How many keywords per page

[kristeejo]

How many links does it take to get a google #1. I see an owl and a lollipop....

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by kristeejo

How many links does it take to get a google #1. I see an owl and a lollipop....

Depending on the keyword, yep.

[Kasparoff]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Thanks Christy.

I have no doubt that he ranks for it. Even in the results I am seeing he is in the top ten.

But then he also stated:



That would seem to indicate that he thinks he got there because of keyword density.

However, many of the pages in the top ten do not even have one occurence of the keywords.

They are there because of anchor text of inbound links.

And our new friend has been a busy bee gathering 42,949 inbound links for that site, many of which have the anchor text "Translation Company".

With that many inbound links, and that many variations of related anchor texts, I really doubt that his on page optimization is having much impact at all. Not much positive impact at least.

So, you think that onsite SEO has very little impact? Okay, let be it so.

You have 22K posts at this forum and I have to trust to your honorable opinion

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Kasparoff

So, you think that onsite SEO has very little impact? Okay, let be it so.

Kasparoff, it kind of feels like 2004 to even to having this conversation. Back then there were still some people defending content SEO, and in Jan. of 2004 when I pronounced content SEO dead, there was quite a bit of whining from the people who wanted content SEO to work.

But that was 2004. Nowadays people generally accept that on-page optimization is of little value. What surpises me is that some people are just now realizing this.

For many, many of the most competitive searches, the resulting pages do not even include the keywords on the page or in the page titles, as shown in this article which I orginally wrote two or three years ago.

[kristeejo]

It's interesting - I started marketing sites a LONG time ago and that is the way it worked back then. I got into the print industry and spent 3 years there and am just coming back. (nice break) THAT is what I've found .... so odd. It seems like it is easier this way tho, w/o the work that goes into preparing pages.

[PaulJames]

so are you guys saying that too many back links are bad, even if they are good quality ones?

[DarrenC]

Okay, this seems to have started a debate - good

Firstly, I'd agree that the max number of keyword terms is 3-4 per page. Now on to keyword density - a few years ago you used to be able to rank high for competitive keywords if you had a high keyword density, and very few links.

Times have changed and now that is not the case - the keyword you have mentioned, in my eyes doesn't appear to be a competitive keyword, so it's likely that you could rank #2 or #1 if you have used this keyword alot in your content.

Nowadays, it's links that count - BUT one-way anchor text links, not reciprocal links, don't waste your time with them. Ideally, if you have 2 websites get them to link to site A and you link from site B, buy links, write articles, submit to directories, create a blog on another domain.

[Kasparoff]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Kasparoff, it kind of feels like 2004 to even to having this conversation. Back then there were still some people defending content SEO, and in Jan. of 2004 when I pronounced content SEO dead, there was quite a bit of whining from the people who wanted content SEO to work.

But that was 2004. Nowadays people generally accept that on-page optimization is of little value. What surpises me is that some people are just now realizing this.

For many, many of the most competitive searches, the resulting pages do not even include the keywords on the page or in the page titles, as shown in this article which I orginally wrote two or three years ago.

Yeah, I agree with you. My SEO level hasn't improved since 2004... Now, I have to take some couses to improve my SEO skills

Thanks for links.