Onsite SEO vs Offsite SEO

[Ali-v-8]

subdomains hosted on a different server are a great way of getting internal/external links.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Going to bump this thread due to a discussion I have with another member. He claims that onsite is on 15% of SEO. Who agrees and who disagrees.

 

[Matt121]

Going to bump this thread due to a discussion I have with another member. He claims that onsite is on 15% of SEO. Who agrees and who disagrees.

I would have to agree on this. You can only do so much SEO within your site.

 

[webgeek]

If on-page was NECESSARY then Grindstone could not have managed to get SEOMoz to rank tops for snuggie dog bed.

Also, the entire Google Bombing phenomenon shows that links alone can result in #1 rankings [miserable failure search leading to George Bush was a classic].

Is on-page optimisation important? Of course.

Is is necessary to do on-page optimisation in order to rank #1? No. There are many thousands of sites ranking one with minimal content, no content, poor content and definitely un-optimised content.

 

[Ali-v-8]

@webgeek - the Google bombing phenomenon is possible - but doesn't last anymore - And really doesn't help a client wanting to ethically remain at page one of Google.

@Matt121 With the new algorithm devaluing links and blog post and increasing emphasis on onsite would you really give your website only 15% of your attention.

 

[Chunkford]

Going to bump this thread due to a discussion I have with another member. He claims that onsite is on 15% of SEO. Who agrees and who disagrees.

For SEO probably. Links (or for a better word citations) is still at the core of the algo. It's just harder to get at with all the filters in place e.g. Ninja Pandas and kamikaze Penguins.

But, SEO isn't everything and turning your back on your site is just pure stupidity. I would much rather have a razor sharp site geared towards conversions that allows me to concentrate on all forms of traffic generation than to put all my efforts into building links.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Good way to put it - which seems to confirm Onsite before Offsite - there is no chicken and egg scenario.

 

[webgeek]

Funny how fleeting logic can be when things seem, rather than are proven, eh?

 

[Ali-v-8]

logically 5 x 7 will give you 35 - regardless of what you may or may not think you see.
Just because you are distracted by flashing dots doesn't men you should hazard a guess instead of walking the train of though for a reasonable conclusion.

Funny how fleeting logic can be when things seem, rather than are proven, eh?

 

[Tin]

He claims that onsite is on 15% of SEO. Who agrees and who disagrees.

Disagree completely. On lots of terms I've worked on it's quite straight forward to get top spots without any link work by working not only on the main landing page that's targeted for a term but on other pages within the domain. Other terms require a degree of link work after the on-site work has been completed.

There is (in my opinion) no clear way to be able to define any particular percentage of on-site or off-site work that's required in order to rank highly for a keyterm, each keyterm needs analysing in it's own right, the type and theme of any associated copy needs to be considered and then on-site optimisation applied fully. If rankings fall short of where they're required then there are options to push these and link work is one of them.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Thanks for your input Tin - I was feeling like this was one sided for a bit

 

[webgeek]

So, rather than everyone having 'wrong' answers, there are in fact many 'right' answers about the most appropriate mix of on-page vs link building efforts.

Ask a link builder, they'll say build links. Ask a copywriter, they'll say write copy.

As long as it works, and survives black and white animal updates/algorithm changes, then it's the right answer.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Ask an SEO and he will tell you focus on everything - Ask a good SEO and I will bet the answer would never be just 15% for on site - Ask a really great SEO with bags of experience and he will say Onsite Must be done first.

So, rather than everyone having 'wrong' answers, there are in fact many 'right' answers about the most appropriate mix of on-page vs link building efforts.

Ask a link builder, they'll say build links. Ask a copywriter, they'll say write copy.

As long as it works, and survives black and white animal updates/algorithm changes, then it's the right answer.

 

[webgeek]

Ask an SEO and he will tell you focus on everything - Ask a good SEO and I will bet the answer would never be just 15% for on site - Ask a really great SEO with bags of experience and he will say Onsite Must be done first.

LOL, well spoken by the one who is positioning himself as the really great SEO with bags of experience

Just try to avoid injury. I've been told that it's good to stretch a bit before extensive sessions of self-back-patting.

 

[Ali-v-8]

When your hot your hot

 

[Chunkford]

People talk about onsite & offsite but there is a 3rd part. Ray touched on it. Its the fundamental area so many overlook... research. Be it keywords, competition, analysis etc its the key area that feeds the other two.

So if you wanted to put percentages on it then 15% offsite, 15% onsite and 70% research

 

[webgeek]

 

[Ali-v-8]

Actually I agree that research takes a hell of a long time compared to the actual work carried out - But - you researching the work onsite and off site is still part of the process.

 

[terryuk]

I wouldn't put a definitive % on any SEO personally.. it's a like with those people who say something 15.08% anchor link distribution - it isn't reality

 

[OldWelshGuy]

People talk about onsite & offsite but there is a 3rd part. Ray touched on it. Its the fundamental area so many overlook... research. Be it keywords, competition, analysis etc its the key area that feeds the other two.

So if you wanted to put percentages on it then 15% offsite, 15% onsite and 70% research

Someone said that in 2006

 

[Ali-v-8]

OK - so king Research - was like henry the 8th and had Queen content, Queen Coding (metas/titles), Queen internal Linking and Queen layout who all had Prince Link and the Knights of the round Article table

Did we miss anyone

 

[terryuk]

OK - so king Research - was like henry the 8th and had Queen content, Queen Coding (metas/titles), Queen internal Linking and Queen layout who all had Prince Link and the Knights of the round Article table

Did we miss anyone

The 7 little dwarfs

 

[Ali-v-8]

Lets call them blog post

 

[OldWelshGuy]

And that woman who lived with them and claimed to be 'snow white'

 

[Ali-v-8]

GOOGLE - obviously - she lived board free and had them running around trying to please her

 

All business is about research as is SEO.

SEO is like a horse and carriage.

You can't have one without the other.

although one can sometimes if you are prepared to push the carriage.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Or ride the horse

 

[webgeek]

If you're riding that horse, better get a bayonet from Mitt Romney.

 

[Annoying Donkey]

SEO is like a horse and carriage.

SEO is|be like|not unlike|similar to|analogous to| a horse|donkey|mule and carriage|cart|conveyance|trap.

You guys need to get up to date. My SEO is like a Veyron... fast and luxurious... and blows the horse and cart brigade away...

 

[Ali-v-8]

ok - this is a case study fact - Site just gone live 1 day ago - 1 link from an post on an article wrote a month ago and one website check by woorank yesterday - two tweets and 2 facebook post. all this was done yesterday

website = www.nekosclera.co.uk
main keyword is - Black sclera contact lenses

If you take a look at the website you will see that i have added many differing keyword that are triggered by buying modes - such as cheapest or cheap.
Also added terms that are associated with these type of lenses (researched) such as "Demon eyes" and "supernatural"

search - cheapest Black sclera contact lenses - site is on page two already - serach - cheapest red sclera contact lenses - Site is page one.

so far this is is the products viewed since 7pm last night (this was set to 0 then)

Black Red Iris Sclera Contact Lenses 13 30.95%
Black Sclera Contact Lenses 11 26.19%
Black White Iris Sclera Contact Lenses 10 23.81%
Red Sclera Contact Lenses 8 19.05%

This website has now taken its first order (also it had to be done manually as payment gateway is still inactive)

My conclusion - if your onsite is done correct you only need a few links to get a niche website to page one (and it is for a number of terms) - especially if you onsite SEO is done well.

15% of concentration will not get you this type of result.
Ps this was done on OPencart - very good for SEO

Feel free to check this with who.is - for date url was registered.

 

[webgeek]

So far, so good

It would be nice to have a section with case studies / real world examples, since "proof" seems to be requested so many times when advice is given. Does seem to be an example of why keyword research and initial copy is worth the effort!

 

[Annoying Donkey]

My conclusion - if your onsite is done correct you only need a few links to get a niche website to page one (and it is for a number of terms) - especially if you onsite SEO is done well.

Not a valid conclusion from this test. How do you know the person who placed their order didn't post a link to the site from his/her PR10 authority site...?

You'd have to repeat the test for a virtually identical site where you build links only, leaving the on site alone and see which ranks better. You'd then have to thoroughly analyse the results to ensure that there are no other reasons to skew your conclusions. This sort of test needs to be repeated many times to try and eliminate any spurious factors.

And what happens when a competitor comes along and builds some strong links?

I don't think any SEO with half a brain will argue that good on site will get you a ranking, but there'd be plenty who will argue that a site with good on site can be beaten by a mediocre site with good links.

Adobe didn't do any on site for 'click here'

 

[Normansmith]

ok - this is a case study fact - Site just gone live 1 day ago - 1 link from an post on an article wrote a month ago and one website check by woorank yesterday - two tweets and 2 facebook post. all this was done yesterday

website = www.nekosclera.co.uk
main keyword is - Black sclera contact lenses

If you take a look at the website you will see that i have added many differing keyword that are triggered by buying modes - such as cheapest or cheap.
Also added terms that are associated with these type of lenses (researched) such as "Demon eyes" and "supernatural"

search - cheapest Black sclera contact lenses - site is on page two already - serach - cheapest red sclera contact lenses - Site is page one.

so far this is is the products viewed since 7pm last night (this was set to 0 then)

Black Red Iris Sclera Contact Lenses 13 30.95%
Black Sclera Contact Lenses 11 26.19%
Black White Iris Sclera Contact Lenses 10 23.81%
Red Sclera Contact Lenses 8 19.05%

This website has now taken its first order (also it had to be done manually as payment gateway is still inactive)

My conclusion - if your onsite is done correct you only need a few links to get a niche website to page one (and it is for a number of terms) - especially if you onsite SEO is done well.

15% of concentration will not get you this type of result.
Ps this was done on OPencart - very good for SEO

Feel free to check this with who.is - for date url was registered.

So was it 15% perspiration or Research ?
The test will be to see if it can rise further and stay there. If the research was thorough it will

 

[Ali-v-8]

Actually - the website has only been live for around 24hr
Please feel free to check the back links to this website out.
as I mentioned the link was posted on a facebook page, a quick woorank check (which creates a link), a url link within a comment on a previously written article.
My point was that minimal effort was put offsite yet this website is now page one for a selection of valid terms (2 orders now been placed).

Also in respone to this - I agree you can get a website to page one by pounding links at it - but - it wont stay there.

I don't think any SEO with half a brain will argue that good on site will get you a ranking, but there'd be plenty who will argue that a site with good on site can be beaten by a mediocre site with good links.

 

[Ali-v-8]

if i was to put a percentage on the work carried out i would say 60% onsite seo +research 20% social and 10% link

So was it 15% perspiration or Research ?
The test will be to see if it can rise further and stay there. If the research was thorough it will

 

[webgeek]

Also in respone to this - I agree you can get a website to page one by pounding links at it - but - it wont stay there.

Sorry, but this has been disproven a few hundred thousand times and is completely incorrect.

Sites can maintain rankings which have been created via quality backlinks.

 

[A Party Shop]

I'm obviously missing a trick here with the popularity of Black Sclera Contact Lenses as I see another seller of them, www. blackscleracontactlenses .co.uk ,was only set-up last month and there looks like plenty of interest on Google. As they're quite a bit dearer than other lenses I didn't think there would be much demand.

 

[Annoying Donkey]

Also in respone to this - I agree you can get a website to page one by pounding links at it - but - it wont stay there.

Whether it stays or not has more to do with the quality of the links than anything else.

Adobe hasn't had any difficulty staying put at number one for 'click here'.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Yes there is - if you look at the history of them they used to cost £200+ but the popularity of the increased because of vampire TV series and the Supernatural series. Halloween will be overrun by people buying them.
Just had message from owner - She is now out of stock till Monday.
20 unit sold today - Halloween is a great time for her

I'm obviously missing a trick here with the popularity of Black Sclera Contact Lenses as I see another seller of them, blackscleracontactlenses ,was only set-up last month and there looks like plenty of interest on Google. As they're quite a bit dearer than other lenses I didn't think there would be much demand.

 

[bennallick]

I express to all my clients from the get go that SEO, is built from the content they put on the site. My sites are indexed, and built using good code, but the traffic comes from the quality of the content.

Imagine the situation that the client has paid £600 for a fancy looking site, but leaves it for months with no updates.

Then imagine a crappy SEO site, but has unique content.

Which one will get more traffic?

It's a balance, like an AWESOME restaurant with no ads will still get custom through word of mouth etc etc.

But a crappy restaurant with bad food, but AWESOME ads may get initial custom, but the reputation will fade.

SEO is still important, it should be stable, but content will always kick ass!

People, will chat through other mediums like Twitter, Facebook so bad sites or good news spreads in other ways.