The SEO panic principle.

[sirearl]

Seems to me there are one hell of a lot of SEO companies trying to scare the crap out of the public with myths about being banned or punished by the search engines.

I suppose the idea is to make themselves seem indispensable and charge a few bob more.

Google et al are very rudimentary in their algo's,so why all the panic.

Our Transatlantic celeb cousins seem very big on rumour mongering.

 

[ZeroDouble]

Have you been reading the same threads as me?

I see this all the time on this and other forums..."If you do this then you will get eaten by a panda" , "if you do that then you will get shat on by a penguin", or "if you do these things then the world will somehow end" etc.. It must really annoy you guys that make a living out of SEO.

I've given up pointing such things out to people, as I normally just end up with about 10 people telling me that I'm talking crap (although on some occasions they're probably right ).

 

[Annoying Donkey]

Well, I talk crap all the time, but my sites seem to rank OK...

 

[StevePoster]

SEO companies or individuals are free to say what they want regarding SEO (true or false) and it is important to the client that is knowledgeable in SEO field and SE updates. This will have a good communication for both parties to build good relationship and success to the project.

 

[Paul Norman]

Seems to me there are one hell of a lot of SEO companies trying to scare the crap out of the public with myths about being banned or punished by the search engines.

I suppose the idea is to make themselves seem indispensable and charge a few bob more.

Google et al are very rudimentary in their algo's,so why all the panic.

Our Transatlantic celeb cousins seem very big on rumour mongering.

This.

Exactly this, and only this.

Like so many, I get regular phone calls selling me SEO, and the great majority are just selling wind and fear.

There are a handful of people who can point to track record, knowledge, and common sense. For the record, the OP is one of them - a comment I make based on knowing at first hand some of the work he has done.

 

[William Gill]

The people calling you are correct. If a company does adopt Black hat SEO techniques then it will be penalised by Google. If you buy links you will be penalised. Look at the recent case of Law firm giant, Irwin Mitchell. Who no longer appear in the natural listings (only in PPC and map). This will confirm that Google are cracking down on un-natural link builders. Be warned!!

 

[Paul Norman]

The people calling me are not correct. They are not talking about those kind of practices.

 

[William Gill]

I was replying to the original post. None of you are actually going in to any detail as to what these companies are calling to offer. Please elaborate..

 

[wdog5555]

If you buy links you will be penalised.......

That's a bit of a sweeping statement

How, exactly, does God Google tell that your buying links?

 

[Paul Norman]

I think that is the basic problem, William. They are not going into much detail, either. They are expecting me to sign up to a monthly commitment based on the fact that I will be on page one of google. They are not specific as to what I shall be on page one of google for. And how much traffic that will generate. And what the likely conversion rate is. And who they feel is my target audience. And how Google actually works.

Now let's be clear. There are some excellent online marketeers out there who will get you more visible and more sales. Let's not get all generic about this. I know of a few, they are high profile in their sphere, and very sort after. But their sales pitch is also more informed, more specific, and more capable of validation.

 

[William Gill]

That's a bit of a sweeping statement

How, exactly, does God Google tell that your buying links?

They can tell from the back link profile, you could go into majesticseo, look at a companies back link profile and can tell whether their links are from authoritative domains. The bots that Google has in place will be many more times more sophisticated and can see this. For example directory sites, many black hatters use these to build their backlinks, these have urls such as uklinkbuilding.com... it doesnt take a genius to work out that is a spammy link. And clearly un-natural which is exactly what Google is penalising through their panda and penguin algorithm changes. Go read up on those, then you will understand.

 

[William Gill]

I think that is the basic problem, William. They are not going into much detail, either. They are expecting me to sign up to a monthly commitment based on the fact that I will be on page one of google. They are not specific as to what I shall be on page one of google for. And how much traffic that will generate. And what the likely conversion rate is. And who they feel is my target audience. And how Google actually works.

Now let's be clear. There are some excellent online marketeers out there who will get you more visible and more sales. Let's not get all generic about this. I know of a few, they are high profile in their sphere, and very sort after. But their sales pitch is also more informed, more specific, and more capable of validation.

Sorry Paul, I think we have our wires crossed here. I agree with you entirely. People calling out the blue, will be ones offering these black hat techniques, which you want to steer away from. So yes, ignore such calls. As they are just short term solutions for keywords you most likely dont want to be ranking for.

I dont know why I started my original comment with 'the people calling you are correct' :S.

 

[Annoying Donkey]

For example directory sites, many black hatters use these to build their backlinks...

If that's what you consider blackhat, then you're not qualified to talk on the subject... What you describe is not much more than poor SEO...

And businesses cold call all the time. It's one of the best ways to get your first clients. To dismiss all because they cold call is simply absurd... How would you suggest a startup get there first customers - wait around until they're discovered...?

 

[wdog5555]

The bots that Google has in place will be many more times more sophisticated and can see this......

Only if you go for the '10,000 PR6 Links for $10' rubbish.
The bots aren't as clever as most people seem to think (but that is a typical Google, smoke and mirrors trick!)

For example directory sites, many black hatters use these to build their backlinks, these have urls such as uklinkbuilding.com...

But there are also some quality, niche directories, so not every directory is bad (I'm listed in a few that I get good, relevant traffic from?)

it doesnt take a genius to work out that is a spammy link.....

Should every website have a 100%, perfect link profile? Surely this would indicate link manipulation as well?

Most sites will acquire some spammy links naturally anyway?

 

[themanpad]

is buying advertising space classed as buying links? im looking to advertise on a site (cost per impressions) but if im gonna get stung ill just avoid it...

 

[LocalGuy]

They can tell from the back link profile, you could go into majesticseo, look at a companies back link profile and can tell whether their links are from authoritative domains. The bots that Google has in place will be many more times more sophisticated and can see this. For example directory sites, many black hatters use these to build their backlinks, these have urls such as uklinkbuilding.com... it doesnt take a genius to work out that is a spammy link. And clearly un-natural which is exactly what Google is penalising through their panda and penguin algorithm changes. Go read up on those, then you will understand.

Exactly, this is exactly what they are doing, just using common sense. They are not going around and using analysing every site and making perfect assumptions, they are just finding a few sites they know receive a ton of low quality links then penalise accordingly. Not rocket science, just say out of their common sense cross-hairs lol.

 

[CB1878]

The SEO companies who spread the scare stories have probably caused the issues themselves in the past.

Google do give some pretty clear guidelines. I am not really sure a load of links are any good these days. Create content that is useful to the reader and they will stay on your page, and possibly meander through your website to you 'goal'.

If you have good content then you cannot be accused of 'gaming' the system.

Google make tons of money on Adwords, so buying links, or advertising space, takes money away from them. No shock that websites heavily advert laden have sunk in many cases.

 

[jdluckhurst]

The SEO companies who spread the scare stories have probably caused the issues themselves in the past.

Correct. Most SEO's are the quickest of all to change their tune...

Seems to me there are one hell of a lot of SEO companies trying to scare the crap out of the public with myths about being banned or punished by the search engines.

They do indeed although as a few on the thread have pointed out, they do not give many details as to how they are going to go about getting you ranked WITHOUT being delisted. It seems strange to me because the webmaster guidelines are very very clear.

What I would say is that although there is a lot of scaremongering, there is no smoke without fire. It amazes me on a daily basis how many SEO's still do really crap work which inevitably get people penalised. Although some of the blame should lie with the site owners who do not seem to check on the work being done and prefer to bury their heads in the sand (despite the stigma of the SEO industry).

 

[GB Showplates]

Good SEO's are happy to provide reports detailing the links they have built for you and to discuss the strategies they use openly. I think that if your SEO will not provide this transparency, then its time to move on and look for another provider.

 

[Chris Fickling Design]

I can only speak of a very recent experience. I don't generally sell SEO services, I carry out on-going SEO for sites I've built. I build all sites with optimisation in mind and I don't pay for links. I believe that good SEO starts with a properly formatted site.

A site I've looked after for years (on behalf of a client) has suddenly dropped. I found out the client has been paying for links from a well known directory site for over 3 years. It would seem to me that suddenly he is being penalised but I'm not certain. There does seem to be a point at which Google 'puts you on the radar' and whilst it might not be open penalisation, other sites will be preferred.

I agree that rumours and myths abound but the basic ideas have always been there: Get the content right, format the site properly, get a few good links from relevant local sites, update the site regularly with relevant and engaging content.

 

[Annoying Donkey]

Good SEO's are happy to provide reports detailing the links they have built for you and to discuss the strategies they use openly. I think that if your SEO will not provide this transparency, then its time to move on and look for another provider.

Link reports are useless to the average business owner. Bit like having a bum on the seat shuffling papers - doesn't do anything for your business but looks busy... Also tends to encourage quantity over quality.

The only measure that is meaningful is "is your business increasing?" or "are you making more profit?".

 

[greyheart]

there is some benefit, means that if the work done was garbage at least you can get a second opinion.....

 

[Annoying Donkey]

there is some benefit, means that if the work done was garbage at least you can get a second opinion.....

If the work was garbage, then you wouldn't be seeing an increase in sales/profits...

 

[greyheart]

If the work was garbage, then you wouldn't be seeing an increase in sales/profits...

Ok, so I've worked at a few agencies over the years on some of the biggest brands in the world. I've seen sales and profits go up on accounts (not ones I've worked on personally) when all that person has been getting has been a report every month, literally no work..... this can happen, updates can wipe out competitors, the site ages a little, pr done by internal guys can have an effect etc etc, does that mean the person is getting a good deal no.

Does it mean the person is getting good value. Definitely not, especially if it's the sort of agency that all they've done after the initial audit is "link build". Is it useful info for if the agency has burned the client and if someone else has to clean it up later? yes.

Does that necessarily mean the client has a clue what they're looking at no.... but that's up to the agency to educate them on the value of individual links not just numbers.....

 

[Annoying Donkey]

this can happen, updates can wipe out competitors, the site ages a little,

This would happen regardless of who was doing the work. We saw it on our own sites a couple of years back with one of the updates. Sales more or less doubled over a period of time with no additional work.

pr done by internal guys can have an effect

Analytics would surely pick this up...? Everything can be tracked and traced...

but that's up to the agency to educate them on the value of individual links not just numbers.....

The same agency you don't trust enough to allow them to get on with it...?

I've not come up with a perfect way - or even an imperfect way - to decide upon a good SEO. A good specification that defines success is a good starting point. And trust is essential - if you don't trust the guy, then don't hire him. Ultimately one has to decide having done best due diligence.

 

[greyheart]

I think you've missed the point with the increase in profits stuff, what I'm saying is you can't use sales/profits as the only way to judge.

Now with PR done by internal guys, analytics would not show value given from brand mentions/social shares/natural links/branding factors like CTR increase etc etc etc

Also agencies should be keeping link docs anyway, otherwise what happens when people working on the account leave, where's the points of reference. Fact is most agencies keep these records anyhow, it takes 5 minutes to copy the slide into the report. If the client wants to see it let them.

In terms of them not just getting on with it, have you ever been in an agency experiencing when the owner just decides he wants to coin it in and cash out?

I have, I've watched budgets get slashed, almost all work stop and guess what the clients who didn't get link reports got shafted hardest (again fortunately didn't happen in my dept, but that was based on the nature of the clients we dealt with).

And besides our industry has a bad enough image anyhow. What's wrong with transparency on records that you should be keeping anyhow?

 

[Annoying Donkey]

I think you've missed the point with the increase in profits stuff, what I'm saying is you can't use sales/profits as the only way to judge.

Haven't missed the point, I just don't agree with you. When asking clients what they see as the measure of success, I've never had one say "link reports! we want link reports!"

If the SEO is any good he will be building good links, so link reports would be redundant. If the SEO is no good, link reports won't help.

Clients always understand profit, but if that's not good enough for you, then it's up to you to educate the client in what a good measure is. But I'll lay you odds, that if you persuade him that link reports are better than profit as a measurement, then your relationship is likely to be brief...

And besides our industry has a bad enough image anyhow. What's wrong with transparency on records that you should be keeping anyhow?

I have no issue with transparency, but giving information that the client doesn't understand smacks of blinding with science. Perception is everything and if the client can't see value in what you're doing, then he's going to get rid of you.

 

[greyheart]

I agree that profit/sales are the main KPI, but it's good to be able to show a bit of what you've done to make that happen.

And to be fair most of my clients are quite well educated on SEO, but I guess that comes from the size of business that you're working with. For example a lot of our clients may have 5 internal guys working on nothing but SEO, but they'll outsource specific regions because we may have different capabilities.

So I guess you could say it depends on the clients themselves, but generally speaking I report on all activity in our reports, not just link reports.

All the best

 

[webgeek]

Seems to me there are one hell of a lot of SEO companies trying to scare the crap out of the public with myths about being banned or punished by the search engines.

The companies are trying to respond to the fear mongering Google has been spreading like wildfire. The more the SERPs fluctuate, the more people distrust SEO, the more Adwords they buy.

There's a lot of penalty recovery work - probably 1/3 of what we do relates to cleaning up after someone has cut corners and left a mess. But the other 2/3 isn't a case of, "do it our way or that other company will get you banned". Instead it's a simple recipe based on fresh content, optimisation of that content, social syndication and an occasional backlink to it.

Sorry, no fear here, nothing revolutionary like a square light bulb that's powered by passive synaptic function or a quantum singularity, just a lot of doing the basics.

 

[greyheart]

There are still a few tricks if you want to go blackhat, but mostly the only real advantage an SEO should have is a nice contacts list (but a PR guy may have one just as well) and the fact that they keep up to date.

Oh and possibly the ability to make some better predictions about where things are going. And looking at certain algo exploits. I mean things like Fresh are very abusable still, but only matters in certain industries etc. So I guess there are still a few tricks, but for the most part it's just work.