Needed: A SEO company review site

SEO's cannot guarantee #1 unless they know there is hardly any keyword competition for it. Even then it can take months.

A good SEO will know within reason whats possible for any given site.

Thats what we get paid for.

A good SEO will not take on a business that has no prospects.IMHO

 

[directmarketingadvice]

Human nature - people want #1 and will pay for it - it cant be guaranteed

It can be guaranteed. That's my point.

especially for high competing keywords - not without spending lot of 1000's
£'s (which customers dont want to spend) - so dodgy SEO says I'll do it, by not sticking to Google guidelines

OK, let's say, for the sake of argument, that you don't want to be a dodgy SEO... then what?

I presume you tell the client what they can reasonably expect for the money they wish to pay, right?

So, how does this prevent a guarantee being given? It might not be a guarantee for #1. It might be a guarantee for page 1.

SEO's cannot guarantee #1 unless they know there is hardly any keyword competition for it. Even then it can take months.

Surely any competent, experienced SEO can estimate the difficulty of ranking in the top 10 for a particular search phrase?... and roughly how long it will take?

Because, if they can't, how do they decide how much to charge a client?

And how do they know whether the client should expect success or failure?

Steve

 

[ukbf0001]

What do you mean by conversion rate?

Conversion Rate - As in how well people who see your product online actually end up buying it (which is the bottom line for most business). If you have a product which for example has been mentioned negatively on social media platforms (and lets say for example your product is actually a bit crap) - then no matter how high it ranks - it wont convert to a sale as well as a product you hear about from your mates on facebook etc.

 

[ukbf0001]

Surely any competent, experienced SEO can estimate the difficulty of ranking in the top 10 for a particular search phrase?... and roughly how long it will take?

Because, if they can't, how do they decide how much to charge a client?

And how do they know whether the client should expect success or failure?

Steve

If you have a webpage that's on page2 of Google for keyword 'x' and you want to get it to #1 page 1, then you need to be able to beat that #1 positioned webpage, you'll need more quality links for example, you'll need more 'likes', social links etc. You want know exactly how many backlinks that #1 webpage has and where they are coming from in order to beat them (although there is software available to help - eg seo spyglass ). Therefore you can only guesstimate, plus if that #1 webpage is still getting hundreds of new backlinks per week (plus other pointers) then you'll be playing catchup for a long time.

My other point was that if you as a SEO or business owner engage your customers where they 'hang out' in Social Media land as Matt Cutts puts it, then you can converse with potential customers directly.

Plus the point that 2 people in different parts of the country can search for the same keywords - and they will get different results - SERPs (search engine page results) is a continually flowing and changing arena - that's why it's truely impossible to prove. And one of the reasons that people should try and do their own SEO - in my opinion anyway, or perhaps offer a % per sale - that way everybody shares in the success - just a thought..

 

My other point was that if you as a SEO or business owner engage your customers where they 'hang out' in Social Media land as Matt Cutts puts it, then you can converse with potential customers directly.

I don't know anyone who hangs out in social media for the purpose of gaining business.

This may help you understand search engines a bit,and correct your misconception that its all about links.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNHR6IQJGZs&feature=player_embedded

 

[Poppy Design]

A UK based review system sounds a good idea to me...
Yes these things are open to the odd vindictive reviewer/competitor but on the whole, honest and real reviews should shine through especially if the review submitter has to register and confirm their business etc

I have come across various so called SEO experts in the past - yes while Google changes are often their line of excuse for falling ratings etc, they need to grow/adapt and update their procedures/methods of work to ensure they meet/keep up with Google's requirements.

I have come across SEO companies not even providing the basics ie not setting up Google Analytics, articles been written in India and passed off as UK etc!

It seems to me Google is going in the right direction, trying to list sites that are genuine and actually doing what they are listed for, in the right area etc

 

[directmarketingadvice]

If you have a webpage that's on page2 of Google for keyword 'x' and you want to get it to #1 page 1, then you need to be able to beat that #1 positioned webpage, you'll need more quality links for example, you'll need more 'likes', social links etc. You want know exactly how many backlinks that #1 webpage has and where they are coming from in order to beat them (although there is software available to help - eg seo spyglass ). Therefore you can only guesstimate, plus if that #1 webpage is still getting hundreds of new backlinks per week (plus other pointers) then you'll be playing catchup for a long time.

Then don't guarantee #1. Guarantee top 5, or top 10... or whatever you feel you can deliver.

If the prospect doesn't like that, he can walk.

It's not for him to decide what you guarantee. That's your decision.

Seriously, think about it, what's the alternative? Is the alternative that the client wants top spot, and only top spot, and you tell him you think you can get it... even though you have no idea whether you can?

And one of the reasons that people should try and do their own SEO - in my opinion anyway, or perhaps offer a % per sale

A % of increased organic sales is a guarantee of sorts. If you don't produce results, you don't get paid.

However, there are downsides to that - and, to a lesser extent the same downsides to making guarantees for PPC.

For example, most businesses are seasonal. If you start work as the business is becoming quieter, how do you calculate the net impact of your work?

Or, if a competitor comes along and offers the same products for less, the conversion rate goes down. You lose out because of something that has zero to do with your work.

Ideally you want to guarantee your work, and eliminate as many outside factors as possible.

(Which is why I guarantee my split-testing service, but not my PPC services - the former eliminates outside factors, the latter can't.)

Steve

 

[JonathanSEO]

In my humble opinion Social Media marketing / management / monitoring etc done well will get a better conversion as the level of trust is greater.

Conversion Rate - As in how well people who see your product online actually end up buying it (which is the bottom line for most business). If you have a product which for example has been mentioned negatively on social media platforms (and lets say for example your product is actually a bit crap) - then no matter how high it ranks - it wont convert to a sale as well as a product you hear about from your mates on facebook etc.

Still slightly confused as to what you are suggesting but are you saying social media marketing will yield a better return than SEO?

If so to say social media generates a better conversion rate than organic search (SEO) is pretty ludicrous.

Social media doesn't even play a part in the funnel for a lot of businesses / products.

There's plenty of websites getting a ton of negative noise on review sites and social sites every day yet they're turning over millions per year courtesy of their rankings alone.

 

[ChoosyReviews]

But looking at your site it is not fit for purpose.

You had a negative review for smart traffic posted in january which was followed by 4 positive reviews in ferbruary, two of which were posted on the same day, so it would seem your review system is being manipulated with lies..

There needs to be a review site where the reviews are evidence based.

Hi Massey,

While I do agree that a pattern of apparent abuse would not be remotely acceptable - unfortunately/fortunately you nor I can rule out them saying, "this reviewer is the 1% and people need to get a wider picture" so contact a handful of clients and say - "can you please leave your review too?"

I have access to the reviewers verifiable email addresses and can confirm that the reviews come from the companies themselves.

If there was a systematic attempt to bury bad reviews - that would be very different - there is a page elsewhere on the site that talks a little about this.

Unfortunately there is no perfect solution - we're just trying to be fair to the reader and company in question. A good example would be the reviews that seem to be genuine for a number of reasons and are challenged - we leave notes to alert the customer that complainants for a company are not non-existent - just defamation laws seem stacked against consumers when it comes to review sites (companies want to utilise/abuse them) - sometimes for good reason - sometimes abused.

So, I get what you're saying - I just don't fully agree.

 

[ChoosyReviews]

I think that the TopSEOs model has the potential of being excellent in terms of if they did what they say they do - visit premises, investigate client results, etc.

The reality of their 'fairness' however is very different as most SEO people know.

That type of homework is time consuming - in fact any type of homework is time consuming - I know that probably one of the biggest review sites in the UK have de-indexed their page for a certain SEO company due to the hassle they have to go to in terms of verifying them when they receive ANY reviews about them. The bad reviews are challenged by the company and the good reviews are challenged by previously 'ripped off' customers.

 

[Suzuki]

I think that the TopSEOs model has the potential of being excellent in terms of if they did what they say they do - visit premises, investigate client results, etc.

Here is the problem though - there is no money in doing it properly. Its far more profitable to simply pretend to be impartial, and then sell ranking spots with no checks whatsoever. Sure its not even legal to do this, but the chances of anything happening to them are slim to none.

 

[commodityconsultant]

Some of these comments are brilliant.

I put the phone down to any SEO-Seller who says: "And in {amount of time} you'll be number ONE in GOOGLE!"

We can't buy top #1 position in Google even seo companies can't sdo because they can make just their efforts like hit & trial.

Your experience to choose companies seem to be bad but don't worry.I have best solution for you.

 

[jdluckhurst]

The writing has been on the wall for years. I know because I've had conversations during that time with an SEO friend where we both predicted google would do this.

The writing has indeed been on the wall, and a very very conspicuous one. Google's Webmaster Guidelines are there, along with Matt Cutts who gives regular warnings. The rules of SEO are no secret and people who spam cannot deny that they know that what they are doing is not quite right.

This website would be a good idea but as other have said, it would just be littered with fake reviews.

I agree - we've had nothing but bad experiences with out-of-house SEO agencies.

My friend asked me to look at the performance of his chosen out of house agency over a year.
Ranking decreased, no change to on-page factors, I discovered just 2 new backlinks from less than credible websites and the chosen keyword they wanted to target had <10 traffic potential.

All of this charged at £2,000 per month, with an additional £1,000 report summary per month.

Wonderful.

That is a hell of a lot to pay for a report, especially when it is probably automatically generated! This is not just you but I have conversations with people who have been spammed by SEO's and the stigma surrounding the SEO industry is something I have to fight against on an almost daily basis. However, I do say to all of them that they need to DEMAND monthly reports and for the SEO agency to articulate the work that they will be doing. Too many people are happy to pay, wash their hands of any responsibility and then complain when they get scammed. Sure, the SEO company should be doing good work, but to not demand information on the work that is being done is naive.

I got called up by someone trying to set up a industry accreditation thing which would be awesome, but until SEO is regulated word of mouth is definitely the best way to find an SEO agency and even then you should not just pay and forget about it. Find out exactly what they are doing!

Sorry, rant over.....

 

[cjd]

The SEO 'industry' is a silly joke all on its own. It's the largest pile of snake oil since Mormonism.

It it actually cared, it would have a trade body, develop some standards and a code of practice and grow up.

A barge pole isn't long enough.

 

[Annoying Donkey]

However, I do say to all of them that they need to DEMAND monthly reports and for the SEO agency to articulate the work that they will be doing.

Why? It wouldn't help most clients, as they wouldn't understand what they were getting anyway. A proper SEO proposal with have agreed measurement of success in the client's terms, not some canned meaningless report.

Too many people are happy to pay, wash their hands of any responsibility and then complain when they get scammed. Sure, the SEO company should be doing good work, but to not demand information on the work that is being done is naive.

One assumes you get detailed reports from your mechanic, your plumber, your accountant, on exactly what they are doing...?

The emphasis on reports gets clients comparing on meaningless factors such as the number of links built, or the number of directory entries. Most clients couldn't tell if a link is good or not. Indeed, most SEOs wouldn't agree if a link was good or not...

...word of mouth is definitely the best way to find an SEO agency and even then you should not just pay and forget about it.

I agree on word of mouth, depending, of course, on the mouth

 

[MASSEY]

Why? It wouldn't help most clients, as they wouldn't understand what they were getting anyway. A proper SEO proposal with have agreed measurement of success in the client's terms, not some canned meaningless report.

One assumes you get detailed reports from your mechanic, your plumber, your accountant, on exactly what they are doing...?

I wish business was that simple. Unfortunately people want to see detailed lists and detailed information about everything you are doing for them these days when it comes to parting with money. Even if people don't understand what it is that you are doing for them, they still want to see some sort of detail so that they have a rough idea about what they are paying for. Any SEO who takes money off someone should be giving them a rough idea of what it is they are going to do for them..

The emphasis on reports gets clients comparing on meaningless factors such as the number of links built, or the number of directory entries. Most clients couldn't tell if a link is good or not. Indeed, most SEOs wouldn't agree if a link was good or not...

Yes, most reports are meaningless mumbo jumbo nonsense - but you should be giving the client something, even if they don't understand what you are giving them.

I'm sure you would be quick to argue with a Mechanic who decided to change all of your spark plugs when you only went in to change your tyres.

 

[jdluckhurst]

Why? It wouldn't help most clients, as they wouldn't understand what they were getting anyway.

Yes, I suppose my main mistake was in the assumption that owners would know something about SEO. The crux of it is that (in my opinion) I do not think it takes a genius to grasp the basic theory of SEO and understanding Google's stance on spam. As such, I do think that owners cannot be oblivious to SEO and just pay someone to do it. In another industry this would be fine, but because of the damage that can be done by poor quality work and the stigma surrounding the SEO industry it requires a little bit of 'monitoring' if you will. Especially when you are paying a hefty retainer.

It just shouldn't be this way but unfortunately that is the state of the industry!

Yes, most reports are meaningless mumbo jumbo nonsense - but you should be giving the client something, even if they don't understand what you are giving them.

SEO's should be giving reports in plain English. But I agree, clients need something if only for peace of mind. Most people can figure out what work has been done.

 

[Annoying Donkey]

Yes, most reports are meaningless mumbo jumbo nonsense - but you should be giving the client something, even if they don't understand what you are giving them.

A box of chocolates might be more appealing and more useful...

I'm sure you would be quick to argue with a Mechanic who decided to change all of your spark plugs when you only went in to change your tyres.

If the spec says 'change the tyres', then yes, but if the spec says 'do a service', then no.

The specification/proposal is what defines what the client gets and consequently how success is measured.

As such, I do think that owners cannot be oblivious to SEO and just pay someone to do it.

But most do, because they don't understand SEO. Even those who say they understand and demand reports rarely do know what they're talking about. Reports simply pile up unread. The car mechanic industry doesn't have that good a reputation, but just try to get them to offer a detailed plain english report...

SEO's should be giving reports in plain English. But I agree, clients need something if only for peace of mind. Most people can figure out what work has been done.

And how to you rate the value of a link or a guest post in plain english? In many cases success can only be measured over time, which makes reports at best misleading.

People don't buy links or articles or whatever..., they buy something else, usually more customers. Few clients require a report to figure out they are getting more enquiries...

 

[jdluckhurst]

Reports simply pile up unread.

And how to you rate the value of a link or a guest post in plain english? In many cases success can only be measured over time, which makes reports at best misleading.

People don't buy links or articles or whatever..., they buy something else, usually more customers. Few clients require a report to figure out they are getting more enquiries...

"Reports go unread".....and people are surprised when they get to 9 months, 12 months or whatever timescale and nothing has been done. My point is that reports SHOULD be read, a close eye should be kept on the SEO and they should understand what is being done. SEO's should not be scamming clients but there are enough people out there happy to do so. Because of this, clients should be proactive in making sure that they do not get scammed.

To say that they buy enquiries is true, but that is an end product. Clients should make sure that hey reach that end product without wasting money.

In regards to the mechanic analogy....if I was worried about them not doing the work I was paying them to do then I would make sure that they did explain the work to me. After all, i am the paying client and have a right to know.

 

[william04]

My point is that reports SHOULD be read, a close eye should be kept on the SEO and they should understand what is being done. SEO's should not be scamming clients but there are enough people out there happy to do so. Because of this, clients should be proactive in making sure that they do not get scammed.
.

There are lots of examples where SEO resource perform outstanding with active participation of their clients in strategy planning and result orientation. The New ways and possibilities come when people work together.

 

[sirearl]

It it actually cared, it would have a trade body, develop some standards and a code of practice and grow up.

.

You mean like the banks,telecom,insurance,law,energy,franchise,insurance,estate agent companies do.

Caveat emptor.

 

[Annoying Donkey]

My point is that reports SHOULD be read, a close eye should be kept on the SEO and they should understand what is being done.

This is were we disagree. If the client is to learn SEO, he might as well employ someone and train them. Of course this would take a while, possibly years dependant on how much money is thrown at it. The whole reason for hiring an outside company is to make use of years of experience, without that up front training cost.

Most clients couldn't care less about SEO, rankings, links, syndication or guest posts. So it's pointless for the client to measure or even be aware of such things. Measuring what the client feels is important is far more reassuring for the client, than some meaningless report.

 

[jdluckhurst]

This is were we disagree..

Well it looks like we'll have to agree to disagree.

Im not saying they should become experts but they should know the basics. Either way, I think the crux of this whole debate is that SEO's should stop spamming and should just do the work that they say they will do, then sustainable results will come and there will be no need for this discussion!

 

[cjd]

You mean like the banks,telecom,insurance,law,energy,franchise,insurance,estate agent companies do.

Caveat emptor.

You're right, best not to even try.

That way you can disappear without trace, like banks, telecoms, insurance, energy franchise, estate agents and even insurance x2. Who the hell uses them these days?

Don't be a dick, start organising - there's a sustainable industry there somewhere, just at least try to be respectable.

 

[sirearl]

Don't be a dick, start organising - there's a sustainable industry there somewhere, just at least try to be respectable.

Afraid human nature beats respectable hands down.

 

[GodOfSEO]

A lot of SEO cowboys out there.

I'd find a reputable one via looking at their standing in the industry. Tripadvisor for SEO is a bit shabby, and more than likely the cowboys will exploit it via hurting their competitors feedback and increasing their own ratings.

 

[zigojacko]

There is a service that already does exactly this. For all web industries.

It's called TopSEO's and is riddled with controversy, the top ranks are lined with those that have the fattest wallets and is gamed like there is no tomorrow.

 

[APOS Recruitment]

But there are good SEO guys on here I assume.....

 

[zigojacko]

But there are good SEO guys on here I assume.....

Sure, there's probably about 6 on here that I know of and would recommend.

 

[APOS Recruitment]

Who would you recommend please zigojacko? PM me if easier.

Cheers

 

[zigojacko]

Who would you recommend please zigojacko? PM me if easier.

Cheers

I was attempting to get their usernames but this heap of junk forum software is useless at letting me find anyone and I can't remember who now or what their usernames are.

Here's a start though.

@Tin
@OldWelshGuy
@RedEvo

There's plenty of other members I'd recommend for other services but you specifically specified 'SEO' so these guys all know their SEO.

I'd add myself to that list also but that's probably not great forum etiquette. There's loads of posts on this forum though with recommendations for me.

(I'd come back and edit my list as soon as I remember the others but I'll be locked from editing this post after 5 minutes).

 

[mrkidd85]

I'm a bit late to this thread but it's very relevant to something I'm starting up in the new year and will hopefully do some good in the industry.

I've been around the block for a few years in SEO, and have lost count of all the penalties, disavows and fixing link profiles I've had to do, so I'm reaching out to businesses to go through the choosing an SEO process with them. I also head up the online marketing for a legal company, and I am inundated on a daily basis by these crap proposals from Indian firms. It makes me fume, as I know there are lots of great people in the industry who are suffering because of these wastes of space.

I'm looking to start a vetting service for SEO agencies and freelancers, to make sure clients are choosing the right people. It's the tactic of many poor SEO's to employ great sales people and get the contract signed, then do nothing but harm to the SEO campaign.

The service includes checking the company/freelancer out and seeing if they have buried any bad reviews. Try to speak to current clients to get an idea of what they do. Question them vigorously on their practices, and pretty much working out if they're the real deal or talking rubbish to get a contract signed.

I'm totally independent, not linked to any agencies, although I have worked for a few and know who is good and who isn't.

This is a very important process, as choosing between the right SEO and the wrong one can be the difference between success and failure as an online business. I'm looking to charge £200 to begin with, but once a client budget goes over £500 a month, I will charge a flat 50% of monthly budget. This way, small clients aren't being priced out.

Not coming on here to advertise as I've only just bought the domain, just seeing if you would agree that there's a place in the market for this.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

What makes you an authority enough to judge others? That is the question.

I was involved right at the start of the setting up of SEMPO (along with backing and funding from Google among others), but even then there were disagreements over what was best practice. Eventually I left.

So again the question is Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

 

[mrkidd85]

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

What makes you an authority enough to judge others? That is the question.

I was involved right at the start of the setting up of SEMPO (along with backing and funding from Google among others), but even then there were disagreements over what was best practice. Eventually I left.

So again the question is Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

The only thing that I could call on to prove that I am knowledgeable is previous client testimonials and results. I have plenty of these.

I'm not saying I know absolutely everything about search, but I'm able to spot a rogue SEO from a mile away. Obviously the client would always have the final say, but for 1/25 of annual budget, getting a second opinion on potential agencies might be the difference between good and bad results.

I'm not doing this for the money as I already have a decent job, but the amount of people who are being ripped off daily by poor SEO companies has led to me wanting to give it a try.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Please don't take it as a criticism or my questioning your abilities, my point was that choosing an independent person to review providers, how does the person choose which independent provider to choose? All we have done is brought in another tier of credibility checking.

 

[greyheart]

Please don't take it as a criticism or my questioning your abilities, my point was that choosing an independent person to review providers, how does the person choose which independent provider to choose? All we have done is brought in another tier of credibility checking.

I've actually been involved in a process ( a few years back) where there was a marketing consultant paid to vet us and the campaigns etc. The guy unfortunately was a complete moron and overruled us on a few decisions, needless to say these elements went very badly for the exact reasons that were highlighted. So I can completely understand the fear here. Not exactly the same, but similar.

When it comes to a listing site, again same issue about topseos, would love to see one well done. But, it's just not too likely to happen. It would as people have suggested end up dominated by companies with the biggest wallets.

That said however, a regulatory body is something that gets discussed a lot at conferences etc and I can think of a few panels I've been on where the questions been raised. My issue with it is of course the fact that if it's going to be done it needs to be done by someone like Moz/Majestic.

Someone who isn't directly effected by it, but still should be "well informed". The problem is then that of course you hit another set of issues when people want you to toe the grey line. As it happens I wouldn't mind seeing something like that done by Majestic because at least their guys are quite clued up.

And for the record I deal I lot in the gambling sector, they're happy with the grey line, often insist. And with that comes another set of problems. That is that almost every man and his dog in the really competitive sectors want NDA's. So they're about as likely to hand over their work done for vetting as they are their bank details.

So my overall issue with that being that I can't think of more than one or two clients that would want us to hand things over to a regulatory body to check.

Would love it to happen, problem is I just can't see it working.

(And if you check the list of topseo's I actually headed the largest department at one of those listed, would I recommend them...... ermmm only if I REALLY and I mean REALLLLLLY hated someone).

 

[zigojacko]

just seeing if you would agree that there's a place in the market for this.

Never.Going.To.Happen.

Big companies in the industry just want to use big bucks to by top ratings. Firstly, this was the main flaw with TopSEO's. There was no ethical vetting of companies, it was just those that paid them the most, ranked higher.

There are so many companies, that work in so many different ways. You'll likely find it very difficult to find a boilerplate way of assessing how an SEO company works and how effective / ethical they are. This then becomes an incredibly long process for you to undergo just to rank one company, unless you're willing to work for less than minimum wage, something you're fee is never going to cover.

Then comes the issue of the fee. Why should an SEO company pay you to rank in your directory of vetted companies? There's loads of companies out there that already do this. And the most known one, was TopSEO's.

Our agency has never paid to be ranked in any directory of SEO companies, it's a flawed process. As soon as anyone knows there is a fee involved, they'll instantly associate it to the bad press and hype that TopSEO's got.

It's a flawed model, it won't work and 90% of those that will be interested will expect to rank better if they pay you enough. If you don't accept these conditions, then they won't bother.

There's too much mess and backhanding in the industry for this too work. That's why Moz settled for a directory or reputable and ethical SEO agencies on their website. That's the best that can be done... For now...

 

[Silky]

We employed someone who used to work with a large Cheshire based agency - one who had smooth sales guys, tight contracts and were also very adept at sending out the heavy threats to anyone who dared criticise them online (or attempted to get out of contracts even though little work was being done) The work focused on bringing in clients and getting them to sign the dotted line....and then doing two tenths of naff all after that. *Shudder* Unfortunately this isn't unusual and the customers' lack of knowledge is being exploited badly by a number of agencies.

It surprises me how many people come onto forums like this and jump at the first name that replies to their post, regardless of how much / little that person knows. They're on the forum so they must be ok, right? (Er...no.) Word of mouth is a great tool, but what if you don't know anyone who's used an SEO consultant?

If a review site isn't the answer (too open to corruption), then what is? We ended up doing our own SEO, not the answer for everyone but at the very minimum SEO does need to be 'demystified' for the potential client, too many see it as some kind of inaccessible black art when in fact much of it is simply a logical, common sense approach in developing your site. Unfortunately without any knowledge of this area, too many companies don't realise how open they are to being scammed until it happens.

It's not a totally reliable route but my first point of call if I was looking at using an agency again would be to check out their own sites using a couple of basic SEO tools . Click on a few here and you recoil at how bloody awful they are, others show evidence of the attention you'd hope to see being implemented on your own site. It can be quite amusing to check out to the testimonials they display too, and see how some may not exist, or if they do, the traffic has increased from around 5 hits per day to 8...hmm....

Richard Branson may not fly his own planes or serve the food on planes, but he can clearly see them flying, and the passengers eating - the results are clear to see and measure. When an industry is based on a wing and a prayer and lots of false promises, the client unfortunately needs to have a better understanding of how it all works..

 

[mrkidd85]

We employed someone who used to work with a large Cheshire based agency - one who had smooth sales guys, tight contracts and were also very adept at sending out the heavy threats to anyone who dared criticise them online (or attempted to get out of contracts even though little work was being done) The work focused on bringing in clients and getting them to sign the dotted line....and then doing two tenths of naff all after that. *Shudder* Unfortunately this isn't unusual and the customers' lack of knowledge is being exploited badly by a number of agencies.

It surprises me how many people come onto forums like this and jump at the first name that replies to their post, regardless of how much / little that person knows. They're on the forum so they must be ok, right? (Er...no.) Word of mouth is a great tool, but what if you don't know anyone who's used an SEO consultant?

If a review site isn't the answer (too open to corruption), then what is? We ended up doing our own SEO, not the answer for everyone but at the very minimum SEO does need to be 'demystified' for the potential client, too many see it as some kind of inaccessible black art when in fact much of it is simply a logical, common sense approach in developing your site. Unfortunately without any knowledge of this area, too many companies don't realise how open they are to being scammed until it happens.

It's not a totally reliable route but my first point of call if I was looking at using an agency again would be to check out their own sites using a couple of basic SEO tools . Click on a few here and you recoil at how bloody awful they are, others show evidence of the attention you'd hope to see being implemented on your own site. It can be quite amusing to check out to the testimonials they display too, and see how some may not exist, or if they do, the traffic has increased from around 5 hits per day to 8...hmm....

Richard Branson may not fly his own planes or serve the food on planes, but he can clearly see them flying, and the passengers eating - the results are clear to see and measure. When an industry is based on a wing and a prayer and lots of false promises, the client unfortunately needs to have a better understanding of how it all works..

I could bet my bottom dollar you are talking about <removed>. They charged a previous client of mine £1000 to add the cookie notification message.

Complete scum.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

I have removed the company name as adding 'complete scum' plus quoting the original post makes the post potentially libelous sorry