Top Ten SEO's

**John Scott** · 01-12-2007, 01:05 AM

There are a few "top ten SEO" lists floating around the blogospere.

For example, this one from SEOMOZ:

# Danny Sullivan
Audience Size: 8/10 (used to be even higher at SEW, and probably will again soon - this also includes the entire SES conference audience and surrounding media)
Decision Makers: 10/10
Credibility: 10/10

# Michael Arrington
Audience Size: 10/10
Decision Makers: 9/10
Credibility: 7/10 (while Techcrunch matters, it doesn't have the same level of impact that Danny does with the search industry specifically)

# Matt Cutts
Audience Size: 7/10
Decision Makers: 9/10
Credibility: 8/10

# John Battelle
Audience Size: 7/10
Decision Makers: 8/10
Credibility: 8/10

# Brett Tabke
Audience Size: 8/10
Decision Makers: 7/10
Credibility: 8/10 (the only reason I'd put him behind John is because he contributes so infrequently to the search world's dialogue)

# Tim Mayer
Audience Size: 4/10
Decision Makers: 8/10
Credibility: 7/10

# Barry Schwartz
Audience Size: 7/10
Decision Makers: 7/10
Credibility: 7/10

# Shawn Hogan
Audience Size: 8/10 (all of Digitalpoint is included here)
Decision Makers: 4/10
Credibility: 5/10

# Philipp Lenssen
Audience Size: 6/10
Decision Makers: 6/10
Credibility: 6/10

# Jeremy Schoemaker
Audience Size: 7/10
Decision Makers: 6/10
Credibility: 5/10

I think, before you put up a list, you have to decide on a criteria.

What is the criteria? Who posts the most? I know of some folks who post more several articles a day, who have zero credibility, zero influence. Like the WepProNews paid writers. I was talking to a friend a few months ago about paid writing, and WepProNews came up as an example of how not to do it. Sure, those people write a lot, but they do not provide any insights.

I think insight is the most important. SEO Blogger "X" can post three blog posts a day about the drinks they had at Pubcon, about the yellow shoes that Randfish wears and about the blogger who cited an article without linking to it (evil!), and does that really provide any value SEO-wise?

Blogger "Z" posts once a week, revealing results of SEO tests, sources for quality linkage, and using a blog to generate links.

Which blog would you rather read?

SasaVtec · 01-12-2007, 01:12 AM

WoW never heard of a single person on that list, maybe I have, but don't remember, I should get out more and read the SEO blogs.

**G10** · 01-12-2007, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SasaVtec

WoW never heard of a single person on that list, maybe I have, but don't remember, I should get out more and read the SEO blogs.

LOL!

Don't worry about it, John just made them up anyway

vistadivine.com · 01-12-2007, 04:35 AM

I think its Danny Sullivan the best SEO.

**John Scott** · 01-12-2007, 04:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vistadivine.com

I think its Danny Sullivan the best SEO.

I'd think most SEO professionals would agree with you. And any top ten list of any legitimacy would also include Aaron Wall and Rand Fishkin.

vistadivine.com · 01-12-2007, 04:45 AM

Ya Aaron Wall is also one of the bests, and why are you forgetting about yourself.

**John Scott** · 01-12-2007, 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vistadivine.com

Ya Aaron Wall is also one of the bests, and why are you forgetting about yourself.

Not forgetting myself. I just don't want to compare myself, a deity, with mere mortals.

vistadivine.com · 01-12-2007, 04:50 AM

Ya but I can say you are a cool and great SEO professional.

**John Scott** · 01-12-2007, 04:50 AM

Thanks, Vista.

vistadivine.com · 01-12-2007, 04:52 AM

You are welcome bythe way I am Akash. Always a pleasure to be with some great SEOs like you.

casperl · 01-12-2007, 05:14 AM

Thanks. Looks like a nice list. And i am happy to know a few of them aready

I will research for the remaining ones..

Ferre · 01-12-2007, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

I'd think most SEO professionals would agree with you. And any top ten list of any legitimacy would also include Aaron Wall and Rand Fishkin.

Me thinks that Aaron (I don't know Rand Fishkin) should definately be on that list, as it is a top ten, that would mean that someone from the list you posted should be removed to make way for Aaron. Who would that be?

Ferre · 01-12-2007, 05:27 AM

Btw, I would remove Matt Cutts from that list. he is not an SEO professional but just someone who happens to sit in Google's kitchen and without that he would not know swat about SEO, the dude was a NSA agent before he was placed there. He knows about data collecting, not SEO.

TheBrain · 01-12-2007, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

I'd think most SEO professionals would agree with you. And any top ten list of any legitimacy would also include Aaron Wall and Rand Fishkin.

Then let's make a Top 20! This way no one will be left out. Anyway, for me Aaron Wall is the best!
@Ferre: I have to disagree! Matt Cutts is a good SEO. Honest and reliable. I read his blog often and I have nothing negative to say! He has done A LOT for Google. I think Google should pay him his weight in gold!

GChoi · 01-13-2007, 05:04 PM

They should also be on the list:
- Aaron Wall (I think he's very deserved of a place)
- John Scott (I think you must be being modest to leave out yourself)

Diddy1 · 01-13-2007, 10:46 PM

lol. I sorta started this whole thing about the top seo's. Anyways I think matt cutts would kick all of everyone's butt if he ever went into private practice. As I am sure there is no one who knows google's ranking factor more than him.

Thank you

khasmoth · 01-14-2007, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SasaVtec

WoW never heard of a single person on that list, maybe I have, but don't remember, I should get out more and read the SEO blogs.

LOL.. You should read them especially Matt Cutts and Danny Sullivan blog. How about Guy Kawasaki can we consider him as an SEO?

**John Scott** · 01-14-2007, 07:05 AM

Guy Kawasaki is more of a business blogger, borderline "Internet marketing", but not SEO by any stretch of the imagination.

Ferre · 01-14-2007, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBrain

@Ferre: I have to disagree! Matt Cutts is a good SEO. Honest and reliable. I read his blog often and I have nothing negative to say! He has done A LOT for Google. I think Google should pay him his weight in gold!

If he was not working in Google's kitchen he wouldn't know that much about SEO, it's not hard to look like an expert when you have access to all the inside information. Matt Cutts is just a spokesman, not a researcher, while all others research the effects of what they do, Matt Cutts only parrots his company's policy.

Put anyone on that position within Google and they'll have the same access to the knowledge that Matt displays and will be regarded as "experts". Sure, he knows the filters and algorithms better than anyone else but that isn't because he's such a good SEO expert, anyone could do that, given the access that he has.