£480 per day for SEO

sarasorrento

Free Member
Jul 1, 2008
133
8
After evaluating a number of potential web developers I am about to select the company that will build my new website/e-commerce platform.

Within their project costs there is a fixed cost for SEO,PPC,CPO strategy and implementation. Then a rolling monthly charge of £960/month (or if I prefer, £480 per day) for on-going SEO projects/campaigns.

I need your opinion on this monthly charge or daily rate......

Is two days work a month sufficient to get me consistently highly ranked? And is the charge per day reasonable?

Or put the other way around what should I be expecting for £960 a month for the next 12 months?

Sara
 
I am not fishing for work but if I had to quote for a medium saturated market - I know for a fine fact, we can offer you a rate at least 40% cheaper on the day rate and I would need to negotiate a monthly rate depending on your market. I know of personally two individuals who have the credibility to charge over £500 per day and I would imagine for the individuals you would be paying for would not be of the same caliber at all. As Fisicx mentioned, the chances are they offer a SEO service on the sideline of website development and would either sub contract it away or have an in-house specialist who is a programmer and has touched upon SEO (Based on my experience)

Let me know how you get on ;) - Would love to know the company by the way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: tech365
Upvote 0
It all depends on the keywords, the size of the competition, the quality of the site and so on.

It may be that you would be better off spending nothing on SEO and investing in PPC.

It's one of those piece of string questions. But I wouldn't use the same people to build the site and do the SEO.

And it's possible that you could spend all that money and still not be ranked.
 
Upvote 0
How can you say that when you have absolutely no idea of what the SEO company is or who is behind it? :|

Because the individuals who have the creditability of charging £500 per day will not be working on a project being valued at under £1000 per month. Day rate is normally bloated to generate a rolling monthly contract.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0
After evaluating a number of potential web developers I am about to select the company that will build my new website/e-commerce platform.

Within their project costs there is a fixed cost for SEO,PPC,CPO strategy and implementation. Then a rolling monthly charge of £960/month (or if I prefer, £480 per day) for on-going SEO projects/campaigns.

I need your opinion on this monthly charge or daily rate......

Is two days work a month sufficient to get me consistently highly ranked? And is the charge per day reasonable?

Or put the other way around what should I be expecting for £960 a month for the next 12 months?

Sara

IMO nope. Day rate might be ok... not going to comment on that. But 2 days work just isn't enough for a competitive market... If the market isn't competitive then £1000 per month is too high.

Do they have some excellent showcase results they can show you?
Can they show you before and after revenue for clients?

What is your business?? If we know your generic keywords we can give an opinion on the toughness of the market and advise from there.
 
Upvote 0
I need your opinion on this monthly charge or daily rate......

Is two days work a month sufficient to get me consistently highly ranked? And is the charge per day reasonable?

Or put the other way around what should I be expecting for £960 a month for the next 12 months?
You really need to be asking the supplier for a breakdown of what they will be doing to earn that money. It could be overkill, or it could end up not being enough, depending on how competitive an area you are targeting.

A breakdown might also reveal that you are not just paying for manpower, but also for paid links, paid ads etc to get traffic, i.e. costs.

As part of your due diligence (buyer beware etc), you also need to contact their clients who are in a similar position to you, in a similarly competitive industry, and ask them whether the supplier was worth it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You will need to provide more info.

What are you getting for the fixed cost SEO? Strategy and implementation sound a bit lofty. Most SEO for SMEs doesn't have much strategy - they just roll out the same strategy each time. Keyword research and putting keywords on a page sounds more like it. I used to do this at an hourly rate, but setting a ballpark of the most they would like to spend on it, thus I could work the whole site into their "budget", but not end up having to work for less than I am happy to do so.

Again, what are you getting for your monthly fee? The £480 / day OR £960 a month sounds dubious to me on the surface. Essentially it sounds like snake-oil-esque sales to me. The monthly deal sounds much better, so people are more likely to go for this. But what is the difference?

Also, £480 / day is a good sum. Do you have any idea what that is going on? If this is purely for man hours, this must be quite a serious agency you are talking for? Or is this £480 a £240 paid link budget and £240 for the 30 minutes work it takes to get those paid links?

From the sound of your post, you seem a bit shaky in going with this. If you are not sure of the answers to the above questions, I would hold your horses and do some reading into SEO.

If you have quite a decent budget, it could also be worth getting someone to speak with for an hour or so who know what they are talking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sarasorrento
Upvote 0
Well...

Im completely against paying a company to do SEO as its something anyone can pretty much learn.
HOWEVER
IF they can proove to be valuable to you ( Ie: you make more money that you spend from the enhanced SEO you *may* get ) Then yes, pay for it.

I think its all down to how much *worth* it actually brings to your business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: david64
Upvote 0
lynxus: From what I understand anyone can learn how to do the basics of SEO, but to do it well takes experience and skill.

Or do you disagree?

From my standpoint, I prefer to pay someone to do a job well rather than one of my team (who is already busy enough) try to muddle through.

sara
 
  • Like
Reactions: GreatSEO
Upvote 0
lynxus: From what I understand anyone can learn how to do the basics of SEO, but to do it well takes experience and skill.

Or do you disagree?

Depends what your niche is and some people don't have the apptitude or technical knowledge to be much good. If you have enough to essentially pay £12,000 a year, that is the sort of level that it is probably worth hiring an SEO. Another option is to hire a Web dev. SEO, although most are not skilled enough to do both to a good standard.
 
Upvote 0
lynxus: From what I understand anyone can learn how to do the basics of SEO, but to do it well takes experience and skill.

Or do you disagree?

From my standpoint, I prefer to pay someone to do a job well rather than one of my team (who is already busy enough) try to muddle through.

sara

No I agree,
As I mentioned if you simply dont have the time or would rather just pay someone then your next question should be:

Is this cost effective? Ie: Do you make money back from spending it on SEO..
If they can get you 1000's of directed organic visitors daily or weekly and this is a good thing for your business then yes, go buy it.

Simply put, If I pay £1000 on SEO, I would expect it to give me £1001 or more in returned value for investment.

If you pay them money and you dont get any better organic results.. Is it worth it?

id ask for a free trial to see how well they do, Or for some case studies / client examples.
 
Upvote 0
To david64

Thanks for your post, I your comments are very helpful.

You are right, I need to get more detail of what I get for my money (and also understand more of the subject myself!!!).

We are in a very, very competitive market and the total on-line platform will be costing over £40k to design, set-up and implement. And on top of that the on-going costs such as SEO.

Sara
 
Upvote 0
So perhaps it would be better to spend all that money on marketing rather than go head to head with the competition.

If is is a competitive as you suggest then you can bet the competition will be spending just as much as you on SEO which means because you may have to spend even more to beat them.

On the other hand, going for something a bit more long tail maybe far more lucrative and far cheaper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RevaxMedia
Upvote 0
Hmm £1k per month for a competitive market is cheap IMO. How do you define competitive in this context Sara? In terms of SEO "highly competitive" would mean your keywords had a minimum of 20-40 million competing pages, quite a few of which take SEO seriously and do it well.

Low competition would be anything under the 5 million mark and average competition would be between low and high (captain state the obvious strikes again...).

I suspect if you're looking at £40k for a website build, it's going to be bigger than a 10 page website. ;) How many pages are we talking about here and what kind of website - information, forums, blogs, ecommerce (shopping cart), review website, etc?

Monthly spend on SEO should really go towards regular reviews of the performance as well and not just link building and if you are indeed in a competitive market with a fairly heavy hitter of a website (and presumably an additional marketing budget?) then regular reviews are a must.

Also worth keeping in mind although there's a whole host of morons who will pipe up and say SEO is easy do it yourself and don't pay anything - the reality is that proper SEO for a decent size website (thousands of pages +) is vastly more complicated than the simple process of keyword research, on page optimisation and link building (which is what many people think "is" SEO). Eg you need to carefully plan and manage the site's architecture to aid indexing and ranking and that in itself is a complex process which isn't discussed that much publicly.

The danger you are facing with a largish site is the same danger of asking for help on forums - the person managing your SEO (or offering you advice) could very well have achieved results for smaller sites (where you don't have to think or even know about big site SEO issues), but that doesn't mean they can do what you need them to do.

That's all assuming that your site is large though! But in my experience, regardless of how competitive the market is, if you have a £40k build budget then there's no reason you can't get a decent foothold. It's all down to your SEO and my gut is telling me you've been underpriced at £1k a month and might not get results from it. You should definitely get more details about their SEO experience - examples of similar sized sites they've got ranking for similarly competitive keywords. Also get clarification on how they source links.

Size matters in SEO! ;) £1k a month link building can be great for a small or medium site but do nothing for a large site.

Scott
 
Upvote 0
After evaluating a number of potential web developers I am about to select the company that will build my new website/e-commerce platform.

Within their project costs there is a fixed cost for SEO,PPC,CPO strategy and implementation. Then a rolling monthly charge of £960/month (or if I prefer, £480 per day) for on-going SEO projects/campaigns.

I need your opinion on this monthly charge or daily rate......

Is two days work a month sufficient to get me consistently highly ranked? And is the charge per day reasonable?

Or put the other way around what should I be expecting for £960 a month for the next 12 months?

Sara

That fee will be fine depending on how much work they will be able to deliver for you and also how from your end it is worth remembering you have to spend it to make it.

All I would say to yourself is, can you tolerate a loss? and do you have a contingency if it doesn't quite go to plan?
 
  • Like
Reactions: david64
Upvote 0
You really need to be asking the supplier for a breakdown of what they will be doing to earn that money. It could be overkill, or it could end up not being enough, depending on how competitive an area you are targeting.

A breakdown might also reveal that you are not just paying for manpower, but also for paid links, paid ads etc to get traffic, i.e. costs.

But what good will a breakdown be? If the op could understand the breakdown they would be doing their own seo?

If i was an seo i would never offer a breakdown. What if you find one good link which propels them a good few places, all the op would think is i paid x amount for one link... I can't see how it is feasible to break down.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0
To david64

Thanks for your post, I your comments are very helpful.

You are right, I need to get more detail of what I get for my money (and also understand more of the subject myself!!!).

We are in a very, very competitive market and the total on-line platform will be costing over £40k to design, set-up and implement. And on top of that the on-going costs such as SEO.

Sara

Who decided it is a very competative market?

And is it also a profitable market?

Earl
 
  • Like
Reactions: RadiusBPO
Upvote 0
You should better collect some SEO quotes from other companies as well. This way you can compare all the amount of efforts and results quoted to you.

Also, £480 / day (£60 per hour is on higher side as I believe).You can get much cheaper rates for SEO efforts.

Considering that SEO does not give results instantly 2 days (16 hours) of work a month is too less. Even if you divide it into 30 days (1/2 hour a day is way too small).
 
Upvote 0
Is this cost effective? Ie: Do you make money back from spending it on SEO..
If they can get you 1000's of directed organic visitors daily or weekly and this is a good thing for your business then yes, go buy it.

The problem is you don't know if you will make that back until you have tried it. Only option is PPC, for which you would need a site.

We are in a very, very competitive market and the total on-line platform will be costing over £40k to design, set-up and implement. And on top of that the on-going costs such as SEO.

At that sort of price tag, I would look at getting a permanent employee as one possible option. You will, of course, need someone with a broad skill-set.

One of the problems with agencies is they have high over-heads, lights, internet, phones, receptionists - and as their client you have to cover all of it, so prices are highly inflated over the actual work you want doing. The breakdown could be something like:

£150 - mean wages for developers, designers, SEOs etc.
£150 - utilities, rent, rates, technical costs, commodities, admin staff
£50 - management's cut

Also a lot of agencies are ruthless. Profit margins in web development are usually very low, SEO is variable. As such, it is more profitable short-term to not provide clients (who generally don't know much or anything about web dev.) much for their money. Having been under the bonnet in this game I have witnessed people being taken for a ride - such as being charged £20K for a site that cost about £800 to build; £180 a month for shared hosting, which shouldn't cost more than that a year; unbelievably lopsided equity deals.... You only have to look through the archives here to see the abuse.

My experience is also that a lot of MDs don't know much or anything about web development. This naturally affects what they produce and they can't even tell if they are hiring talented people. Their passion is making money. Whereas, MDs who are web developers are often passionate about making people the best site they can in their budget.

Further, my experience is that many web developers are bored and under-motivated. They have no interest in their conveyor belt of projects and so just bosh them out. When I was working in this field, I was most productive when I was dedicated working on two sites, with which I had carte blanche across the board. I was creative, independent and motivated and they are still the best sites I have worked on.

Further still, selling online is a hard nut to crack. The market is saturated with people with £300-3000 online stores selling stock which they often don't have. People see it as an easy money maker, but it's not. Even with SEO, most of these sites will only convert 0.2-1% of visitors; averaging from a few sales a month to say 10 a day. The main issue with selling online is lack of awareness of your site. People don't like buying from sites they have never heard of.

When you have an agency, your needs for their skills are likely going to be translated into - "How can we make the most money from this?" Whereas if you have your own developer, their £ is covered, and your needs should be translated solely into how they can fulfil them.

The only eCom. sites I am aware of that generate enough money to run a dedicated business and provide a living to the owners are ones where the owner(s) are developer OR they have relevant web skills in-house.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
But what good will a breakdown be? If the op could understand the breakdown they would be doing their own seo?
There's a couple of reasons to ask for a breakdown:

1. To get an idea of the split between time and materials. A bit like a garage bill splits up parts and mechanic time spent. With that breakdown you might find that £960 per month is not purely for 2 man days of work at £480 per day, but it might include say a budget of £500 per month to spend on sponsored links, ads etc, with the remaining spent on manpower (which also then gives you a true idea of how much time is spent working and at what rate)

2. Having a breakdown of what work is done gives you measurable goal posts to check that work is actually being done. Whether that is new articles, updating product feeds, enhancing product and category descriptions, postings on social media networks, backlinks, etc. Without having any work to measure, they could be charging all that money and doing absolutely nothing.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
2. Having a breakdown of what work is done gives you measurable goal posts to check that work is actually being done. Whether that is new articles, updating product feeds, postings on social media, backlinks, etc. Without having any work to measure, they could be charging all that money and doing absolutely nothing.

Quantifying SEO is very poor practice IMO. Rankings, traffic and sales should be the main ways SEO clients measure their SEO's work.
 
Upvote 0
But the problem is that most (but not all) SEO work is purely about ranking. Very little consideration is made by SEO companies on the effectiveness of the actual site. It's quite possible to have a site/page on the #1 spot and get shedloads of visitors but not one conversion.

So I'd suggest a holistic approach is needed. Get the site optimised for the chosen products or services and test to see if it converts (using PPC). It's often the case that a hoped for killer product fails but the humble pot boiler is the one that makes all the money. Test and adjust and then start work on the link building.

One would hope that the 40K spend includes market testing. No point in launching a site that fails to convert.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Quantifying SEO is very poor practice IMO. Rankings, traffic and sales should be the main ways SEO clients measure their SEO's work.
Both areas can be measured, but only one area can be truly guaranteed, and that is stating what work will be carried out.

With new sites, it can also be more difficult to measure success in the first few months, and for a client not sure whether they've chosen the right supplier, they need other ways to measure this as an early warning mechanism.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Both areas can be measured, but only one area can be truly guaranteed, and that is stating what work will be carried out.

With new sites, it can also be more difficult to measure success in the first few months, and for a client not sure whether they've chosen the right supplier, they need other ways to measure this as an early warning mechanism.

But how does knowing an SEO is spending 4 hours per week generating A of X, B of Y and C of Z show that they have chosen the right SEO company to be doing their work??

Quantifying leads to complacency IMO and not above and beyond service.
 
Upvote 0
After evaluating a number of potential web developers I am about to select the company that will build my new website/e-commerce platform.

Within their project costs there is a fixed cost for SEO,PPC,CPO strategy and implementation.

I think the most important thing here, is the developer is constructing the site with SEO in mind form the onset - as set out within your costs (for plenty it's an after-thought)

Given this, it seems the site is going to take sometime to develop. There should be no pressure to take up there offer as yet, you could say, you'll come back to them when the site is somewhere nearer to completion. This in turn will give you some time to learn up on the basics of SEO, esp, onsite SEO as it's easier than offsite.
You may then be in a better position to judge yourself whether it's a viable offer.

I was surprised to see a prominent member I,Brian a well respected SEO/M, whom. sometime ago had a client pull out - thus, had room to take on one new client. He stipulated, the client must be prepared to have a min, budget 1K/mnth. Experience of these forums, could have made you aware, your £960/mnth may not be a good deal in comparison (of course I'm making comparison's with unknown's).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0
Having read all these extremely informative posts, I have to give you guys a bit more information than I have previously.

Also give myself a reality check - when I say "very competitive" it is of course relative. I suppose I am selling against 20 odd competitors. The market I am in is energy saving products for the domestic market.

The unique and totally differentiated advantage I have over my competitors is that I intend to sell on-line directly to my end-user customers, wheras my competitors are locked into selling through wholesalers. There are historic reasons why my competitors cannot sell to the end-user which I do not intend going into on the forum.

My on-line platform is therefore my primary route to market. I will have an easy to navigate and attractive web site, and easy to use e-commerce site, I will be using social media everyday, plus a daily blog. But further more......

I intend my site to be the UK's number on site where people will go to to get energy saving information, to educate themselves and to choose the correct product (technically). In other words it will be about 80% informing my customer base and 20% selling.

Over the next three years the site will be expanded to take in micro-generation products and other similar high-tech products.

My company is very well funded, and currently in an adjacent market sector, but this new venture will have the spirit of a start-up.

Can't (won't) give any more info about my business as I want to keep this business venture to myself!!:)

Exciting times ahead....

Sara
 
Upvote 0
But the problem is that most (but not all) SEO work is purely about ranking. Very little consideration is made by SEO companies on the effectiveness of the actual site. It's quite possible to have a site/page on the #1 spot and get shedloads of visitors but not one conversion.

So I'd suggest a holistic approach is needed. Get the site optimised for the chosen products or services and test to see if it converts (using PPC). It's often the case that a hoped for killer product fails but the humble pot boiler is the one that makes all the money. Test and adjust and then start work on the link building.

One would hope that the 40K spend includes market testing. No point in launching a site that fails to convert.


Hope that as already been completed before they have the website built :eek:
Conversions are the goal, i can get thousands of visitors a day, what good is that ?
 
Upvote 0
Hmm £1k per month for a competitive market is cheap IMO. How do you define competitive in this context Sara? In terms of SEO "highly competitive" would mean your keywords had a minimum of 20-40 million competing pages, quite a few of which take SEO seriously and do it well.

Low competition would be anything under the 5 million mark and average competition would be between low and high (captain state the obvious strikes again...).

Is this a true indication of difficulty? Surely there is much much more to it than that?

Please enlighten me I may be completely wrong
 
Upvote 0
Also give myself a reality check - when I say "very competitive" it is of course relative. I suppose I am selling against 20 odd competitors. The market I am in is energy saving products for the domestic market.
20 competitors isn't competitive. In fact a decent website and few high quality inbounds may be all you need to get on top. Which means you probably don't even need any monthly SEO work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: david64
Upvote 0
Also give myself a reality check - when I say "very competitive" it is of course relative. I suppose I am selling against 20 odd competitors. The market I am in is energy saving products for the domestic market.

...

I intend my site to be the UK's number on site where people will go to to get energy saving information, to educate themselves and to choose the correct product (technically). In other words it will be about 80% informing my customer base and 20% selling.
It is still difficult to say without further information of what part of the market you are targeting and who your competitors are.

You mention energy saving products, I ran a quick search on just those words and could see (natural results, ads, products) quite large companies targeting that area: Tesco, Uswitch, B&Q, ScrewFix, Amazon, Which, British Gas, etc as well as quite large information sites like energysavingtrust.org.uk. I'm also surprised moneysavingexpert isn't targeting that area too.

So depending on what you are targeting, you might find that £1K per month isn't going to be enough to get a new site number 1 in a competitive area, unless you are targeting a more niche area.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Is this a true indication of difficulty? Surely there is much much more to it than that?

Please enlighten me I may be completely wrong

There is much more to the application, but if you want an idea of what's involved in achieving SEO success from a brief appraisal of the situation, then market density & competitor's (SEO) strength is a good rule of thumb.

A keyword search could have 20 million competing pages, but if only the top 10 are optimised then I would constitute it as low competition. Similarly, another keyword might only have 10 million competing pages, but the top hundred are well optimsied and aggresively SEO'd - that would be higher competition.

You could argue a case for including search volume in this calculation - obviously you'd not want to waste your time targeting keywords that bring in no traffic. However the reality is there aren't any keywords that you won't aim for because they are too competitive as long as you have the resources to achieve rankings for them.

Scott
 
  • Like
Reactions: FunkyBears
Upvote 0
Would it not be best to get some other quotes as well?

It may well be very cheap, it may be expensive, depending on keywords.

We can provide you with another quote if you wish, or a free SEO review.
 
Upvote 0
Is two days work a month sufficient to get me consistently highly ranked? And is the charge per day reasonable?

Or put the other way around what should I be expecting for £960 a month for the next 12 months?

Sara

Sarah this stinks a bit of bullsh1t or some other unpleasant substence.

My experience is that SEO needs to be done intensively initially.

Do you really want to wait 1 year for some decent results?

Not saying the daily rate is wrong for a half decent SEO.

But the 2 days a month is outrageous for a new site.IMHO

I work intensively on a new site untill it has achieved what I want it to do ,then I can take it a bit more easy.

Earl
 
Upvote 0
Sarah this stinks a bit of bullsh1t or some other unpleasant substence.

My experience is that SEO needs to be done intensively initially.

Do you really want to wait 1 year for some decent results?

Not saying the daily rate is wrong for a half decent SEO.

But the 2 days a month is outrageous for a new site.IMHO

I work intensively on a new site untill it has achieved what I want it to do ,then I can take it a bit more easy.

Earl

You don't need a good seo working on a site around the clock though. The chances are 2 days to plan and implement things are fine - leave the other 29 days in the hands of the low paid link builders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OldWelshGuy
Upvote 0
I think the assumption here is that the SEO planning, research and implementation is done during the build phase (already paid for) and the 2 days a month is link building and ongoing support. 2 days a month is more than enough for that if the pre-launch stuff is done well.

Hell, you could go to a big agency and pay 3 times that and get some dumb@ss account manager doing "link building" for you. At least going the web dev agency route there's a good chance the site is properly optimised (technically optimised) already - the only question marks are the keyword research, content strategy and link building. And those really all depend on the market, budget, etc.
 
Upvote 0
You don't need a good seo working on a site around the clock though. The chances are 2 days to plan and implement things are fine - leave the other 29 days in the hands of the low paid link builders.

well that would depend on the competition for a site allied to the size of the site.

I look after a site with 110,000 pages and I suspect 2 days a month would not quite be enough.

As for low paid link builders,that would depend on the quality of there work remembering that 1 good link is worth a thousand mediocre links allied to google seems to be in the process of devaluing links at last.

Earl
 
Upvote 0

Latest Articles