SEO: The plain and simple truth. No crying please.

[AMSEO]

Myth #1: SEO is 'easy'

People who think SEO is 'easy' are ignorant, completely uninformed or suffering from some sort of mental block. It's as simple as that. Ranking for some small term doesn't make you an SEO. That's like me adding £100 to £100, coming out with £200 and claiming myself to be an accountant or a bookkeeper. If I change a lightbulb, it doesn't make me an electrician. If I floss my teeth, it doesn't make me a dentist.

Myth #2: "I'm an SEO"

SEO is HUGE. You can specialise in social media and be in SEO, just as you could be a conversion optimiser, a local search specialist, a link builder or a stats analyst. It's not just one jack-of-all-trades job. The term SEO applies to the industry or process, just as someone in 'Finance' could be an investment banker or a clerk.

Myth #3: SEO is a scam

I'm so sick and tired of posts on here trying to fob SEO off as some scam, it's pathetic. It's undeniably one of the most powerful marketing avenues available to a business and so much more than just getting some zero search volume keyword ranked first, third or twentieth. The sooner people get over the idea of "top of google" as being a definition of SEO, the better. But it DOESN'T suit all businesses, just as other mediums don't. It's real, it's here to stay and for most businesses who plan correctly it can be hugely profitable.

People get scammed because in most cases they fail to conduct ANY research at all in the first place. It's basic business acumen. You wouldn't believe a TV ad agency if they told you they could get your ad placed in the X-Factor breaks for £100, so why the hell would you believe you're going to double your business for an equally suspect fee from an SEO company. Research. Research. Research.

Myth #4: SEO is some completely foreign thing.

The internet is barely any different to the offline world yet some business owners seem to whimper as if it's some completely foreign platform. The same business basics and common sense still apply. Research, weight up the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to an SEO campaign when applied to your business and market and stop blaming your damned naivety on this industry.

Other Reading:

http://searchengineland.com/an-open-letter-to-derek-powazek-on-the-value-of-seo-27680 - Worth reading along with all the referenced articles.

Apologies in advance for the rant, but talk about scratched records

Regards,
Alex

 

[AMSEO]

SEO applies to both.

 

[360interactive]

SEO and internet marketing are 2 different things

I would say seo is a form of Internet marketing.

 

[Dawg]

Methinks the snakeolio salesman doth protest too much....

 

[BusinessIdeas]

So how can I be at the top of google?

 

[maxine]

What research would you suggest people do?

 

[Ali-v-8]

Give me your money and you wish will be granted LOL

So how can I be at the top of google?

 

[Ali-v-8]

the whole subject was called new media advertising about 9yr ago. Now its internet marketing which has sub sections.

Online marketing = any form of internet advertising including creating a website to advertising on emails and affiliate (affiliate also uses the methods listed below) . data capture, social networking
SEM = search engine marketing ( pay per click (ppc) ,cost per application (cpa), cost per lead (cpl), cost per 1000imp (cpm),cost per term (cpt) seo (search engine optimistation),

email marketing is another section altogether.

Point is that with out it a website business is like putting a shop in a field.

Marketing is about people
SEO is about search engines

(and of course I understrand people use search engines)

 

[irishguru]

This article doesn't particularly protray the plain and simple truth about SEO as such but it does cover key elements. One I can pick out is myth #2. I am an SEO. This particular myth is the most true because the truth is being a lone SEO would be a long and tiresome days work.

It's really all about team work with at least one person standing head of the operation and keeping up to date with what's working and what's not..though truly it rarely changes but one mistake and you're gone - Matt Cutt's coming down on you like bankruptcy.

For myth one you're way off, SEO is an acquired skills that does become easy. It's not rocket science. The day I told myself that was the day I stopped asking questions because I had finally conquered the main learning curve.


To finalize.. anyone can do SEO if they put their mind to it just like the 4 minute mile.

 

[BusinessIdeas]

Give me your money and you wish will be granted LOL

What!? all of it?

 

[Ali-v-8]

May be more unless your a millionaire then just half will do .

Again the big question is this.
HOW MUCH IS PAGE ONE OF GOOGLE WORTH TO YOU?

No point in spending £5,000 on seo to bring you in £1,000.

What!? all of it?

 

SEO is search engine optimisation, which is a small simple facet of IM. Internet marketing is a huge multi faceted dicipline. SEO is a small part of it.

You must have your own agenda somewhere but not a lot to do with reality.:|

Try giving away rolls royce's from a website on page 10 of google.

Earl

 

Not really, I am equally for IM as SEO

I am merley pointing out they (SEO and IM) are different things. Some SEO's will try to tell you they are the same thing, bombard the client with lots of acrronyms, and want the clinet to come and spend all your money with them. I would advise a buyer to understand the difference, and be aware of exacly what they are buying

if you look at the equation:

turnover = (visitor numbers x conversion x AOV) - refunds

One will begin to twig that SEO and visitor numbers are not the (exclusive) holy grail that people make out

Fundamentally, online sucsess is governed by (not exclusive list)
- Analysis of the market (that provides hints to the SEO what trafic to bring in in the first place)
- SEO (that hopfully brings in a good volume and high % of the right traffic)
- Non internet marketing (directly driving visitors to a site)
- Off site Internet marketing (directly driving visitors to a site)
- efacacy of website (conversion)
- efacacy of website (AOV)
- eficency of company (avoiding refunds)
- acumen of comany (selecting correct products at correct time)
- On site marketing, site split testing and adjustment (another specialism)
- Ability for site to draw back its previous visitors in its own right

What the OP did was ellude that all the diciplines exist, but then roll them back into the realm of a SEO, and then note that people find SEO confusing or difficult. I am just pointing out that if one separates the roles, understands what you are paying for... everything then does become simpler, much more measurable etc. This also makes the subsequent decision making proccesses easier

Paid-for search continued to grow, proving itself a mainstay of marketing budgets with an 11.8% increase from H1 2008 to H1 2009. As the purest form of direct response advertising, search is proving recession-friendly with marketers investing £1.1bn during H1 2009, which equates to 62.6% of all online advertising expenditure.

Earl

 

[mattsaw]

Again the big question is this.
HOW MUCH IS PAGE ONE OF GOOGLE WORTH TO YOU?

No point in spending £5,000 on seo to bring you in £1,000.

That's actually a point well worth making. So many people completely miss the point of SEO/IM/SEM/Social Media etc etc etc and forget that at the end of the day it's all about sales, revenue and ROI.

Whatever your activies, SEO, PPC, email marketing, you should be tracking ALL of it, and at any point in time be able to work out your exact spend/cost and be able to work out your revenue for each activity. If you're not then you're almost certainly wasting money.

 

[AMSEO]

Some really interesting replies here I wasn't looking to get into a debate of what SEO is or isn't (although a great point about separating the jobs to make things more measurable).

Rather, I was trying to exaggerate the fact that ultimately the same business principles apply online as they do offline. Sure it's a different 'environment' but a person who buys a shovel online, is essentially the same as the person who buys it offline. They still want or need a shovel.

Research would include nothing too far off what you'd do offline:

• Research the company you are giving your money
• What clients do they have? Speak to them...
• How long have they been trading? What are the contract guarantees? Do their promises sound too good to be true?
• Research your market or ask an independant SEO company to. They might charge you a few quid, but surely it makes more sense to have this knowledge before you go and sit down with a salesman who is going to promise you the world for a monthly fee. An uninformed person is easy pickings for trained sales people.
• Ask for progress reports each and every month on what work has been done. Check your ROI, is this making you money (or achieving what you want to achieve)? If not, why not.

I'm trying to stress the basic, and fundemental business principles that surround any campaign you undertake. Just because it's online and you may not have a particularly deep knowledge of it, the same underlying factors apply and should not be overlooked nor should it be completely blamed on the SEO company.

Nobody knows your business more than you. Whether you're online or offline this doesn't change.

Regards,
Alex

 

[Colin Parker]

Nobody knows your business more than you. Whether you're online or offline this doesn't change.

Regards,
Alex

Not sure about that ... some business owners are more blinkered than the loser in the donkey derby.

Colin Parker

 

[Tin]

Again the big question is this.
HOW MUCH IS PAGE ONE OF GOOGLE WORTH TO YOU?

No point in spending £5,000 on seo to bring you in £1,000.

Well said

Ray

 

[irishguru]

Very interesting thoughts and opinions have been discussed right here and it got me thinking about the umlimited potential of hiring a really good SEO is.

A really good SEO would convert your site into hungry buyer traffic and keep doing it over and over again.

Isn't that SEO summed up?

Hire a really good seo or hire the SEO who's building his business on quicksand..

 

[quikshop]

Myth #1: SEO is 'easy'

People who think SEO is 'easy' are ignorant, completely uninformed or suffering from some sort of mental block. It's as simple as that. Ranking for some small term doesn't make you an SEO. That's like me adding £100 to £100, coming out with £200 and claiming myself to be an accountant or a bookkeeper. If I change a lightbulb, it doesn't make me an electrician. If I floss my teeth, it doesn't make me a dentist.

Actually, the biggest deception is from those within the SEO industry such as yourself who try to peddle the belief that SEO is difficult.

I understand why you have said what you have in your post, you wouldn't earn very much if it got out that just about anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence could do the essential stuff themselves

Core SEO and by that I mean stuff that falls into the common sense bracket such as putting content, useability and copy-writing first, relevant naming conventions, building a good link neighbourhood, basic visibility stuff through social networking sites, context linking etc is easy to understand and to do, even for beginners.

It would have been more convincing (and truthful) if you had said that the core SEO stuff is accessible to almost anyone, but to compete on the most competitive search terms requires a different level of understanding.

A learned knowledge of Google, best-guess at its algorithm through researching patents Google registers, trends in changes to listing priorities, actual trial and error case studies carried out over a suitable period of time to prove or dis-prove a theory - that is where a skilled SEO bod earns his crust.

Just as a matter of interest, how would the SEO gurus here define a competitive search term?

 

Actually, the biggest deception is from those within the SEO industry such as yourself who try to peddle the belief that SEO is difficult.

I understand why you have said what you have in your post, you wouldn't earn very much if it got out that just about anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence could do the essential stuff themselves

Core SEO and by that I mean stuff that falls into the common sense bracket such as putting content, useability and copy-writing first, relevant naming conventions, building a good link neighbourhood, basic visibility stuff through social networking sites, context linking etc is easy to understand and to do, even for beginners.

It would have been more convincing (and truthful) if you had said that the core SEO stuff is accessible to almost anyone, but to compete on the most competitive search terms requires a different level of understanding.

A learned knowledge of Google, best-guess at its algorithm through researching patents Google registers, trends in changes to listing priorities, actual trial and error case studies carried out over a suitable period of time to prove or dis-prove a theory - that is where a skilled SEO bod earns his crust.

Just as a matter of interest, how would the SEO gurus here define a competitive search term?

Totally agree.

One you can't bleeding get.

Earl

 

[websitedesign]

1 - SEO can be easy if you have no competition for your keywords. There are still some great untouched niche markets out there...

2 - To be really great in SEO you have to know ALL of it, not just bits and pieces. So yes I believe a person can offer the full range of SEO services... it's really not that compicated

SEO is extremely powerful and can bring in long term results if done correctly. It is not cheap, and definitely not a scam... just takes time to get results and a long term outlook.

 

[AMSEO]

Actually, the biggest deception is from those within the SEO industry such as yourself who try to peddle the belief that SEO is difficult.

I understand why you have said what you have in your post, you wouldn't earn very much if it got out that just about anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence could do the essential stuff themselves

Core SEO and by that I mean stuff that falls into the common sense bracket such as putting content, useability and copy-writing first, relevant naming conventions, building a good link neighbourhood, basic visibility stuff through social networking sites, context linking etc is easy to understand and to do, even for beginners.

It would have been more convincing (and truthful) if you had said that the core SEO stuff is accessible to almost anyone, but to compete on the most competitive search terms requires a different level of understanding.

A learned knowledge of Google, best-guess at its algorithm through researching patents Google registers, trends in changes to listing priorities, actual trial and error case studies carried out over a suitable period of time to prove or dis-prove a theory - that is where a skilled SEO bod earns his crust.

Just as a matter of interest, how would the SEO gurus here define a competitive search term?

Pretty much my thoughts exactly (worded better than me). When I talk about SEO, I generally look way beyond keywords and title tags - that's boring, entry-level stuff. It's when people generalise SEO as only being this that grates the hell out of me. You could lay into any job role as being 'easy' if you're only prepared to state the very basics.

http://vimeo.com/user409469/videos/sort:date - Some of these videos focus on the stuff I'm interested in. We're dealing with more and more e-commerce sites at our place, and some of the SEO stuff we're beginning to thrash out is what I joined the industry for. Challenging, but very rewarding. I highly recommend them!

Alex

 

[paretowasright]

One way I think you could judge a competitive keyword is with a bunch of KPI's.
So daily broad/phrase/exact term volume, phrase to broad search %,page title competition and description competition, click through rate, adwords daily volume, OCI (commercial intention although I am sometimes dubious about this)

I always look for at least 50 phrase/exact searches per day, phrase to broad above 50%,page description under 30,000, title competition under 15,000, CTR above 1.5% and OCI above 75%. The best search terms do of course have much higher page title competition so I am mainly referring to organic keyword SEO here for niches.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Is it me or did this statement not make sense.:|
I am feeling very dumb because i cannot for the life of me make sense of it.:redface:
Translation please

One way I think you could judge a competitive keyword is with a bunch of KPI's.
So daily broad/phrase/exact term volume, phrase to broad search %,page title competition and description competition, click through rate, adwords daily volume, OCI (commercial intention although I am sometimes dubious about this)

I always look for at least 50 phrase/exact searches per day, phrase to broad above 50%,page description under 30,000, title competition under 15,000, CTR above 1.5% and OCI above 75%. The best search terms do of course have much higher page title competition so I am mainly referring to organic keyword SEO here for niches.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Ok translated now on my commodoe 64.
It says " do Keyword research"

Now this is the sort of person people should avoid. Blinding with science i think the terms goes.

One way I think you could judge a competitive keyword is with a bunch of KPI's.
So daily broad/phrase/exact term volume, phrase to broad search %,page title competition and description competition, click through rate, adwords daily volume, OCI (commercial intention although I am sometimes dubious about this)

I always look for at least 50 phrase/exact searches per day, phrase to broad above 50%,page description under 30,000, title competition under 15,000, CTR above 1.5% and OCI above 75%. The best search terms do of course have much higher page title competition so I am mainly referring to organic keyword SEO here for niches.

 

Is it me or did this statement not make sense.:|
I am feeling very dumb because i cannot for the life of me make sense of it.:redface:
Translation please

I strggled a bit till I realised that KPI's are a well known producer of crisps and I think OCI do containers.:|

Earl

 

[fisicx]

I strggled a bit till I realised that KPI's are a well known producer of crisps and I think OCI do containers.

I thought KPI was a Legionaires hat and the OCI was where you stood to throw a dart.

 

[Ali-v-8]

Joking aside
KPI = key performance indicators

And Guess what OCI = Overseas Citizenship of India

Couldnt help myself

 

[mattsaw]

Like them or loathe them KPIs are something you'll be hearing a lot more about in SEO. Large corporates have been relating SEO performance to them and setting targets for a long time now.

As more and more people start to correctly realise that SEO is entirely trackable and the revenue from their spend can be traced to the last penny it's something that shuld be done as a matter of course.

 

[paretowasright]

Joking aside
KPI = key performance indicators

And Guess what OCI = Overseas Citizenship of India

Couldnt help myself

Firstly apologies for the KPI jargon that's what you get for 8 years in a corporate and demanding Marketing Director clients who need to measure everything!
I am the first to jump on something unclear like that on here so humble pie eaten!
...so plain English then...measurements and as Matt points out the need to justify return on investment and set targets, KPI's etc is now the norm with a lot of businesses. I even have to do it with social media marketing which is very challenging sometimes.

 

[d30]

Where there is seo there is usually a fight .

 

[Latebloomer]

When I was starting my site, I've encountered people who talked too much about SEO. Many come across as rather aggressive and ranting in their sales pitch.

Stopped using any of these people now but my results in search ranking was better.

Many times in reality is that there are many "SEO experts" out there who does most things that anyone can do anyway given sufficient time.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

This is a 3 year old thread so I am locking it.