Question for the SEOs [Archive] - UK Business Forums

sysops

1st June 2010, 13:02

Have you ever taken a site which is already performing reasonably well, and made it perform amazingly well?

I need someone who can do this. I've worked with many SEOs over the past few years, and one thing has become quite clear - taking a poor site and turning it into a good one is something most SEOs can do just fine. However, taking a good site and turning it into a great one seems to be something that eludes most of them.

This is a pity, because if a site is already well established, this means I have a good budget to spend on it - far more than I could spend on a new or poor site.

PMs or replies here welcome.

sirearl

1st June 2010, 13:20

It all depends at what stage the site is at when the SEO starts work on it.

There is a finite amount of traffic available for every product group and every targetted country.

The answer to you question is yes depending.:)

Earl

harryboon

1st June 2010, 13:40

What site are you talking about, can you give details?

sysops

1st June 2010, 13:51

What site are you talking about, can you give details?

I'm not talking about a particular site.

paretowasright

1st June 2010, 13:58

I'm not talking about a particular site.

Sysops...in fairness that is the impression you gave so can we now take it that you are talking hypothetically?...I doubt you will get taken very seriously if so so may be worth being a bit more specific about what your agenda is here.

craigc0302

1st June 2010, 14:10

Have you ever taken a site which is already performing reasonably well, and made it perform amazingly well?

I need someone who can do this.

Does that not confirm your on the lookout, im sure there are quite a few seos here who can assist you with making your site even better !

sysops

1st June 2010, 14:12

Does that not confirm your on the lookout

I am (did I say I wasn't?). But I am not talking about a single site, so posting a single URL would not be appropriate.

I don't see what is complicated or confusing about my question.

(thanks for all the PMs, working through them)

fisicx

1st June 2010, 14:20

Confused of Basildon here.

Taking the general view that a SEO specialises in promoting the organic ranking of a website aren't you really looking for a specialist who can improve the effetiveness of a website that is already ranking well. Someone who knows marketing rather than just SEO, a copywriter, usability expert and whoever.

Or do you mean a site the is ranking well for an nummber of keywords and you just want to rank for a loads more keywords and not worry about which ones convert?

sysops

1st June 2010, 14:22

GNU

1st June 2010, 14:46

Have you ever taken a site which is already performing reasonably well, and made it perform amazingly well?

No but I once caught a PR5 for £7 and subsequently got it banned :rolleyes:

paretowasright

1st June 2010, 15:58

Ah, the old conversion chestnut.

Nope, I'm not interested in conversion, I am interested in gaining more traffic through natural search.

Ah, the old natural search chestnut.

I would take more conversion any day over more natural search but just goes to show it takes all sorts ;)

harryboon

1st June 2010, 16:04

So you simply want to rank higher for your keywords? If I can be honest we would all be able to give you better and more relevant advice if we knew a little more about your site etc.

Sorry to be a bore lol :D

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 17:44

When confronted with that question I'd be inclined to turn it round and ask how much effort the site owner was willing to put in to make their good site great. You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.

What makes a great site? 9/10 great content that people really want and need. Who has ultimate control of that? The subject matter expert or site owner.

It's a point of view.

d

I, Brian

1st June 2010, 18:14

Have you ever taken a site which is already performing reasonably well, and made it perform amazingly well?

These are the best sites to work on, IMO - with link building, for example, for a really concerted campaign in competitive areas, you already need a well established website in the first place - and these necessarily have some decent rankings already.

In which case, you then leverage the offsite work to synchronise with the on-page work, and you can absolutely clear up on both the major generic keywords, as well as the longtail.

A website performing reasonably well should be very pleasant to work with, though a good combination of on-page strategy with offpage links will likely be necessary.

mattsaw

1st June 2010, 18:16

As others have said, it depends on the current situation the site is in, as well as how much time, effort and money the owner is prepared to put in. It's not just a case of throwing money at an SEO and expecting miracles.

The SEO can take care of site architecture, on page optimisation and link development. The site owner has a heavy influence (along with the SEO in some cases) on,

- site content
- Online/offline PR
- Advertising/branding
- Leveraging existing contacts/suppliers/associations for links

The most successful projects that I have worked on has been in conjction with a marketing minded and SEO aware site owner - I'm happy to put in the time to help people understand what they're doing and why, but it takes a willingness to learn and work hard.

What can be achieved with a decent budget, decent content strategy and a proactive owner

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/3934/revd.jpg

sysops

1st June 2010, 18:25

When confronted with that question I'd be inclined to turn it round and ask how much effort the site owner was willing to put in to make their good site great.

None - but I am willing to pay someone to do it.

sysops

1st June 2010, 18:29

I would take more conversion any day over more natural search but just goes to show it takes all sorts ;)

Look buddy -

1. This is the SEO forum
2. The thread is titled "Question for the SEOs"

What makes you think you know my business better than I do?

adventurelife

1st June 2010, 18:36

sysops

1st June 2010, 18:38

The question that is being asked by the OP is one I ask myself on a monthly basis.

OP if it is okay I will post my site so the SEOs have something to comment on?

It has been around 10 plus years ranks very well and makes money but I know it can do better:)

Go for it!

The reason I'm not posting a URL is not shyness - the question really is a general one, not about one particular site, because we run lots of sites!

adventurelife

1st June 2010, 18:41

Go for it!

The reason I'm not posting a URL is not shyness - the question really is a general one, not about one particular site, because we run lots of sites!

Yes I know , picked that up from your previous postings. I have around 15 sites but one performs the best and I am going to have another attempt at improving. Site is Rafting

(http://www.rafting.co.uk)

sysops

1st June 2010, 18:52

Yes I know , picked that up from your previous postings. I have around 15 sites but one performs the best and I am going to have another attempt at improving. Site is Rafting

(http://www.rafting.co.uk)

Nice domain :-)

After staff issues, SEO is my single biggest ongoing headache. A typical scenario is this:

- I contact an SEO, have a chat about potential work. I outline some targets and timescales, and ask how much they think it would cost to achieve this.

- They come back with a quote, and a definite "we can definitely achieve the targets you want".

- Six months and several thousand pounds later, we're exactly where we started with the site.

This leaves me in a very difficult position. Most of these guys are genuinely nice guys, and go into the project thinking that they will be able to deliver. But they don't, and I'm then faced with:

a. carry on paying them month after month because they are nice guys

b. try someone else

And the cycle repeats, ad infinitum.

adventurelife

1st June 2010, 19:05

Nice domain :-)

After staff issues, SEO is my single biggest ongoing headache. A typical scenario is this:

- I contact an SEO, have a chat about potential work. I outline some targets and timescales, and ask how much they think it would cost to achieve this.

- They come back with a quote, and a definite "we can definitely achieve the targets you want".

- Six months and several thousand pounds later, we're exactly where we started with the site.

This leaves me in a very difficult position. Most of these guys are genuinely nice guys, and go into the project thinking that they will be able to deliver. But they don't, and I'm then faced with:

a. carry on paying them month after month because they are nice guys

b. try someone else

And the cycle repeats, ad infinitum.

I take it what you describe above is with already well performing sites? Looks like a pay on results route is what you need.

sysops

1st June 2010, 19:09

I take it what you describe above is with already well performing sites?

It is.

Looks like a pay on results route is what you need.

Very few SEOs are willing to go down this route - and I can understand why. In fact, I'll stick my neck out and say that generally the better ones are the ones least interested in pay on results.

Because of this, I'm happy to pay a fixed monthly fee - as long as we agree a target and work towards it. The problem is that this target is seldom achieved.

paretowasright

1st June 2010, 19:15

Look buddy -

1. This is the SEO forum
2. The thread is titled "Question for the SEOs"

What makes you think you know my business better than I do?

Firstly my name is not buddy and secondly I never said that I purely pointed out that I would go for conversion but different sites have different needs.
Thirdly I am acutely aware this is the SEO forum but just found your initial posting vague (but can now see that you wanted to keep things under wraps which is cool) as did others but it seems like you are now making headway and wish you all the best.

adventurelife

1st June 2010, 19:25

It is.

Very few SEOs are willing to go down this route - and I can understand why. In fact, I'll stick my neck out and say that generally the better ones are the ones least interested in pay on results.

Because of this, I'm happy to pay a fixed monthly fee - as long as we agree a target and work towards it. The problem is that this target is seldom achieved.

I know most will not go this way, I have to say I cannot understand why. I have done several company turn rounds on a paid on results basis. Of course I seen everything up front and made a judgment call on if I could pull them off or not.

I am considering a turn round at present. If I go for it , I will invest between £40-80k and the success will or failure will all be down to me. Obviously if I get it right the returns I get will be much higher than if I was just paid a fee in fact I would not do it for a fee as the return would never be worth the amount of work it takes.

Is your target just traffic or are your measuring ROI?

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 19:28

None - but I am willing to pay someone to do it.

That's OK so long as you can source a subject matter expert who will work for you.

d

sysops

1st June 2010, 19:33

Is your target just traffic or are your measuring ROI?

For most of our sites, UK traffic is the target - the conversion rate stays fairly steady regardless of the source, as long as it's UK based.

In terms of the work involved, it's actually pretty simple:

1. Identify a set of terms to target
2. Build content pages (if not already there - they are for most)
3. Build links

It's number 3 that seems to be the hurdle for most, building enough links of sufficient quality.

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 19:33

I know most will not go this way, I have to say I cannot understand why.

There are many variables outside the control of an SEO and SEO is a slow game - black hat and schemes notwithstanding - the economics of this don't stack up, you can't live on fresh air. We don't 'never' do PFP, but we are careful about the PFP projects we do take on.

d

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 19:36

They come back with a quote, and a definite "we can definitely achieve the targets you want.

That's where I'm going wrong. I tell it like it is and people don't want to hear it. They want to hear people tell them things they know deep down are very unlikely to happen. There's no silver bullet with SEO (and to repeat myself - except for short lived schemes and black hat).

d

adventurelife

1st June 2010, 19:38

There are many variables outside the control of an SEO and SEO is a slow game - black hat and schemes notwithstanding - the economics of this don't stack up, you can't live on fresh air. We don't 'never' do PFP, but we are careful about the PFP projects we do take on.

d

Agree, but your last bit of the para is the most relevant " careful about the projects we do take on"

With all due respect doing a company turn round has more variables that you can shake a stick it, the odds are stacked against it working. So my checks are the same, I am careful on what I take on.

Take you point though that the economics might not stack up, no point taking the risk unless the potential return is worth it.

adventurelife

1st June 2010, 19:42

For most of our sites, UK traffic is the target - the conversion rate stays fairly steady regardless of the source, as long as it's UK based.

In terms of the work involved, it's actually pretty simple:

1. Identify a set of terms to target
2. Build content pages (if not already there - they are for most)
3. Build links

It's number 3 that seems to be the hurdle for most, building enough links of sufficient quality.

Seems straight forward enough, but it is the links that your correctly say is the hard one. It is getting harder each year to do so, particulary quality ones and a lot of SEO's are finding that methods they used in the past are not working anymore.

Like Redevo says though it takes time. I tend to think in terms of 12-24 months when I am doing anything these days with sites

sysops

1st June 2010, 19:44

That's where I'm going wrong. I tell it like it is and people don't want to hear it. They want to hear people tell them things they know deep down are very unlikely to happen. There's no silver bullet with SEO (and to repeat myself - except for short lived schemes and black hat).

d

This I can't understand.

If I said to you "here's a site, it's doing 1000 uniques a day, I want it to be doing 2000 uniques a day within 12 months" - do you answer:

1. it can't be done at any price
2. I can do it, but it will cost you X per month

I don't think there is a single site that can't generate an extra 300k uniques a year - not one.

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 19:45

With all due respect doing a company turn round has more variables that you can shake a stick it, the odds are stacked against it working. So my checks are the same, I am careful on what I take on.

I would suggest both are complex for very different reasons.

d

sysops

1st June 2010, 19:46

Like Redevo says though it takes time. I tend to think in terms of 12-24 months when I am doing anything these days with sites

With all our sites, we're in it for the longterm. But I also think that you should be able to see results within 3-4 months. I have seen results within that kind of timescale. If you don't start seeing some results by then, I would bet that you won't by month 12.

adventurelife

1st June 2010, 19:51

With all our sites, we're in it for the longterm. But I also think that you should be able to see results within 3-4 months. I have seen results within that kind of timescale. If you don't start seeing some results by then, I would be that you won't by month 12.

I do a fair bit of the linkbuilding myself and I am a donkey at SEO so it takes me longer:(

harryboon

1st June 2010, 19:56

With all our sites, we're in it for the longterm. But I also think that you should be able to see results within 3-4 months. I have seen results within that kind of timescale. If you don't start seeing some results by then, I would be that you won't by month 12.

I am not sure what site's you run, or how competitive your market is - however I will tell you two things if you are willing to spend a bit of cash which it seems you clearly are - you should see results within 3-4 months no problems. If you are paying out money to a company and not seeing results then they aren't doing a very good job or you are being conned.

Most SEO's won't do pay on results because often we don't end up getting paid!

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 19:57

This I can't understand.

If I said to you "here's a site, it's doing 1000 uniques a day, I want it to be doing 2000 uniques a day within 12 months" - do you answer:

1. it can't be done at any price
2. I can do it, but it will cost you X per month

I don't think there is a single site that can't generate an extra 300k uniques a year - not one.

No, I would answer something along the lines of.......

We need to understand the market to establish how much worthwhile traffic there is available within the scope of your offering. We need to understand how much competition there is in the market and the strength of that competition. We then need to understand which links are going to make the biggest difference to your rankings and we need to understand what we would need to do to attract links from these prized link targets.

In some niches there are very few quality link targets and the SERPs are simply the best of a bad bunch.

That would be a starting point and at that stage I wouldn't give any guarantee other than we would do everything in our power to achieve the stated goal.

The thing is as you have already stated, you'd rather hear someone say 'yeah sure we can do that 100% guaranteed' when the only way an SEO can guarantee positions and exact rankings is by using dodgy techniques that may get you to where you want, but will likely not last (not always but often). IMHO.

d

sysops

1st June 2010, 20:05

No, I would answer something along the lines of.......

We need to understand the market to establish how much worthwhile traffic there is available within the scope of your offering. We need to understand how much competition there is in the market and the strength of that competition. We then need to understand which links are going to make the biggest difference to your rankings and we need to understand what we would need to do to attract links from these prized link targets.

In some niches there are very few quality link targets and the SERPs are simply the best of a bad bunch.

That would be a starting point and at that stage I wouldn't give any guarantee other than we would do everything in our power to achieve the stated goal.

The thing is as you have already stated, you'd rather hear someone say 'yeah sure we can do that 100% guaranteed' when the only way an SEO can guarantee positions and exact rankings is by using dodgy techniques that may get you to where you want, but will likely not last (not always but often). IMHO.

d

Don't take this the wrong way, I do appreciate your input (and find your posts valuable and informative) - BUT:

Why does what you've said sound like an apology? Instead of accepting the fact that it is doable (which it is - it is always achievable, given the right approach and enough resources), you spend time explaining why you probably can't do it.

I'm not after guarantees - I pay the agreed fee regardless. But if we don't hit the targets which my SEO has already stated we should be able to reach, then I'd be an idiot to carry on paying - no?

sirearl

1st June 2010, 20:13

It is.

Very few SEOs are willing to go down this route - and I can understand why. In fact, I'll stick my neck out and say that generally the better ones are the ones least interested in pay on results.

You think.?;)

This migh help explain why you have a hard time finding a top notch SEO.

http://webmaster.bwdp.org.uk/greatseo

Earl

sysops

1st June 2010, 20:17

You think.?;)

This migh help explain why you have a hard time finding a top notch SEO.

http://webmaster.bwdp.org.uk/greatseo

Earl

I don't buy it, that's a pile of crap.

There are many, many highly skilled professionals who don't have the interest/inclination to work outside their field.

An Oasis

1st June 2010, 20:18

Great thread sysops, one of the few in many months. Can this not be transferred into the members section and possibly more specifics discussed, there must be many business people in a similar position, who want to spend but have difficultly defining how that spend needs to be appropriated.

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 20:21

Don't take this the wrong way, I do appreciate your input (and find your posts valuable and informative) - BUT:

Why does what you've said sound like an apology? Instead of accepting the fact that it is doable (which it is - it is always achievable, given the right approach and enough resources), you spend time explaining why you probably can't do it.

I'm not after guarantees - I pay the agreed fee regardless. But if we don't hit the targets which my SEO has already stated we should be able to reach, then I'd be an idiot to carry on paying - no?

I'm not taking it the wrong way and I'm not offended by your response :) I would never guarantee something that isn't guarantee-able. I don't agree with your assumptions, it's not a perfect world.

d

sysops

1st June 2010, 20:21

sysops

1st June 2010, 20:24

I'm not taking it the wrong way and I'm not offended by your response :) I would never guarantee something that isn't guarantee-able. I don't agree with your assumptions, it's not a perfect world.

d

Again, I'll stress the point that I never ask for guarantees.

I approach it like this:

Me: The site currently gets 1000 uniques a day. I want 2000 uniques a day (at least 90% UK) within 12 months. Can you do it, and if so how much do you think I need to pay you?

SEO: Yes, we can do that, it will cost X

No guarantee - I pay, and I don't ask for money back.

sirearl

1st June 2010, 20:26

I don't buy it, that's a pile of crap.

There are many, many highly skilled professionals who don't have the interest/inclination to work outside their field.

again you think.?:)

In the main you won't even know they exist as they are not looking for work as SEO's.

They are to busy running there own business's or flogging e-books and such inbetween doing seminars at a few thousand a pop.;)

I mean why would a quality SEO want some sniveling business owner burning there ear.?:|:D

Earl

An Oasis

1st June 2010, 20:42

again you think.?:)

In the main you won't even know they exist as they are not looking for work as SEO's.

They are to busy running there own business's or flogging e-books and such inbetween doing seminars at a few thousand a pop.;)

I mean why would a quality SEO want some sniveling business owner burning there ear.?:|:D

Earl

Oh great Earl tries to burn yet another interesting thread. Sometimes threads are bigger than your ego.

sysops

1st June 2010, 20:45

Oh great Earl tries to burn yet another interesting thread. Sometimes threads are bigger than your ego.

He's just touting for business. There is nothing Earl would like more than for me to ask him to work on our sites. But that would be a cold, cold day in hell.

sirearl

1st June 2010, 21:02

He's just touting for business. There is nothing Earl would like more than for me to ask him to work on our sites. But that would be a cold, cold day in hell.

Many many people have asked me to work for them on the forum and only one ex member has formed an alliance with me.:)

Afraid your sites would not come under the heading of what I would term a viable proposition owing to lack of meat.

Earl

Tin

1st June 2010, 21:06

My 2c

Firstly, let me make it clear, I'm not pitching for any work. I've an idea which market spaces you're focusing on and I've clients in those spaces which counts me out.

Ok, reading the thread it occurs to me that the seos you've used may have run short of the resources required to deliver your expections. Being honest I don't know any seos who have all the resources required for every job, no matter what resources that involves (specifically, very competitive keywords).

There are pockets of seos that will often deliver high quality results but if you've a number of sites that require a special push to make the difference then I've two questions...

1. Are you savvy enough about seo to be able to realise an seos shortcomings and from that ensure that you just get the best they deliver then cut them short?

2. Are you savvy enough to be able to decide what is missing from your seo picture to then choose the best seo candidate to deliver that particular aspect of the work and once that's done move onto the next missing ingredient?

Just to throw a bit of a spanner in the works, are you positive that the on site optimisation is maxed to best effect as I have found that in my experience it is often the subtleties of the on site work that can take a well performing site and turn it into a great site.
Ray

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 21:08

I approach it like this:

Me: The site currently gets 1000 uniques a day. I want 2000 uniques a day (at least 90% UK) within 12 months. Can you do it, and if so how much do you think I need to pay you?

SEO: Yes, we can do that, it will cost X

And I would prefer to paint the bigger picture, but I'm not sure we are poles apart. You see you need to understand that every ethical SEO is working against a backdrop of con men and I prefer to use language that demonstrates that. You see that as negative or apologetic I don't although I do respect your point of view.

d

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 21:12

My 2c

Firstly, let me make it clear, I'm not pitching for any work. I've an idea which market spaces you're focusing on and I've clients in those spaces which counts me out.

Eeek.... do we all need to state we are not touting for work when we enter into a great debate?

:D

d

sysops

1st June 2010, 21:14

Many many people have asked me to work for them on the forum and only one ex member has formed an alliance with me.:)

Afraid your sites would not come under the heading of what I would term a viable proposition owing to lack of meat.

Earl

Oh do give it up Earl - playing hard to get is the oldest trick in the book.

sirearl

1st June 2010, 21:20

Eeek.... do we all need to state we are not touting for work when we enter into a great debate?

:D

d

Oh I think its fair comment after Sysops was under the impression I might be looking for work.

And yes its a good idea to state you are not taking work on as the PM box gets a bit filled and one has to gently explain that one is not in a position to take on anymore work.

Earl

UKSBD

1st June 2010, 21:23

I would say the biggest problem with optimising an already established, doing well site, is it means you have to be a little more careful about pushing the google webmaster guidelines, unless it is made clear to the site owner about the risks and the site owner is prepared to take the risks.

What annoys me most about some SEO's is they gamble with other peoples livelihoods, if everything is working they are great guys and take all the plaudits. If something goes wrong, they just move on to someone elses site.

RedEvo

1st June 2010, 21:23

What a shame. It was a decent thread for a while there.

d

sysops

1st June 2010, 21:24

1. Are you savvy enough about seo to be able to realise an seos shortcomings and from that ensure that you just get the best they deliver then cut them short?

2. Are you savvy enough to be able to decide what is missing from your seo picture to then choose the best seo candidate to deliver that particular aspect of the work and once that's done move onto the next missing ingredient?

I don't know. I think so, but I can't say for certain. However, it does take time (a couple of months at least) before I get a feel for the work the SEO is doing.

Just to throw a bit of a spanner in the works, are you positive that the on site optimisation is maxed to best effect as I have found that in my experience it is often the subtleties of the on site work that can take a well performing site and turn it into a great site.
Ray

Well, again, I couldn't say that every one of our sites is perfect, but the vast majority of improvements suggested by SEOs over the years have been carried out.

sirearl

1st June 2010, 21:31

I would say the biggest problem with optimising an already established, doing well site, is it means you have to be a little more careful about pushing the google webmaster guidelines, unless it is made clear to the site owner about the risks and the site owner is prepared to take the risks.

Although I agree I would never take the risk with an established site of pushing the envelope and would not advise an owner to do so.

In general I would say its harder to get a greater percentage increase of visitors to an established site than a fairly young site.

but again horses for courses.

Earl

Tin

1st June 2010, 21:43

Eeek.... do we all need to state we are not touting for work when we enter into a great debate?

:D

d

Not at all, I was simply stating where I was in the scheme of things:)

UKSBD

1st June 2010, 21:45

Although I agree I would never take the risk with an established site of pushing the envelope and would not advise an owner to do so.

Yes, but that could be Sysops problem.
If he is only giving the SEO's 6 months and telling them not to abuse the webmaster guidelines, he is effectively tying their hands together.

This is why I don't do optimising for anyone else, I won't push the guidelines with someone elses site, (without them knowing the possible consequences) where as some other SEO's wouldn't care.

Faevilangel

1st June 2010, 21:46

Well, again, I couldn't say that every one of our sites is perfect, but the vast majority of improvements suggested by SEOs over the years have been carried out.

No site is ever perfect, there is always something to be improved so there is always work to be done...

sirearl

1st June 2010, 22:12

Yes, but that could be Sysops problem.
If he is only giving the SEO's 6 months and telling them not to abuse the webmaster guidelines, he is effectively tying their hands together.

Well in the case of Sysops sites there is still a lot of milage to go using whiter than white SEO.

But I would agree with him about not abusing googles guidlines,not so sure on the 6 month deadline.?

The dark side in general should only be used when there is nothing to lose .IMHO.

Earl

UKSBD

1st June 2010, 22:23

I'm not talking dark, I'm talking grey.

here's the scenario;
Stuck in 6th position, want to be top 2 for competitive phrase.
All the onsite stuff is done well, an assesment of 5 sites above you show they have far better backlinks and networks than you.

Obvious advice to the client is you need some good quality backlinks to which the client asks,

"but isn't it against the google guidelines to deliberatley try to manipulate results by getting links?"

To which your answer is,

"well it is technically, but if you want top 2 it's up to you whether you take the risk or not"

RedEvo

2nd June 2010, 07:56

"but isn't it against the google guidelines to deliberatley try to manipulate results by getting links?"

To which you reply of course not. The whole point of the web is to link things together, it was why Sir Tim created it. Buying links to manipulate results is is against Google's guidelines, not simply the act of securing links.

d

UKSBD

2nd June 2010, 08:21

Any link gained to manipulate pagerank is against the guidlines, which is why it is a grey area.

Let's face it, if it is an old, established, already optimised site, chances are virtually all natural links should have already been obtained.

Like it or not all the sites above the site in the rankings will be using link building campaigns, it is up to the owner of the site if he wants to take the risk of doing similar, or is happy to just stay down in position 7 or 8.

To rephrase slightly my previous post

You advise them they need some quality links, to which they reply
"how do we get these"
and the answer is,

"The best way to get other sites to create relevant links to yours is to create unique, relevant content that can quickly gain popularity in the Internet community. The more useful content you have, the greater the chances someone else will find that content valuable to their readers and link to it"

or

"We set up a subtle link campaign and obtain some quality links which will shortcut the above"

RedEvo

2nd June 2010, 08:34

Any link gained to manipulate pagerank is against the guidlines, which is why it is a grey area.

Really? Is that what you think?

d

UKSBD

2nd June 2010, 08:49

http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=66356

Examples of link schemes can include:

"Links intended to manipulate PageRank"

RedEvo

2nd June 2010, 08:59

Context is everything my friend. The title of the piece you have quoted?

Link Schemes.

d

UKSBD

2nd June 2010, 09:36

Are you saying gaining a link with the intention of manipulating page rank is ok if it isn't part of a link scheme :)

RedEvo

2nd June 2010, 09:52

Are you saying gaining a link with the intention of manipulating page rank is ok if it isn't part of a link scheme :)

Who asks for links to manipulate pagerank? You ask for links to share your content, generate traffic and improve rankings. Rankings are not dependent on PageRank. Links are then given on merit i.e. if your site measures up you gain a link from the link curator. This is best practice and is endorsed by the search engines, it's called merit based link building and it's not a scheme. ;)

See the quote here (http://www.ericward.com/) endorsed by Matt Cutts.

d

craigc0302

2nd June 2010, 12:44

sirearl

2nd June 2010, 12:54

There's no silver bullet with SEO (and to repeat myself - except for short lived schemes and black hat).

d

Of course there is a silver bullet in SEO.

Its called assesment which give one the ability to only choose projects that will succeed.

No different to market research,but for websites.

Earl

JElder

2nd June 2010, 13:04

...This is best practice and is endorsed by the search engines, it's called merit based link building and it's not a scheme. ;)...

Have to agree with this - quality, totally White Hat links are ones where the intention is to drive natural traffic. Links on sites related,but not competitive (usually), links from blogs reviewing your products or services, links from suppliers/manufacturers who's products you stock. All these will get natural traffic - AND boost your relevancy for the related terms.

Back to the original topic, there are always some ways to boost a sites rankings, but it's not in a static context. Your competitors are likely doing the same thing (either intentionally or 'accidentally'). Google algorithms change, the number of searches for a term goes up and down as things go in and out of fashion.

This is where is is tricky - maintaining your traffic may be a good result if the overall searches have dropped (you are getting a higher % of the overall traffic) whereas an increase of 10% is poor if overall searches have doubled. You also have to allow for country specific searches, and other effects - you may get less traffic, but more from the local area as the search engines get better (hence the comments about conversions being more important)

Specific ranking for a specific keyword is becoming less and less important as personalised search increases, and the rapidly expanding mobile internet changes the way people search. If you increase your sales/advertising revenue, etc that's the only real measure.

Ali-v-8

2nd June 2010, 13:08

Two things
More traffic doesn't mean more business. (it can help)
I have trebled the sales on a website but the traffic has only increased by 32%

What is the logic behind not want the conversions chestnut?

sysops

2nd June 2010, 13:11

More traffic doesn't mean more business. (it can help)

More traffic from the same demographic does mean more sales.

I have trebled the sales on a website but the traffic has only increased by 32%

Wow, that's amazing.

What is the logic behind not want the conversions chestnut?

I've already explained this several times, and I'm getting a little tired of this thread.

GNU

2nd June 2010, 13:14

Two things

I have trebled the sales on a website but the traffic has only increased by 32%

Nice work :)

sirearl

2nd June 2010, 13:16

More traffic from the same demographic does mean more sales.

Wow, that's amazing.

I've already explained this several times, and I'm getting a little tired of this thread.

Agreed.:eek::D

Try asking Tesco how they would view having to sell twice as much to 50% less customers.;)

Earl

UKSBD

2nd June 2010, 13:34

Have to agree with this - quality, totally White Hat links are ones where the intention is to drive natural traffic. Links on sites related,but not competitive (usually), links from blogs reviewing your products or services, links from suppliers/manufacturers who's products you stock. All these will get natural traffic - AND boost your relevancy for the related terms.

The OP was talking about an existing, well established, well optimised site, one would hope all of the above has already (and is still) being/been done.
My impression was he was talking about going to the next level.

Mystro

2nd June 2010, 15:43

Just my two penny's worth,

If the fact that more traffic = More sales, then why not keep increasing Adwords spend, again would depend on what market your in, but if traffic does = sales then this would be the most viable route.

Seo is great but if you have been burnt a few times over the last few years how much time have you wasted and who says its not going to happen again, or even Search engines can change the algo's and your back to square one again...

sysops

2nd June 2010, 15:45

If the fact that more traffic = More sales, then why not keep increasing Adwords spend, again would depend on what market your in, but if traffic does = sales then this would be the most viable route.

Because in the sectors in which we operate, the cost per visitor via Adwords is quite a bit higher than the cost per natural search visitor.

Seo is great but if you have been burnt a few times over the last few years how much time have you wasted and who says its not going to happen again, or even Search engines can change the algo's and your back to square one again...

Are you suggesting I just quit?

sirearl

2nd June 2010, 15:51

Just my two penny's worth,

If the fact that more traffic = More sales, then why not keep increasing Adwords spend, again would depend on what market your in, but if traffic does = sales then this would be the most viable route.

That possibly is the way sites selling high value,high profit products work.

Mortgage brokers are prepared to pay £11 plus per click.

But for those flogging £1.99 painted mugs I can see a few problems.

Earl

deniser

2nd June 2010, 16:02

Interesting question which I've been thinking about all afternoon.

I couldn't find your site (the one I usually find quite easily) when I googled it just now.

Mystro

2nd June 2010, 16:15

Are you suggesting I just quit?[/quote]

Indeed not, just offering a alternative, i pay 18p per click when some of my competitors pay over £1.20 per click, a good PPC expert im sure coupled in with a New seo could help in both parts

Ps have you seen this thread http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=158264

Good luck with whatever you choose to do, im sure you will sort it one way or another

Paul