nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Search Engine Optimisation

mark.h8080

I run a small business and we have had a website for about 5 years, now the website is grand and has our services and contact details etc but it's not in the top of google when I try and search it. People find us but I think that's from google our name directly. My nephew recently put analytics in our site and I was shocked by hits (despite us getting lots of calls each week, when asked they said they found us on directories like yelp).

My nephew who does web design at college said I should do some search engine optimisation (he does not know enough to do it but understands it, to me it's a foreign language) but to be careful who I choose.

I sent out some emails to companies I found online in Ireland and am waiting for replies on costing, but how much should I expect to spend on this and will it get me to the top of google in my area?

As a businessman of over 30 years in my sector I want to know my money is well spent and have been told by a fellow business operator they pay €200 a month. Is this the standard for an entry level seo or are there packages? It seems a lot of money to me unless I get business from the campaign.

Also, in my research I found a company called DPFOC who seem to be very high in google so my instinct is that this crowd know their business. Has anyone dealt with them? Can anyone recommend some companies for me to get quotes from to do the seo I need?

Do I need to pay people to do this or can I give my nephew information to make us top of searches in google, in this climate anything we can do ourselves would be of huge benefit.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

kennyb3

Peterdalkey wrote: »

This such a great topic and having spent much of the last year involved in rejuvenating our websites, improving SEO and tweaking AdWords campaigns alongside external designers and digital marketing talent. I learned a lot, understood most of it, spent time educating myself by reading online blogs, articles and SEO For Dummies. It is the combination of all of these that make it all work better. Probably the most important thing I understood was that I knew my market and the associated terms better than any Digital Marketing person ever could, what they knew was how to use that information effectively. Like regular marketing and advertising, it is your responsibility to manage, you use the external talent to get effective campaigns in place and fill the in-house expertise deficit.

I guess the important question, for someone now think of investing in this what is the time and monetary cost like to get proficient?

We are only a small business, in a professional area (read not online sales or anything) and i'm just wondering whether SEO and other marketing is really suited/conducive to the sector (or how you'd go about finding out)

riveratom

kennyb3 wrote: »

I guess the important question, for someone now think of investing in this what is the time and monetary cost like to get proficient?

We are only a small business, in a professional area (read not online sales or anything) and i'm just wondering whether SEO and other marketing is really suited/conducive to the sector (or how you'd go about finding out)

Unless you are well known brand or a very unique case, then you need to be focused on search and SEO! Everything is moving online and over 90% of people look for services and products online.

If you're not showing up for their searches, then you don't get found!

Mind if I ask what sector you are in? Will be better placed to advise then.

riveratom

MadsL wrote: »

Screwing up a website is easily reversible would be my point. "Bud".

How do you know this? And why would someone want to risk their livelihood - or even an income stream - by trying to find out?

MadsL

riveratom wrote: »

How do you know this?

Err... because basic common sense is to back up your website before making changes, therefore any changes to the website are easily reversible. As to other SEO efforts, backlinks, and the like, I doubt a novice will do something hugely damaging and irreversible.

Can you give me an example of such an action?

And why would someone want to risk their livelihood - or even an income stream - by trying to find out?

What change would anyone with the best interests of the business at heart make that would risk their livelihood.

I doubt very much given the OPs comments that more than 20% of their business comes from internet searches. If it did, SEO would have a much higher priority in their marketing strategy.

kennyb3

riveratom wrote: »

Mind if I ask what sector you are in? Will be better placed to advise then.

Cheers, I work in an accountancy practice.

I also provide bookkeeping services out of hours.

I'm more asking in the context of the former.

tricky D

MadsL wrote: »

Err... because basic common sense is to back up your website before making changes, therefore any changes to the website are easily reversible. As to other SEO efforts, backlinks, and the like, I doubt a novice will do something hugely damaging and irreversible.

Can you give me an example of such an action?

Post Penguin, the novice has much much greater scope for damaging actions. As for common sense, you'd be surprised how many don't do such simple tasks such as backing up.

Regarding the general jist of this thread, the SEO industry like web design in general, is practically unregulated (actually it's more like the Wild West), so the site owner themselves really does need to learn up on at least the basics. It's dangerous to just trust your 'SEO guy/gal even company', as far too many don't quite cut the mustard. If we were in a highly regulated industry like say Law, we could much more easily just leave it to the professionals (debatable). There's also other factors such as whether you think leaving it up to 3rd party to completely manage your company/site's marketing campaigns (of which SEO is a component) is such a good idea, especially given the impact of the likes of Social Media presently.

TsuDhoNimh

MadsL wrote: »

Can you give me an example of such an action?

Sure, there's a few hundred of them listed in the Google Webmaster Guidelines, any number of which when breached would get a site deindexed and many of which would require far more than a simple 'backup' to resolve.

MadsL wrote: »

I doubt a novice will do something hugely damaging and irreversible

Nothing is ever 'irreversible', but that doesn't mean it's always easy or fast to resolve and might not have massive consequences on the business in question.

Day in and day out novices do huge damage to their sites as they didn't know any better. From overoptimising internal anchor text links, to spamming title tags to make them "keyword rich, just like this one Google guy I heard said once" (that's an actual quote) to building links from low quality bad neighbourhoods, sites are hit with manual penalties and algorithmic penalties constantly due to lack of experience or knowledge by a 'novice'.

They obviously don't mean to hurt their own business, but they're not aware that what their doing is hurting their business until it's too late. Jump onto the Google Webmaster Forums and see just how many small business owners are there begging and pleading for help to get their site back into the index or remove that -X0 penalty, that their livelihood is at risk and jobs for xx employees as a result of this, just to be helped out and shown that it was something incredibly basic and obvious that caused the problem. In other cases, there are so many small issues with a site and no big 'headline' issue that identifying what issue or mix of issues is causing the problem is incredibly difficult even for experienced professionals.

The bottom line is that problems are very easy to cause, can be very difficult to diagnose and even more difficult to remove once picked up on by the search engines.

If you genuinely believe that "Screwing up a website is easily reversible..." I'd strongly suggest you look at cashing in on that. If you were able to reverse the hits that many sites took post Panda or post Penguin (and that sites continue to take on a daily basis as a result - and I'm talking about genuine sites with 'honest' issues, not spammy or blackhat sites), you'll be a very rich man as a result.

MadsL

tricky D wrote: »

Post Penguin, the novice has much much greater scope for damaging actions.

Fair point, I've been away from Sales this past year so have not followed developments such as this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Penguin

As for common sense, you'd be surprised how many don't do such simple tasks such as backing up.

Tell me about it, I've seen a few facepalm moments.

Regarding the general jist of this thread, the SEO industry like web design in general, is practically unregulated (actually it's more like the Wild West), so the site owner themselves really does need to learn up on at least the basics. It's dangerous to just trust your 'SEO guy/gal even company', as far too many don't quite cut the mustard. If we were in a highly regulated industry like say Law, we could much more easily just leave it to the professionals (debatable). There's also other factors such as whether you think leaving it up to 3rd party to completely manage your company/site's marketing campaigns (of which SEO is a component) is such a good idea, especially given the impact of the likes of Social Media presently.

I'd agree. The Irish industry could do with a professional body, representing the industry - with certified standards of training and experience levels.

The Apprentice

Im sorry to say this as it might end up going down the garden path. .

If you agree with the comments above then why were your arguing against them further up the thread, it just confusing man and you haven't heard of the Penguin update but you have a strong opinion on what is considered "irreversible" ... ? It doesnt make any sense. Your either trolling or .. your busting my chops just for the sake of an argument to see me wrong and you right .. makes no sense

Im actually gone beyond this thread at this moment !

MadsL

The Apprentice wrote: »

Im sorry to say this as it might end up going down the garden path. .

If you agree with the comments above then why were your arguing against them further up the thread, it just confusing man and you haven't heard of the Penguin update but you have a strong opinion on what is considered "irreversible" ... ? It doesnt make any sense. Your either trolling or .. your busting my chops just for the sake of an argument to see me wrong and you right .. makes no sense

Im actually gone beyond this thread at this moment !

As I admitted earlier, I haven't been working in this area for the past year - rather busy losing two jobs due to the economy in the last 12 months and emigrating.

As for trolling, I've reported that. I really don't appreciate accusations like that.

"If you agree with the comments above then why were your arguing against them further up the thread"

Read what I agreed with.

If Penguin is going to have/has had that big an impact then I stand corrected as to how irreversible changes are, as I said I have been away from this field for over a year - it now looks to me that Google needs a more effective appeals system.

riveratom

MadsL wrote: »

Err... because basic common sense is to back up your website before making changes, therefore any changes to the website are easily reversible. As to other SEO efforts, backlinks, and the like, I doubt a novice will do something hugely damaging and irreversible.

Can you give me an example of such an action?

What change would anyone with the best interests of the business at heart make that would risk their livelihood.

I doubt very much given the OPs comments that more than 20% of their business comes from internet searches. If it did, SEO would have a much higher priority in their marketing strategy.

I'm sorry, but you are openly showing how going on a day-long training course is really just touching the very tip of the iceberg when it comes to knowing what you should and shouldn't be doing!

You are clearly a novice yourself, and you could easily make changes that would be damaging. The fact that you say that it is unlikely a novice will do anything damaging is misguided. How about getting another novice to spam a load of websites with links to your own site, or spend a couple of hundred euro on content that they then duplicate across a whole bunch of websites?

MadsL

riveratom wrote: »

I'm sorry, but you are openly showing how going on a day-long training course is really just touching the very tip of the iceberg when it comes to knowing what you should and shouldn't be doing!

I attended that training course over three years ago, I'm pretty sure that course has been updated since. I haven't had any requirement to do any hands on SEO in the last two and half years.

Given a very limited budget, I'm simply advising the OP that training is worthwhile.

In the time since that training SEO has moved at a rapid pace - were I to be doing SEO now; I would expect to have to refresh my knowledge to take into account those changes.

I'm capable of doing a course to teach me how to do simple tax returns myself, but if that course was in 2009 and I don't keep up to date, of course I am not doing myself any favours.

riveratom

MadsL wrote: »

I attended that training course over three years ago, I'm pretty sure that course has been updated since. I haven't had any requirement to do any hands on SEO in the last two and half years.

Given a very limited budget, I'm simply advising the OP that training is worthwhile.

In the time since that training SEO has moved at a rapid pace - were I to be doing SEO now; I would expect to have to refresh my knowledge to take into account those changes.

I'm capable of doing a course to teach me how to do simple tax returns myself, but if that course was in 2009 and I don't keep up to date, of course I am not doing myself any favours.

Fair enough, but you are shifting your position now, just like the Apprentice said. Your original argument was that you would recommend choosing training over hiring an expert / someone qualified. Now you're just saying that training is just worthwhile.

It is critical to do things right and do them consistently when it comes to SEO, and so you either need to be highly invested in doing it right yourself, getting someone within your organisation who can do it in your place - or hire someone. Going on a training course simply isn't enough on its own - it's fine as a supplement, not as a replacement!

MadsL

riveratom wrote: »

Fair enough, but you are shifting your position now, just like the Apprentice said. Your original argument was that you would recommend choosing training over hiring an expert / someone qualified. Now you're just saying that training is just worthwhile.

I recommended choosing training over hiring an expert when on a limited budget. If the OP has the money for experts of course it is better to choose an expert.

As I posted earlier

MadsL wrote: »

I think the debate is, given a limited budget, spend it on training or consultants. I'd spend it on training tbh.

The OP is baulking at €200 a month, Matrix say they can get him to page 1 for €500. I'd spend it on training, you disagree.

It is critical to do things right and do them consistently when it comes to SEO, and so you either need to be highly invested in doing it right yourself, getting someone within your organisation who can do it in your place - or hire someone. Going on a training course simply isn't enough on its own - it's fine as a supplement, not as a replacement!

How would one go about "doing it right yourself or getting someone within your organisation who can do it in your place" without investing in training or other knowledge development. That's what I was recommending as a first step.

Just what percentage of business do you think comes to this business from the web? I'm inclined to say 20:80 rule applies, and web is less than twenty percent in this businesses case.

OP, any figures?

mark.h8080

I'm sorry for causing an argument. Seems that this topic can raise some hard opinions, but I thank you all for the replies so far and advice.

I have looked at it more over the last weekend and I'm a bit confused about a few things, I understand we can do some things now ourselves like optimise pages with the important words and titles, which I am trying to do and seems pretty straightforward actually.

I'm still unsure about doing the content changes, what we have in each page nails what we do but I was Pm'd about content optimisation and doing bold tags, now let me tell you I can do bold tags in word but i'm not sure in web language and does it really matter? I'm very reluctant to write fluff to put thins in bold, call me old fashion but been told to bold things and make pages that talk about what is already in out site but called differently seems like a waste of time to me when our site has over 30 pages that explains our service etc in detail.

I have also been told to create links to other sites to get higher ranks and to be honest, how it was explained, made no sense to me.

I am fairly good on the computer and have managed a few pointers provided but some of this just seems absurd, why do I need to make more pages when it's already in our site, the content I mean?

From a few people I spoke to this all seems very unclear, no-one will tell me what they will do for seo or what I can get, I asked how long and all I get is "piece of string" answers which is disconcerting.

Is the information I am receiving deliberately confusing or can anyone recommend someone I can talk to with no-obligation.

tricky D

Don't worry about the starting an argument, happens all the time with this type of subject where the landscape changes and things aren't simply black and white.

Wrt bold tags, it's not bold you want, but strong. Bold just makes it look bold but strong makes it mean strong and by default, makes it look strong too. Semantics vs looks. SEO likes good semantics.

Linking out to other sites isn't good advice. You want it the other way around, but it's not that simple. You've got keep it natural and organic and pay attention to certain practices.

I'll put together a better PM for you tomorrow (I'm going out) and point you to a couple of very reliable reads for you to learn from.

TsuDhoNimh

mark.h8080 wrote: »

... but I was Pm'd about content optimisation and doing bold tags, now let me tell you I can do bold tags in word but i'm not sure in web language and does it really matter? I'm very reluctant to write fluff to put thins in bold, call me old fashion but been told to bold things and make pages that talk about what is already in out site but called differently seems like a waste of time to me when our site has over 30 pages that explains our service etc in detail.

Excellent intuition there.

Bolding text for the sake of bolding it is old hat and, relatively speaking, a complete waste of time. The same goes for randomly trying to cram keywords into header tags (h1, h2, etc.). It used to give a measurable, yet still minute, benefit a long time ago but is somewhere between negligible and non existent in todays algorithms. The only sites still suggesting this, or consultants still advising it, are recycling information that's very old while the industry has moved beyond this at a rapid pace.

Keep your most important content (or keywords/phrases) to the forefront of your copy (at the start - this is the most likely to get read and therefore will receive a higher rating than terms that appear randomly at the end of copy). If it makes sense to give it a specific type of formatting, apply it, but don't go out of your way to add any tags purely for any assumed SEO benefits.

Thinking of it from your own point of view, would any tiny potential SEO benefits that might be achieved by this type of activity be worth the negative side of doing it without your users experience being improved? Hopefully the answer is no.

mark.h8080 wrote: »

I have also been told to create links to other sites to get higher ranks and to be honest, how it was explained, made no sense to me.

This isn't quite so questionable, but the devil is in the detail and how it's explained will go a long way to explaining how it would end up being of benefit to you and avoid you attempting to do it in the wrong way.

The only point you should take from this, and what should have been said to you to begin with, is to make the content the best possible resource for your users. You want it to be outstanding and something that they are not only willing and happy to share and link to, but something they're keen to share on your behalf (whether that be via word of mouth, social sharing or a backlink).

If linking out to an external site improves the quality of your resource, link out. Don't avoid linking out in an attempt to avoid losing link juice/authority and overly manipulate the flow of authority to remain on your own site (something that is overly common in the industry and another dated practice, similar to advice to 'nofollow' external links to retain PR on site, that should have died years ago).

From a technical point of view, if you were running a search engine and looking to find the best possible resource for a given keyword/keyphrase, would you view a site that was linking out to highly authoritative, high quality, highly relevant content from a page as a positive, a negative or a neutral thing? On the other hand, if a site never linked out to content on other sites, would that look natural, organic and providing the best possible information for a user?

There's plenty of correlation in the industry to suggest linking out isn't harmful to rankings (which isn't the same as being beneficial - plus add in the normal caveats around correlation and causation), but there's no tangible proof to suggest that it's actually helpful in and of itself.

What is helpful, and would be my suggestion on why the correlation exists, is that linking out to sites is how the web is intended to work, that sharing beneficial information is what your users want and that by making your content stronger (by including links to relevant data) your performance will improve as it will be providing a better user experience.

mark.h8080 wrote: »

why do I need to make more pages when it's already in our site, the content I mean?

I'm not sure what exactly is meant by this point. Were you told to create duplicate pages or something?

In any case, don't hurt your domain and your site by doing anything stupid like that. If you can't see the benefit for your users in doing something that is suggested to you by an SEO you're more than likely dead right (or else you need to get them to explain it in a far clearer manner and it's their fault). If you have a page that someone suggests you copy/duplicate (my assumption is that maybe they were suggesting manipulating existing pages to target related keywords?), think about a way you could achieve a similar result (getting a keyword included in your content, if my assumption is correct) in a way that will actually benefit your users.

mark.h8080 wrote: »

From a few people I spoke to this all seems very unclear, no-one will tell me what they will do for seo or what I can get, I asked how long and all I get is "piece of string" answers which is disconcerting.

Any decent provider should be more than happy to clearly explain what they will do and what they provide for a given price. If they can't, then you're looking at the wrong provider and need to look for someone else.

As for the 'piece of string', that depends on what it's in relation to. If someone promises "I'll get you on Page 1 for these 10 keywords", run a mile. No decent provider can ever make a promise like that (if they do they're lying), as there are too many factors at play that are out of their control (potentially they can say if they don't achieve something they won't charge, but they can't promise to achieve anything).

What they should be clearly explaining is what work they will do (and if it includes elements like external link building how it would be executed, with specific reference to adhering to search engine guidelines), how it will benefit your site and most importantly what you can expect to achieve in the short/medium and long term (e.g. Short term = Target very specific long tail terms that will drive extremely qualified traffic that will convert but at relatively low volumes; Medium term = Expand the volume of long tail terms driving traffic and by improving the authority of the domain build up the ability to rank for a small number of higher volume head terms; etc.).

The truth is that no outsourcing of digital marketing is a complete outsource solution. You know your business better than any marketer ever will, so they'll need you to help produce the right type of content and provide expertise where they're lacking. They'll be providing the input in terms of what terms you should be targeting (based on search volume and competition for that phrase) and even in terms of how best to execute it, but without seeking input from you in terms of the actual content it will lack the expertise to make it exceptional (the type of content someone would wish to link to). With that in mind, when working with a freelancer/agency it needs to be someone you feel you can work with and that you trust. (Easier said than done, I know)

mark.h8080 wrote: »

Is the information I am receiving deliberately confusing or can anyone recommend someone I can talk to with no-obligation.

It's not deliberately confusing in many cases, but it can be a combination of good suppliers not taking enough time on an initial consultation, some providers being excellent technically but not having the communication skills to put it across in a digestible way and some being chancers who don't actually know what they're talking about and just throwing buzz words and out of date information at you (in many cases, being unaware themselves that they're actually talking out their hats).

In some cases, it will be someone just trying to pick up a quick pay day knowing that they know very little, but you'd normally be able to identify those pretty quickly.

daigo75

TsuDhoNimh wrote: »

Sure, there's a few hundred of them listed in the Google Webmaster Guidelines, any number of which when breached would get a site deindexed and many of which would require far more than a simple 'backup' to resolve.

This is by far one of the best contributions to this thread. I'm surprised how many "SEO gurus" recommend and engage into practices that clearly violate Google's guidelines, such as :

Automatically generated content. Extremely common nowadays amongst self-proclaimed "Internet Marketers". Not to mention the pathetic content spinning, used to spam the Internet with garbage articles.
Participating in link schemes. Same as above.
Cloaking. As spread as weeds, this is how "Internet Marketers" try to fool their visitors into clicking on affiliate links. As a 15 years old "IM guru" told me, "you must have deception skills to sell".
Scraped content. Close cousin of the automatically generated content, with the difference that this content is copied from someone else (without permission). I even know of a big company in Dublin which relies on scraping for its business (it could get the data officially, but, you know, they charge a subscription price...).
Participating in affiliate programs without adding sufficient value. The best of the best. Websites built on top of all the above, in the belief that "you just do it once, and then wait for the money to roll in".

I've been offered so many times one or more of these options, that I chose to take care of SEO myself. It's really not complicated, as long as one dedicates time to it.

TsuDhoNimh

daigo75 wrote: »

I'm surprised how many "SEO gurus" recommend and engage into practices that clearly violate Google's guidelines

The ones recommending these kind of things I can kind of live with. Don't get me wrong, I don't condone or advocate any of those things, but if someone is being honest about doing them then at least it's up front on what's being offered (which is spam, not SEO or digital marketing in any shape or form).

If they clearly state what they intend on doing, even better if they clearly identify the risk/reward profile of what they're suggesting (though those who practise these tactics always suggest the risk is minimal until a ban/penalty hits), then it's down to caveat emptor and an informed client can at least make the decision to avoid them (which they should, obviously).

The problem occurs when everyone, from the pump 'em and dump 'em gurus to the genuinely knowledgeable providers, all preach from the same book but behind closed doors operate in vastly different ways. This is scarily common in the industry and something that there's no obvious or realistic way of combating.

The story where Google ended up outsourcing work themselves to a business that ended up breaching Google's own guidelines (a pitch was made by a firm to do some type of video promotion for adoption of Chrome as a browser, Google employed them, some of the promotional work was then outsourced to a 3rd party that employed 'questionable' techniques - some as blatant as those daigo just mentioned) shows just how easy this can occur and puts it into perspective just how difficult it can be for a small business to navigate the minefield. (Google even ended up applying penalties to a number of their own pages, though for a very short period, in an attempt to show a 'we play by the same rules')

Zascar

Op can you post a link to your website? The problem with seo is it totally depends on how bad your site is right now. If it's really awful it might be easier to get a new website than make your current one good for seo. I helped a friend redo his website in wordpress with some seo plugins and good keywords etc and his google rankings had a huge improvement. He was getting some very expensive quotes to try to do something with his old site. I know seo is more than just how the site is designed - but using something decent like wordpress is a good start, and if your site is a very simple brochure site you can get a new one for a few hundred quid...

Just my 2c

Kersh

What a super thread. Very interesting reading.

BnB

daigo75 wrote: »

This is by far one of the best contributions to this thread. I'm surprised how many "SEO gurus" recommend and engage into practices that clearly violate Google's guidelines, such as :
Automatically generated content. Extremely common nowadays amongst self-proclaimed "Internet Marketers". Not to mention the pathetic content spinning, used to spam the Internet with garbage articles.

Participating in link schemes. Same as above.

Cloaking. As spread as weeds, this is how "Internet Marketers" try to fool their visitors into clicking on affiliate links. As a 15 years old "IM guru" told me, "you must have deception skills to sell".

Scraped content. Close cousin of the automatically generated content, with the difference that this content is copied from someone else (without permission). I even know of a big company in Dublin which relies on scraping for its business (it could get the data officially, but, you know, they charge a subscription price...).

Participating in affiliate programs without adding sufficient value. The best of the best. Websites built on top of all the above, in the belief that "you just do it once, and then wait for the money to roll in".

I've been offered so many times one or more of these options, that I chose to take care of SEO myself. It's really not complicated, as long as one dedicates time to it.

Thanks to all contributers to this thread. I am just launching into SEO myself for a number of sites for our business. I plan to use a combination of getting an outside expert in to give me a good start, but also learning enough myself so that I can keep it going. The info on this thread so far has been brilliant.

Just in relation to the post above, particularly the advice being given RE Scraped and Automatically generated content - This seems to be what Google says and a lot of blogs etc will agree with it, but yet..... When I search for something on Google, a lot of the first page results is very often just that. Rubbish sites with scraped content etc.

Now, it is not a road I would consider going down because I think your site looks terrible with it, but purely from a search results point of view from what I can see as a user - It seems to work.

TsuDhoNimh

BnB wrote: »

... but purely from a search results point of view from what I can see as a user - It seems to work.

That's the problem, they all work. If they didn't work, they wouldn't be used (and abused).

You'll often see people in the industry say that these tactics "don't work", but what they mean is that if you employ them you'll eventually find yourself getting hit hard. They don't mean "they'll never provide a short term gain", they mean that it's not a sustainable business model or marketing model, it's not the image that your site/business/brand wan't to portray and that once you do get caught for it the negative impacts in the long term will completely eclipse the short term gains you might have made.

The question is how long will they work for and how much can somebody earn in that time vs. how much will it cost them to do it. Until we reach a point where the work required to do the spamming (which is minimal to be honest, given that the majority of the work is completely automated) isn't worth it for the returns (extremely difficult, if Google are too aggressive in hitting potentially questionable activity more and more completely innocent sites would end up getting hit), you'll continue to see muck like that show up in results.

To be fair, it works far less effectively now than it did six or twelve months ago. I hope that we'll be saying the same, even more emphatically, in another six or twelve months. However for the minute, yes, most of that spammy crap does still appear in results.

L.Jenkins

To the OP. If you want to do some research in the area of SEO, here is a link to a PDF file you can read.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CEMQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fwebmasters%2Fdocs%2Fsearch-engine-optimization-starter-guide.pdf&ei=CV6JUIW_C4jbsgaPvoHQDg&usg=AFQjCNEMj8KHxhxQz9cMLoMxMDiLdrAbJw&sig2=OWkdlYwiDIt65F5hmIt26w

If you have trouble understanding some of the content, I would advise you to Google it, to gain a further understanding of the topic.

flynnlives

Im from a web dev backgorund and have been building sites for 3 or so years.
Im looking to move across into SEO so im looking to gain experience. Im fairly tech knowledgeable and have a good idea
about SEO and constantly learning.

Im basically looking to take on 3/4 clients for 2/3 months, train them up whilst helping them improve their ranking.
if anyone is interested they can pm me. The experience is more valuable to me then the money.

[Deleted User]

I will simply add what someone said some pages back......as with everything.....You get what you pay for.

Is it easy to get to get to page 1?
Yep....I did it with my first go at SEO...but with Google adwords....and it was in a very Compeditive Sector I may add.

Thats the thing about the net......if you want to learn anything....it is there to tap into.

TsuDhoNimh

EIREHotspur wrote: »

I did it with my first go at SEO...but with Google adwords...

Just to try and avoid confusion in the thread and derailing the conversation on SEO....

Paid search advertising is completely different to search engine optimisation. SEO is exclusively related to organic results.

You might have been on the first page of Google, but it wasn't SEO that got you there or SEO that you were doing.

Axwell

Mod Note: Thread moved to a more suitable place.

A note to the OP also, a lot of people lately in these kind of threads saying pm me for help/advice. At the end of the day SEO is important for your business and the wrong type of work can do as much damage as the right kind can help. If you are going to pm people for help or advice I would first make sure they have the expertise by seeing previous work, testimonials etc.

tricky D

Axwell wrote: »

If you are going to pm people for help or advice I would first make sure they have the expertise by seeing previous work, testimonials etc.

Also, previous posts.

blue4ever

"I did it with my first go at SEO...but with Google adwords"

I'll translate that:

I don't know the difference between Adwords and SEO.

C