Onsite SEO vs Offsite SEO

[Ali-v-8]

This is a great analogy.

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

 

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?

In general the one that is highest in the SERP's

 

[Ali-v-8]

I have had a few calls off people - last hour - so please read this.

I do not think that 12 week is too long to wait to see A TURN AROUND.
Yes I did it in a day - but that was a niche market.
Please do not think this is a normal thing to happen - every website has a different approach.
Do not blame your SEO for taking longer - they may have some other contributing factors to attend to.
Re-optimising a website is harder than optimising a new website.

The example I put up was to show onsite seo vs offsite seo nothing more. The time it took to get to page one was not the norm - I think i may have been lucky with catching the spider at the right moment. Even i look at a minimum of 4-6 weeks between changes.

Hope this clears up some of the questions.

 

[webgeek]

If someone hires an SEO team and don't see progress in 30-45 days, I can certainly understand their dismay. At 45-60 days if there still aren't signs, then that dismay would turn to bitter disappointment. I'm not saying nowhere to page 1 in a month, but at least some progress.

This is why regular ranking reports and monthly summaries of activities are critically important communications with clients. They deserve transparency, and if it's not achieved, then their frustration is perfectly natural.

 

[Ali-v-8]

I had to make it clear to people ringing me telling me that they think their SEO's were not doing the work correctly.

 

[terryuk]

Very well if they know what they are talking about, I've had it before amazes me after they have been told garbage from another SEO or something

 

[Metalfrogboss]

In the SEO project plan, there should be timelines and measurable waypoints for success. If this is the case then nobody expects anything more or less than the contract states. Our average delivery for localised search engine phrases is 3 months and for non-geographical keywords we average at 9 months at the moment. We expect to see progression from 4 weeks,but this obviously depends upon competition/market/whether we built site/domain age etc

 

[Ali-v-8]

Getting sidetracked on this thread - Going back to the point made - SEO must spend time researching and modifying the website before considering offsite SEO.

 

[vitalintelligence]

On-site SEO defines the process of optimizing a website for a different keywords, and Off-site SEO involves acquiring links to your website from other websites on the Internet.

 

[webgeek]

On-site SEO defines the process of optimizing a website for a different keywords, and Off-site SEO involves acquiring links to your website from other websites on the Internet.

And the two are mutually independent of one another.

As such they can be pursued at whatever ratio of effort between them, and whatever order, that an SEO team desires.

Effort is nothing without results, regardless of whether it's on- or off- page.

 

[punitbook]

Yes I am agree no one count effort that you done just output matter but there is no doubt that Google need lots of reference to mark your website as top in search engine

 

[Net66]

The thing with on site SEO as you can tweak and edit it a little to include the relevant keywords depending on where your website is currently ranking. Backlinks will not be as effective without a good structure of onsite SEO.

 

[Ali-v-8]

all in all - when taking on an SEO it is my opinion that they should have spent sufficient time improving your onsite SEO before they do any offsite.
I also believe that SEO's who only optimise the home page have only done half a job.

 

[webgeek]

Oddly, I believe that SEO's who fail to give full transparency with accountable reporting on all their efforts and linkbuilding either have something to hide or don't care about the needs of the client.

I also believe that the only good SEO is the kind that gives measurable results with regular improvements in rankings, regardless of their mixture of on-page and off-page.

Further, I believe that SEO's who fail to show results for several months because it takes time for changes to show up in the rankings are singing the song of excuses which no longer fit the rapid indexing and quick updates of search rankings today.

Interesting how a coin has so many sides, eh?

 

all in all - when taking on an SEO it is my opinion that they should have spent sufficient time improving your onsite SEO before they do any offsite.
I also believe that SEO's who only optimise the home page have only done half a job.

Or in the case of one of our sites that has several thousands of pages somewhat less.

 

[webgeek]

3000 pages x 2 hour per page = 6000 hours / 2000 hours per year = 3 man-years to optimise - ouch.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Depends - most ecommerce solutions auto fill.
also a quick way to prioritise going through 3000 pages is site:.
I find that at a certain point google omits the results regardless of what you do.

3000 pages x 2 hour per page = 6000 hours / 2000 hours per year = 3 man-years to optimise - ouch.

 

3000 pages x 2 hour per page = 6000 hours / 2000 hours per year = 3 man-years to optimise - ouch.

Blimey I got a job for life.

Fortunately There are ways and means to cut the time to a minimal when they are product specific pages.

 

[Metalfrogboss]

I agree totally with Webgeek on his summary

 

[Ali-v-8]

I think webgeek was being sarcastic lol

 

[Stephen Davies]

Blimey I got a job for life.

Fortunately There are ways and means to cut the time to a minimal when they are product specific pages.

One guy I worked with had some kind of templated script to do all his Title Tags and Meta Descriptions. It worked really well for him.

 

[Ali-v-8]

If its software - The titles and keywords are possible, but never great and usually description would end up being a snippet of the content.
Te autogen i refer to usually created title from the product name.

 

[terryuk]

Is that 3 years for on page, then we've the off page.. a good ten years

 

[aaron70]

As you said Google Algorithm change as the rains so we need to work on both techniques ,fist of all we should work on the on-page SEO and try to make our website SEO friendly than we should work on Off-page SEO techniques to get more back links for our site ,
I think we have to work on both techniques to get good results ,
well ,thanks for sharing good information ,
regards ,

 

[Kevin007]

And if your blog is on a subdomain or different domain? Is that off-site?

Hi there, if your blog is a subdomain. Its considered a different entity by google and treated as a separate domain altogether. so blog.domain.com would require the same efforts as domain.com to optimise.

If its a different domain its treated as a standalone blog and would be considered as off site.

 

[allsquare]

Hi there, if your blog is a subdomain. Its considered a different entity by google and treated as a separate domain altogether. so blog.domain.com would require the same efforts as domain.com to optimise.

If its a different domain its treated as a standalone blog and would be considered as off site.

Surely this then raises the argument of sub-domains being treated as separate entities especially considered users of .gb.com domains are possibly penalised :|

 

[eonejames]

If you are in a moderate to highly competitive niche, on-page alone will not take you to the promised land on it's own without an incredible amount of time and content publication.

Sure, quality on-page optimization is easier than quality backlink building, faster and cheaper, so it should be done in the early days. But, very few sites have been able to compete on content alone.

The recent algo changes favor quality content and quality backlinks, not one OR the other, but rather BOTH. Brand mentions and social signals are very important in the weighting scheme, neither of which can be handled from internal content....

Companies are going to have to spend an increasing percentage of resources in building content, that's probably not something to be debated by many SEO practitioners.

But if you claim on-page trumps off-page, then pick 5 or 6 competitive industries and show #1 sites who rank based on their content alone and not their backlinks. For every 1 example you find, there's what... 10, 100, 1000 or more who rank because of their offpage / backlinks?

Project out this scenario further into the future.

Where's the algo going to be in 2 or 3 years? As the landscape changes, people build more and more content and less and less links. Suddenly Google is left weighing the number of pages of content in site A vs number of pages in site B, all other things being equal. Instead of massive link-building going on, there is massive article publishing, hailing the content era. Suddenly, the sites with the most written pages are now #1.

Following closely behind this is the age of quality. Which site has the better written content wins the rankings battle, all other things being equal. Suddenly now it's a battle of who has the best AND most writers, as companies churn out volumes of worthless linkbait which reads well but has no real value in the world. Some would argue companies like Hubspot are already in this phase, throwing out reams of content in hopes some of it sticks.

Suddenly Joes Garage has a 250 page site with 247 pages of information that no one needs in their quest to find a garage for their auto repairs...

Content proliferation is already rampant and will undoubtedly escalate at a much higher rate. Is it the be all and end all which will determine rankings forever? No.

Is it likely to carry more weight in the next few years than it does now? Yes.

Will it create a new set of problems as companies have to find other ways of setting their site apart from the competition? Yes.

How will they do it? Backlinks... Social Signals... Content quotations, citations, references, syndication? (think backlinks)... Sure.

How else will they do it? I'd love to hear the answers to this!

Note: I'm a big believer in content marketing / inbound marketing, and agree with a lot of the fundamentals about content being king. However, I also don't see Google, or any other major search engine, dropping their external votes system anytime soon.

The voting system is being 'cleaned up' so as to try and restore the legitimacy which it once claimed. As poor quality links play less and less a role in the rankings, an ever increasing focus on quality backlinks will make the difference between #1 and #10 or #100.

I believe that quality content + quality links will dominate the rankings for the next 2 to 5 years.

I totally agree with "webgeek" if you maintain all this things then getting all which you wants.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Did you really need to quote the whole lot - could you not just have thanked him