|
Manish Pandey:
<<<Could you please post the quote and link where I stated that.
>>>Already done by Michael...thanks dude!
I am going to be very frank here Manish. You are as blind as mvandemar. There is no simularity in your statement that you atributed to me...
"Well you stated that if a domain is an authority then it must rank to the top of SERPs atleast for their title terms and according to rand as Aviva is not showing up for its title terms means that it is not an authority domain..."
and in the quote statement of mine that Michael posted...
"Also John I think that is a valid way to measure how well a page rankings by taking the title or part of the title."
If all you can do is build a stawman, pull it down, and then think you have provided me wrong -- I have no time for that.
I suggest you product a real quote of mine and then post your disageements with it. The discussion becomes meaningless when you start posted supposed quotes that I didn't say.
>>>Missed the point why??? and now you seem to agree!
I think there is a language barrier. I don't even know what the following statement means. Please restate it.
"It isn't necessary that if you don't have the keyword phrase on the body you can't have it on the anchor!!! Got the point."
>>>and now you seem to agree!
Yes there is lots of things you will say I will agree with. It not possible to be wrong all the time even if you try : )
>>>"Devalued" huh...its just you are using a different "english" word!
No in SEO there is a big difference between penalized and devalued.
>>>From the word go you were disagreeing!
No from the word go I was posting my position.
>>>Now, seems like you have started to agree!
As noted before it not possible to be wrong on every thing even if you try.
>>>Now...now....you don't know the power of being on the front page of digg.com or what!
Diggers don't click though PPC Ad and they are not a easy bunch to convet, they don't like SEO site or consultants, and they don't pass out links easy. I wouldn't turn down a super digg but they are a lot of work to get.
>>>Does that makes sense to you??
I understand what Rand is saying.
>>>You don't sound like you have come here to learn!!!
I can understand you stating that. But then again you have been misquoting me a number of times and staw man'ed the misquotes. Worse yet you have stated that the quote Michael posted of mine was the say as why you claimed I stated. So it doesn't supprise me for you to further state that I am not here to learn.
>>>And what did i say...
I was just answering your question. I trust that was ok?
>>>Lol you missed the rest of the part...
Not sure what you mean here.
>>>So, you see why i pointed out this.
<<<I am not sure.
>>>As i already said you missed it completely...here it is once again...just for you...
>>>So, you see why i pointed out this. It is because this fact that Aviva is not ranking for the term Information Web Directory because they don't target that term. As your site is high authority your page should have come up to the top 10 or atleast ahead of my site!!!
I think that "SEO Expert" is very completive. I perhaps have 3 or 4 inbound links with that term in the anchor text. The page that I put up has very little text. So no I don't think I should be ranking on the first page based on site authority.
>>>And until now you were just saying that "keyword phrase" is the best method to do it and never supported my allintitle: and allinanchor: theory. At last you are supporting now!!!
I think I stated that putting the key phrase in quotes and looking at the number of results is better than using allintitle: or allinanchor: searches. No I am not supporting your position that allintitle: or allinanchor: searches are the best way. They are one way among a number of ways to try to get a feel for how competitive a key phrase is.
|