Comments on: Google SEO Guidelines http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html I think there's an opinion on that subject lying around here somewhere.... Thu, 23 May 2013 01:07:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: Mark Nicholson http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134111 Fri, 06 Jul 2012 01:05:45 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134111 It seems the ratio of exact match anchors is something they've likely been sitting on for some time. With the data they pull or access, I think they've held off pulling the trigger on this one. Past updates have affected all niches the way this has. As they beef up measurable signals like social interactions and visitor actions, there aren't many obvious signals left to police. The flux has increase too, so indexing has improved, but the weight and authority of a link is still one factor where I think we will see improvements. Keep in mind something Schmidt said; "brands are how we sort the cesspool" It's deep now, autogen churn/burners have a shorter lifespan. Most black hats seem to be using income to create real businesses last few years too. It seems the ratio of exact match anchors is something they’ve likely been sitting on for some time. With the data they pull or access, I think they’ve held off pulling the trigger on this one. Past updates have affected all niches the way this has.

As they beef up measurable signals like social interactions and visitor actions, there aren’t many obvious signals left to police.

The flux has increase too, so indexing has improved, but the weight and authority of a link is still one factor where I think we will see improvements.

Keep in mind something Schmidt said;
“brands are how we sort the cesspool”

It’s deep now, autogen churn/burners have a shorter lifespan.
Most black hats seem to be using income to create real businesses last few years too.

]]> by: Brad Dalton http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134109 Thu, 05 Jul 2012 21:47:11 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134109 The problem is Google should never be allowed to control such a large percentage of the search market in the first place. Bing has a new tool to Disavow links which Google should also offer to support webmasters. Content should be created and indexed based on ones own personal experience and not simply content marketing based on research and rewritten ideas. Google could easily credit original content producers and should penalize domains creating content simply to produce links and traffic. The problem is Google should never be allowed to control such a large percentage of the search market in the first place.

Bing has a new tool to Disavow links which Google should also offer to support webmasters.

Content should be created and indexed based on ones own personal experience and not simply content marketing based on research and rewritten ideas.

Google could easily credit original content producers and should penalize domains creating content simply to produce links and traffic.

]]> by: Tyler Herman http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134106 Thu, 05 Jul 2012 18:06:12 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134106 Also forgot, the biggest problem behind SEO is the mystery. SEOs need to start being trasparent, especially the "white hats". Show a case study of how your blog post when viral and sent 100,000 visitors to your clients site and built 150 new links in a single day. Tell clients exactly what you are doing. If the client wants to do the work themselves they can but ultimately if the links you build are hard to get, the content you create is awesome, people will pay you for your expertise. Also forgot, the biggest problem behind SEO is the mystery.

SEOs need to start being trasparent, especially the “white hats”.

Show a case study of how your blog post when viral and sent 100,000 visitors to your clients site and built 150 new links in a single day.

Tell clients exactly what you are doing. If the client wants to do the work themselves they can but ultimately if the links you build are hard to get, the content you create is awesome, people will pay you for your expertise.

]]> by: john andrews http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134104 Thu, 05 Jul 2012 17:29:45 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134104 "Peter Says: I guess i am one of the stupid clients, weel not really cause we don’t have any SEO thing going on." @Peter maybe you haven't done the math yet. Check your main search referrals, and your ranking position in Google for those terms. If you're not #1 for those specific searches, there is potentially a lot more traffic available (search market share). How can you get it? Steal it via improved marketing (snippet, ppc, other properties) or increase your ranking position. Stepping up in rank position usually boosts search market share far more than other methods. “Peter Says: I guess i am one of the stupid clients, weel not really cause we don’t have any SEO thing going on.”

@Peter maybe you haven’t done the math yet. Check your main search referrals, and your ranking position in Google for those terms. If you’re not #1 for those specific searches, there is potentially a lot more traffic available (search market share). How can you get it? Steal it via improved marketing (snippet, ppc, other properties) or increase your ranking position. Stepping up in rank position usually boosts search market share far more than other methods.

]]> by: john andrews http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134103 Thu, 05 Jul 2012 17:21:59 +0000 http://www.johnon.com/782/google-seo-guidelines.html#comment-134103 @Russ: yes we know the "link disavow" tool from Google is coming any day now. But that tool is not a big deal, until it is combined with more comprehensive exposure of Google's knowledge of the seo industry. I would not expect Google to support a covert nofollow for published links, since that is so clearly deceptive to the user. I have been wrong about Google's boldness in the past, however. @dave thanks and I agree about exploiting seo clients. That's exactly what would happen in the long term, but the current players (including Google) seem to be all about the short term right now.I think if you look at those SEOs who would be in the "Trusted" program, they are already exploiting their clients to a large degree. I believe that's a part of why the real SEO talent is currently working "all in" for select industries or clients or owned projects. "Where there is trust, there is an exploit" and it hurts to allow a third party to gain from those exploits... own it and monetize/or defend all angles. @Russ: yes we know the “link disavow” tool from Google is coming any day now. But that tool is not a big deal, until it is combined with more comprehensive exposure of Google’s knowledge of the seo industry. I would not expect Google to support a covert nofollow for published links, since that is so clearly deceptive to the user. I have been wrong about Google’s boldness in the past, however.

@dave thanks and I agree about exploiting seo clients. That’s exactly what would happen in the long term, but the current players (including Google) seem to be all about the short term right now.I think if you look at those SEOs who would be in the “Trusted” program, they are already exploiting their clients to a large degree. I believe that’s a part of why the real SEO talent is currently working “all in” for select industries or clients or owned projects. “Where there is trust, there is an exploit” and it hurts to allow a third party to gain from those exploits… own it and monetize/or defend all angles.

]]>