they really make a difference?

Steve

It's really talking about indexing rather than ranking - as anything indexed will be ranked, but that doesn't mean to say it will have a particular useful ranking position, and additionally any benefits can be extremely ephemeral.

And worse still - lots of the content can be poorly targeted - a post about "twitter" may rank briefly for Google search for "Twitter" - but it's often just traffic for traffic's sake and doesn't convert well.

What the original piece doesn't meantion is that lots of the blog and news content is primarily informational, not transactional - both are different types of searches in Google's algo - and informational content has only very limited room on the first page for transactional search keywords.

So, yes it's a nice piece about getting indexed - rather than ranked - but omits the part about targeting and conversions, which is the necessary follow up, and the reason why the method rarely impacts the big money keywords.

[mattsaw]

But I don't think I have ever seen a blog or social site topping the rankings for the money stuff.Not absolutely sure on that as I have as yet not looked at every result.:D


Bankaholic is/was ranking for many key financial terms in the US, sold for $15m in '08.

[irishguru]

Bankaholic is/was ranking for many key financial terms in the US, sold for $15m in '08.

Yup and there are many more in this inudstry and they are good earners. Nothing like blogging in this day and age.

[sirearl]

Bankaholic is/was ranking for many key financial terms in the US, sold for $15m in '08.

interesting $15 for only 8k visitors a day.:)

Earl

[mattsaw]

interesting $15 for only 8k visitors a day.:)

Earl

It's not really about the visitor numbers but the potential ROI.

[williamscommerce]

I think it works well in combination with more traditional SEO techniques. A combination of the two will deliver lasting results

[Snippa]

While I don't understand all of what the article is saying, without a closer read, the detailed information to First make a post to your blog. Then submit a snippet to Digg, et.al., Then bookmark the snippet to Delicious, etc. DOES make sense and is very helpful. That's clear enough that anyone can do it right now.

[seobristol]

The tactics described work pretty effectively if your primary vehicle is a blog.

Simply by posting with the right use of keywords, pinging and bookmarking including RSS feeds etc., should produce pretty good results.

However from personal experience, I've found that while you do get indexed quickly and ranked highly, rankings can also quickly disappear.

So in the end to stay on top you will have to adopt a strategy of backlinking which brings one back into the realms of good old-fashioned SEO.

As an aside, the bankaholics site was highly ranked because the guy Johns Wu, (a 22-year-old) embarked on a pretty aggressive backlinking campaign and the site did have several hundred thousand backlinks at the time that it was sold - Now there's a clue for all you wannabe millionaires!:)


Kind regards,
Darryl....