SEO like it was 1999

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by rustybrick

Oh, I rank poorly for it. I need quality IBLs for that page. John - hook me up?

Sure - it'll cost ya.

[rustybrick]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Ah, yes - you finally noted that you need links.

Did I ever note that you do not need links to rank well?

[rustybrick]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Sure - it'll cost ya.

Do you charge by hour? I am not interested in ranking #1 for SEO, just curious how someone charges for link building.

[John Scott]

I don't charge per link. I charge a monthly or yearly consulting fee, and it covers the link building.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by rustybrick

Did I ever note that you do not need links to rank well?

Heh, it was because I was constructing a post about how I couldn't find you ranking for that term, and was about to write something about links.

What got me really worried is seeing you registered with SEOconsultancy. I'm under the impression that the place is simply sticking all the copywriters into a single barrel for shooting.

In claiming to put the ethics into SEO, they are in very real danger of taking the ethics out of the SEO-client relationship, and that is very unethical.

Professional SEO *needs* link building - and at some point that means not bowing to the sensibilities of multi-million dollar Search Engines. Ergo, the people involved in the SEOconsultancy protect are in the very real position of undermining the entire industry.

Copywriting is not SEO. To claim otherwise could be to misrepresent to prospective clients.

(Btw - if you give me a few days, I'd love to take this to a well-meaning debate with you - and whoever - on one of my new sites. Should be ready within a week. )

[rustybrick]

Brian,

I applied to SEOConsultants and they accepted me. I am not in some kind of cult.

Anyway, "ethics" is gray - I can not give it a definition in regards to SEO.

I know link building is huge.

No need to argue - Im on your side here.

[I, Brian]

No problem - I simply like the ethical debate aspect.

[Mel]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Rusty, that's copywriting. Copywriting is of utmost importance in marketing. That is, copy written to drive sales.

"SEO copywriting", however, is copy written to rank high in search engines. SEO copywriting is a waste of time, IMO.

SEO copywriting=worthless.
Marketing copywriting=extremely important.

Semantics again John. If I choose to do my SEO copywriting in such a way that it also sells/entices the reader to buy the product who's to say that its not SEO copywriting? Or that its not effective or valuable?

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Mel

Semantics again John. If I choose to do my SEO copywriting in such a way that it also sells/entices the reader to buy the product who's to say that its not SEO copywriting? Or that its not effective or valuable?

I don't care what anybody chooses to call it. In the context of this discussion, SEO copywriting is using page elements SEO.


Definitions aside, copywriting as the primary tool for attaining search engine rankings is useless and ineffective.

This is in oppostion to the statements made by Jill and Karon. This is the context of the discussion.

[Mel]

Well John if you are willing to limit you definitions (and your thinking) fine by me, But I will continue to use a much broader and more useful definition in my practice.

If you say that this is the only method that Jill Whalen espouses and that it is totally useless, how do you explain her long standing top rankings for competitive keywords and more particularly her currrent #1 and #2 Google rankings for expert search engine optimization? Or the fact that her rankings survived Florida unscathed?

Mind you I am not saying that I might choose to do or preach the same things in the same way, but personal attacks without clear justification I find distasteful and demeaning.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Mel

Well John if you are willing to limit you definitions (and your thinking) fine by me, But I will continue to use a much broader and more useful definition in my practice.

Mel, definitions are just that - definitions. If we don't define (i.e., limit) the meanings of the words we use, they are worthless.

Originally Posted by Mel

If you say that this is the only method that Jill Whalen espouses and that it is totally useless, how do you explain her long standing top rankings for competitive keywords and more particularly her currrent #1 and #2 Google rankings for expert search engine optimization? Or the fact that her rankings survived Florida unscathed?

Florida bounced a lot of competitive keyword phrases. "Expert search engine optimization" is not anywhere near a "highly competitive keyword phrase". Maybe if she got into the top ten for "search engine optimization".

And this is a pet peeve of mine. When people ask for rankings I've achieved, I don't mention sites I own. That would be wrong. I point out sites I've optimized.

Originally Posted by Mel

Mind you I am not saying that I might choose to do or preach the same things in the same way, but personal attacks without clear justification I find distasteful and demeaning.

Are you reading the same thread I'm reading? What indicated this was a personal attack? This is - and always has been - an ideological attack. Note the summary of the first post:
SEO copywriting will never win out. Link mongers will always win out in Google.

That's ideological, not personal.

As for her rankings, check them yourself:
realestatenorthstar.com
ereleases.com
newyorkdivorcelawyer.com

I've repeatedly - and with clarity - referred to her clients' SE rankings.

[Mel]

Ok John I checked out the rankings on those sites

realestatenorthstar.com targets northstar properties and ranks #5 in Google for that term.

ereleases.com targets press release writing and is #1 and 2 at Google for that term.

newyorkdivorcelawyer.com is not ranking at all for its primary terms - is this what you mean?

[John Scott]

realestatenorthstar.com targets Northstar Real Estate and isn't top ten.

ereleases.com targets press release and isn't top ten.

If Jill targets 3- or four-word long search terms, and non-competitive search terms, then she really isn't doing anything. Either that or she doesn't know how to use WordTracker.

[Mel]

Look again John; targeted terms are almost always in the page title and description and those terms are the ones they put in those spots and are IMO what they are targeting. Might not be what you'd choose to target but they are relvant and ranking well.

I target three and four word terms all the time as do many of those I know who use and understand Wordtracker.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Mel

Look again John; targeted terms are almost always in the page title and description and those terms are the ones they put in those spots and are IMO what they are targeting. Might not be what you'd choose to target but they are relvant and ranking well.

The search terms I mentioned came from the page titles, and no, the pages are not ranking well for them.

Originally Posted by Mel

I target three and four word terms all the time as do many of those I know who use and understand Wordtracker.

I do target 3 and four word search terms, too:

http://www.internet-marketing-resear...g-report-2.php

But, I target those secondarily. Primary keywords should be the most competitive, relevant keywords.

Take Jim Kujala for example. He sells Kawasaki motorcycles. So, I could target "kawasaki ninja" (he's #2 and #10), I could target "Kawasaki Vulcan" (he's #2, #3 and #10), and a bunch of other secondary keywords. But what makes the difference between a professional SEO and a non-professional? The difference is the standards we are held to. As a professional SEO, we have the absolute obligation to deliver top ten ranking for the most competitive, relevant keywords.

If Jim did a search for "Kawasaki Motorcycles" and he wasn't in the top ten, how would he feel? I bet he'd feel disappointed and maybe even used. (Fortunately his sites are #3, #4, and #5 for that search term.)

If Jim's sites were not in the top, his competition would be in the top, and that would be a bad thing. Right?

The more competitive keywords are competitive because they drive more traffic. Looking at his stats:

kawasaki motorcycles 6.4 %
kawasaki ninja 3.9 %
kawasaki vulcan 3.1 %
kawasaki z1000 3 %
kawasaki mule 1.6 %
kawasaki forum 1.5 %
kawasaki eliminator 1.3 %
.....
.....
kawasaki vulcan 1600 mean streak 0.1 %

The less competitive, the less productive.

SEO's need to stop looking at it from a "well I tried" perspective, and look at it from a "this is a professional obligation and I better deliver or get out of the business" perspective.

When I was CFO of Just-Contractors.com, we hired a professional SEO. David Gilmore. Paid three thousand dollars for bunk. What do I mean by "BUNK"? I mean he delivered top ranking for search terms nobody used:

HVAC Air Conditioning Contractor Directory
Find Home Building Contractor Directory
ETC, ETC

Having paid $3,000, I as the customer felt ripped off. OK, not only did I feel ripped off, I was ripped off. If an SEO cannot deliver the more competitive keywords, he/she needs to get out of the business.

After I fired his incompetent arse, I went out and got links from anybody and anything that would give me links. Day in and day out, we got links. I was only satisfied after we got top placement for all the competitive keywords, including "contractor" and "contractors".

So, as I said, links will always win out over copywriting (page elements SEO).

[Fruit & Veg]

On the Kawasaki site you've used alt tags, meta tags, keywords in copy - which is good, yet you state that you only want to get links? I'm a little lost. I agree that JUST copywriting isn't going to really help, but it IS part of the recipe to a well cooked SEM pie.

I don't agree with getting links from anybody. I think spending your time getting relevant links is far better. Remember, links can drive traffic too.

I'm not surprised that David Gilmore screwed your SEO up - all he does is sit in his office comfortably numb, having a cigar, wasting your time and money. He should be put in a spaceship and set the controls for the heart of The Sun.

[John Scott]

Hiya Fruit,

Suzuki-Bikes.com was designed to test a couple SEO theories.

First, without accumulating hundreds of inbound links, can a site rank well on the basis of internal link architecture and page-elements SEO alone?

The answer would be "kinda". Even before the site was completed, it was indexed by Google and achieving hundreds of uniques per day.

However, as we carefully added link weight to the index page, the rankings of internal pages rose accordingly.

To non-SEO types, this may not mean much; to SEO's, it puts to rest the often-repeated fallacy that PageRank doesn't matter.

PageRank does matter; it can, in fact, make all the difference in the world.

http://www.internet-marketing-resear...ing-report.php

The Kawasaki site was the same. It only ranked well for the competitive keywords after we added a ton of links.

[Jimmy2]

Hmmm, very interesting discussion. As the owner of Beartooth Kawasaki I can only add to this discussion that all of the work of my SEO ( expert) has converted my website's to profits for my company. I can tell you that since 1997 I have had a few so called webmasters work on my site and I never have had the type of service that John Scott provides. Coming from an area that I am in and being raised the way I have been raised (work ethics) John Scott has the quailities that I admire and need in my business. I unlike some business owners understand how the web works and how the SEO works and I can tell you that we have had conversations at all hours of the day and night about page ranking, back links, search terms and every other aspect of websites and John is right I expect the best and I know what being number one is all about as well as the other business owners that I have refered to John. I only wish that I felt as comfortable with the rest of my business as I feel with the websites. The point behind having John is that I know that I have someone working on my sites that takes as much pride as I do about my business and who works as hard as I do to make my business number ONE. Even though I know there is more than one way to skin a cat, John has the answer to page ranking! Sorry about horning in on your discussion John but I just felt the need!

[John Scott]

Thank you for the kind comments, Jim. And check your PM's once in a while.