Intrapromote

Subscribe

April 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

« November 2005 | Main | January 2006 »

December 23, 2005

Happy Holidays to Speedwagon Readers

SEO Speedwagon is heading into the garage until the first week of January. We wish everyone Happy Holidays and a prosperous new year.

If you're flying during the next few weeks, here are two good reasons to behave:

  1. Flight attendants don't care who you are.
  2. Gate agents don't either.

See you soon.

Posted by erik at 01:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Avoid Link Candidates that Stop Short!

It’s not acceptable for someone to stop short with your wife, and it shouldn’t be acceptable for someone to stop short with your link!

Most times, you can predict that a link candidate will stop short. If other links on the page indicate a predilection for the stop short, get out of the car! Unless you feel that the stop short link will directly send traffic, save your time for link candidates that will give you full value for your link.

When link candidates stop short, their links do not impact your search engine relevance. Below are the most common stop short tactics:

  • seoblog.intrapromote.com – A url link only tells the search engines that your site is about the url.

  • seoblog.intrapromote.com/ – If links are not clickable, they do not tell search engines anything.

  • SEO Speedwagon Blog – If you see JavaScript when you mouse over a link, assume search engines will never see it.

  • Click here – Your site is not about click here, so avoid sites that tell search engines your site is about click here.


Your time is your greatest commodity. Devote it to the quality sites that also offer clean text links.

Happy Festivus!

Posted by tom at 10:06 AM | Comments (0)

December 21, 2005

Are You the Master of Your Domain?

Just a few quick notes about domain management. These are things we see over and over and over again while we do initial site evaluations.

  • If you scooped up multiple domains (for example, nike.com, nikeshoes.com, nikeapparel.com, and so on), that's fine. But be very sure you know the exact status of each one.

    Merely "pointing" them to the main site and trying to make sure that no one links to the secondary domains is not good enough. In a recent site eval, a reverse IP lookup showed that a client had three total domain names sitting on one IP address. "But only the main domain is active," he said.

    He was wrong. The Big Three engines had indexed portions of all three sites to varying degrees because he had not ensured that the two "inactive" domains redirected to the main site properly.

  • The same concept holds true for subdomains. Make sure that you've solved any "canonical domain" issues. Typically, this means that http://domain.com should redirect (via 301) to http://www.domain.com. Otherwise, engines can crawl "both" sites (even though there's really only one) and think you're posting a mirror site. (Google is getting better at "getting" this, but they're not 100% there yet.)

    This became critical for another site evaluation client whose Apache server was set up incorrectly. For some reason, the server was incorrectly utilizing "wildcard subdomains." In this particular case, any subdomain you entered would resolve to the main site. In other words, spam.domain.com, lies.domain.com, and crazy.domain.com were all mirror images of www.domain.com.

    This became a real headache when an actual fan of his site linked to him - but mistyped the URL. His fan linked to ww.domain.com instead of www.domain.com. See where this is going?

    To top it off, this client had set up most of his internal navigation links as relative instead of absolute. As a result, dozens of pages on the ww subdomain had been crawled and indexed, which created a real mess that's still not entirely resolved. (Thanks to Yahoo Site Explorer for playing detective. I really, really love that tool.)

Domain issues often get lost in the shuffle of everyday web dev and SEO. But make sure to check them out periodically, because they can cause significant problems if left untethered.

Posted by erik at 11:45 PM | Comments (2)

December 20, 2005

Google Search Results in a Wiki Thicket

Oilman got a hot tip about a new UI test involving Google results pages.

He points out that appending the terms "information" or "info" to simple concepts (such as [typing info], [driving information], and so on) often triggers the serving of the Wikipedia definition of that term as the top Google result.

I did more poking, and not only does it occur in a ton of different searches, but that result is also given a font size boost, and in some cases, a placement boost (see the Adidas example later in this post). For example, a typical Google descriptive "snippet" has a font size of "-1". The Wiki results don't have that attribute, resulting in text size that is the same as the blue title text. Following is the top result at Google for [airline information]:

Top Google result for [airline information]

It's hard to get excited about this; the result above is unlikely to be helpful to anyone older than nine.

Historically, Google has had an interesting relationship with "information"-based queries, often producing pages from Answers.com or Business.com in the top spot for brand-focused queries such as [adidas information]. (Note that in this search, the Wiki result surpasses even the Froogle results.) But Wikipedia appears to be the new authority in town, doubtless leaving Answers.com wishing it had ... answers.

Due mostly to its raison d'etre of offering real-time edits by anyone, Wikipedia has had its share of negative press this year, including controversies surrounding former MTV veejay (and current Podcast evangelist) Adam Curry; former assistant to Robert Kennedy, John Seigenthaler; and even Wikipedia's founder, Jimmy Wales.

A bit of good news came recently, however, when a study by the journal Nature put Wikipedia on par with Encyclopaedia Britannica in terms of accuracy:

The exercise revealed numerous errors in both encyclopaedias, but among 42 entries tested, the difference in accuracy was not particularly great: the average science entry in Wikipedia contained around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three.

So for better or worse, Wikipedia isn't going anywhere. For SEOs and their clients, the pressing concern is whether its rise to fame hinders their branding message, and if so, how they're going to handle it.

Posted by erik at 03:56 PM | Comments (0)

December 19, 2005

You Think Your Keywords Are Competitive?

List fanatics love the last few weeks of every calendar year. Search engine freaks are no exception, because that's when engines release their top searches of that year.

Yahoo and Lycos are the first to make their announcements. Following are their Top 10 searches of 2005. (Please check out the sites too, because they sub-categorize searches and show some very interesting data.)

Yahoo Top 10 for 2005:

  1. Britney Spears
  2. 50 Cent
  3. Cartoon Network
  4. Mariah Carey
  5. Green Day
  6. Jessica Simpson
  7. Paris Hilton
  8. Eminem
  9. Ciara
  10. Lindsay Lohan

What did you expect? "How to be a good citizen"? "Best foreign films"? Grow up.

Lycos Top 10 for 2005:

  1. Paris Hilton
  2. Pamela Anderson
  3. Britney Spears
  4. Poker
  5. Dragonball
  6. Jennifer Lopez
  7. WWE
  8. Pokemon
  9. Playstation
  10. Hurricane Katrina

Just to show you how far we've (not) come in six years, following are the Top 10 Lycos searches for 1999. The more things change...

  1. Pokemon
  2. Britney Spears
  3. WWF
  4. Dragonball Z
  5. Pamela Anderson
  6. Star Wars
  7. Backstreet Boys
  8. Poetry
  9. Halloween
  10. Blair Witch Project

That's right. A full 50% of the top 10 terms from 1999 are still in the top 10 six years later. (This assumes we can call [WWF] and [WWE] the same term. If not, I'm afraid I'll have to hit you with a folding chair.)

FYI, [Y2K] was #20 in CY99.

I'm hoping that Google Zeitgeist will release some interesting lists in the next week or so as well. "Stay tuned," as they said long, long ago.

Posted by erik at 10:37 PM | Comments (0)

Pay Per Click - Naughty or Nice?

Return On Investment (ROI), three words that can strike fear into the heart of any Pay Per Click (PPC) campaign manager. Is my campaign producing enough ROI? How can I get more ROI? And, Is there ever enough ROI?

From the campaigns that I have been involved in both directly and indirectly, I've seen a few truisms that, when applied, can lead to better ROI. Interestingly enough skill and talent are last on list.

First, as location is to real estate, communication is to ROI. If goals, expectations, and measurements are not clearly communicated then the chances for successful ROI are greatly decreased.

Secondly, Pinocchio’s nose grew every time he told a lie, and every time you're not upfront with your client in communicating what is actually going on, their view of the ROI will go down. Let clients decide the level of detail that they want, and don't assume - we all know the acronym for that.....

Finally, in regards to the three questions mentioned in the opening here are the answers that get to the heart of the issue, regardless of technique.

  • Is my campaign producing enough ROI? Ask your client, they'll tell you. Compare results against what the plan was. And only adjust with the client’s explicit approval.
  • How can I get more ROI? Understand your client. Typically, the techniques to success are tried and true, but the better you understand your client, what their business is, who their customer is, and what they are expecting to receive, the better the ROI is going to be.
  • Is there ever enough ROI? YES. You thought I was going to say no didn't you. I prefer to look at it in a logical equation. If there is never enough ROI, then the goal can never be met.....etc..... I believe in goals, they are good, healthy benchmarks that keep us focused and on task. To exceed the goal is a great thing, don't get me wrong, but to never set a bar for success is a sure way to create an environment for eventual disappointment and perceived failure.

Ultimately, IMHO I think that exceptional ROI is measured in good communication as much as it is in actual numbers. Try taking a few minutes and evaluating your current campaigns with the above criterion and see how you feel about your current ROI.

This humble blogger wants to say thank you to all of the readers out there and wish you all a wonderful Christmas!

Posted by brent at 11:08 AM | Comments (0)

December 16, 2005

Search Engine Traffic Growing - Big Time!

Peter Gabriel's 1986 hit "Big Time" has a line in the first verse:

"I'm gonna watch it growing - Big Time!"

gabriel-1.gifI doubt Peter was thinking about search engine traffic when he wrote "Big Time". But I think of this song and lyric often. Especially as we close out another year and take time to compare search traffic numbers historically for many of our clients. After all, a significant portion of SEO's bottom line is getting target audience visitors to your site from Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc.

I want to tip my cap today to companies that have embraced search engine optimization for the long term. Too many companies take a half-hearted attempt at SEO ("Just have the web guy throw some keywords in there"). I've also seen companies with sites that change frequently, that think a one-time SEO project is all they need.

Here are 7 common characteristics of companies big and small that have committed to ongoing site optimization and are reaping the reward of steadily increasing search traffic:

1. They understand the search behavior of their target audience. They know exactly how potential customers are using search engines to seek out their products and services. They understand that search behavior can be dynamic...yes, they even know how their target audience searches during different times of the year!

2. They are flexible with their site content. They will even add a content-rich page to their site if an important keyword phrase is identified and there is no existing page on the site focused on that phrase.

3. They understand that it's easier and smarter to optimize a new page on their site during the development process, not afterward.

4. They have web analytics programs that provide search engine referrer data so they always know exactly how many visitors find their site through each search engine.

5. They understand the importance and necessity of having high quality incoming links from other sites.

6. Their copywriters effectively balance the "voice" of the site with search behavior intelligence. Their "art" isn't a higher priority than allowing people to find and visit their site.

7. Their search traffic over the long term contines to grow and grow and grow...

gabriel-3.gifIf I can take some liberty with Peter's closing lyric:

"My search traffic is getting bigger!
Big Time!
And my bank account!
Big Time!"

Is your search traffic growing big time? Are you a company like the one described above? In my next post, look for some nitty gritty historical search traffic data from such a company.

Posted by doug at 01:20 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 15, 2005

Directory Submission: The Wagon Way

Since the birth of the link building craze, opportunists have responded with the creation/inundation of directories awaiting your submission fee. Pay me to “review� your site, and I will add it to my directory if I “approve� it. Not much different than Dr. Lecter’s quid pro quo tactics or your average reciprocal linking arrangement, methinks.

You can easily get lost while searching for directories to which you should submit, so stick to the path created by various blogs and forums. Also, largely since Jagger’s birth, search engines strive to assess value to directory links in a fashion similar to how they treat reciprocal links. Value still resides in links from human-edited, focused directories, but the opposite types are bereft of value, even harmful in extreme cases.

What should you pay for directory links? Below is the short answer:

  • $299 – Yahoo is a must.

  • $40 – Only if substantial traffic is associated. Joeant, for example.

  • $10 - $20 – Only if focused, human-edited, and offering text links. Yeandi, for example.

  • Free – Only if focused, etc., and RESPONSIVE. DMOZ is an exception, Illumirate is an example.

Directories are essential, but guard your time and wallet closely.

Posted by tom at 02:03 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

December 14, 2005

Who's Doing the Work Here, SEM Friend?

Search Insider has a fascinating interview today with a secret SEO agent, codenamed Rohit, operating out of India. Rohit handles search engine marketing outsourced from the U.S., but you may be surprised to find out that his clients are not whom you might think, or rather your SEM may not be actually who you think it is:

He's not willing to share his real name or the name of his company with the press. Due to non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), he cannot disclose the names of the leading SEM firms who employ him and his fast-growing company.

Call me naive or a purist, but I simply didn't imagine outsourcing was occurring at the top of the SEM pyramid, especially considering the involved subcontracting disclosures normally required in contracts involving fortune 500 companies. Yet Rohit claims:

We are currently working with large SEM agencies in the U.S. who either hire full-time resources from us or outsource projects in full or part to us.

-and-

If you talk about our agency itself, we have a team of copywriters. There is a proper process we follow. It's not just picking up a project and optimizing it. I can tell you, some of the best brands' websites are being worked on by people out of India.

Now I'm in no way against Indian enterprise, yet I do think when you pay for a brand, especially an SEM brand which can carry a higher price tag because of the perceived value of that brand, you should be actually getting the brand's actual product.

Posted by john at 11:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 13, 2005

Watching MSN's Algorithm at Work

I was all ready to bash MSN's search algorithm a week ago, and I'm glad I waited. Instead, I've grown more impressed with its self-governance and, I daresay, its audacity.

During a routine vanity search for [seo speedwagon] about two weeks ago, I was shocked at the top result - an actual results page from Google Blog Search. The following screen shot was snapped on 12/4 and shows the MSN results page for the query [seo speedwagon].

12/4 shot of the top MSN SERP for [seo speedwagon] showing a Google Blog Search results page in top position.

As you can see, the top result is a dynamic results page from Google's blog search engine. And that's my fault, I guess. Back in September I wrote about Google's new blog engine. In that post, I talked about (and linked to) various test searches I had run, including a search for our blog name. No big deal.

When you think about a search results page like this, it has several factors that, in a vacuum, should make it rank well:

  • A succinct title with relevant keywords
  • Loads of on-page instances of keywords
  • At least 20 outbound links to related sites (Google Blog Search results pages link to both the specific post and to the blog's home page for each of the 10 positions.
  • (In this case) four incoming links (albeit from the same domain) with targeted anchor text. Because of the way the Speedwagon is written and archived through Movable Type, each post tends to show up multiple times. MSN sees this specific post in four locations:

So ironically, I created the very page that supplanted our own site in a vanity search. How poetic.

Now here it gets even more interesting. We can debate the merits of the Google Blog Search results page all day, but in truth, MSN never should have crawled and indexed it in the first place, because Google Blog Search results pages are specifically disallowed in the robots.txt file for that subdomain:

Google Blog Search's robots.txt file

So let's sum up:

  • MSN crawled and indexed a page from Google's blog search engine against Google's robots.txt exclusion.
  • Its algorithm deemed that page worthy of ranking for a relatively uncompetitive term.
  • A week after I noticed MSN ranking the Google page at position 1, it had dropped to position 2. Today, it doesn't rank anywhere.
  • The Google Blog Search results page has dropped out of the MSN index.

I'd say that just about balances out right.

Posted by erik at 04:00 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

December 12, 2005

Speedwagon Nominated for Best of Search Blogs Awards

Search Engine Journal just announced the nominees for the 2005 Search Blogs Awards, and we are quite excited to be on the list under the category of "Best SEO Blog." Other categories include "Best Search Engine News Blog," "Best Search Engine-Owned Blog," "Best Search Engine Marketing and Contextual Advertising Blog, and the "Best Blog Search Engine Blog."

Following is the list of nominees under our category, "Best SEO Blogs:"

You can rate the blogs here. (We would encourage nothing less than voting your conscience.) Most important, if you look through the list of blogs in this and other categories, you'll walk away with a list of sites covering (and covering well) nearly every narrow niche of the SEO/SEM field.

And with that (sniff), we're all winners.

Posted by erik at 09:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

A PPC Manager’s Christmas Wish List

Tis the season for Santa to deliver his gifts to kids young and old across the globe and I for one am willing to admit that I’m just a big kid at heart. So Search Engine Santa, here’s one humble PPC Manager’s Christmas wish list.

  1. A Google desktop API that will allow me to monitor my PPC campaigns in real time. {Hint: A lot like the one they’ve got for AdSense users}.
  2. For Yahoo to get rid of the archaic random image input at login.
  3. For Yahoo to allow us to combine all of our accounts into one central place instead of having to log in and out for each account.
  4. More computing platforms for Google so they can meet the demand for Analytics requests.

As you can see my list is short because I don’t want to be greedy and get any virtual coal in my inbox this Christmas. But these are a few of the things that I run across on a daily basis that would sure make great Christmas presents from Search Engine Santa.

I am collecting “wish lists� from others to give to Search Engine Santa and would be happy to deliver yours with mine. Feel free to contribute to the list by adding your comment to this post.

Posted by brent at 10:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 09, 2005

More On SEO Considerations When Moving To .NET

In my last post about the SEO implications of converting your site to the .NET platform, I warned about search engine indexing problems if you create long, dynamic URLs with more than 4 dynamic characters.

A few more SEO things to think about when making the conversion:

* Avoid anything after the "?" that looks like it might be a user ID or session ID (search engines will likely stumble on these).

* Before the new .NET pages go live, make sure to use a 301 redirect on the old URLs.

* Assuming the pages you are converting are optimized, before the new .NET pages go live, make sure to include the optimized title tags and meta descriptions on the new pages. (Believe me, your SEO company will really appreciate it.)

Posted by doug at 04:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 08, 2005

Creating a Custom 404 Page

Creating a custom 404 page can be very helpful to your sites visitors and profitable to your company. Often times potential customers looking to purchase products from your site will simply hit the back button when confronted with a "page not found" error. Because the default error page leaves them with limited links (none to your actual site), many of those lost customers will never return.

There are many reasons why a web surfer would end up at a non-existent url on your site ranging from a site redesign to user error. Having a properly configured 404 page is crucial to retaining those visitors.

Step One: Create the custom 404 page with your editor of choice. Make sure to use your regular site HTML template complete with graphics, main navigation and footer. In the main text section insert a "Sorry" message that ask the user to please choose an option found on the page to find what they are looking for.

Step Two: Name the file 404.htm and upload to the root directory at http://www.example.com/404.htm

Step Three: Modify your .htaccess file (if none is present you can make one in Notepad) to indicate the location of your custom "page not found" error:

ErrorDocument 404 http://www.example.com/404.htm

Save the modified .htaccess to your server.

--------------------------------------------------------------

From Wikipedia:

Custom error page creation using Microsoft IIS

- Use a text editor or an HTML editor to create your custom page on your server

- From your server's desktop, launch the Internet Services Manager (usually located at Start->Programs->Administrative Tools->Internet Services Manager)

- Click the [+] to the left of the server name

- Right-click on "Default Web Server" (or whatever you may have renamed it as), and click on "Properties"

- Click on the Custom Errors tab

- Click on the number of the HTTP Error you want to make the custom message for, then click "Edit Properties"

- Use the Browse button to locate the custom file you created and click OK. Keep clicking OK to dismiss the windows, then close the IIS window

Posted by james at 03:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 07, 2005

Yahoo Site Explorer Enhances Backlink Feature

The Yahoo Search Blog announced enhancements to the Yahoo Site Explorer yesterday that make your backlink searches more efficient than ever.

The interface now allows you to filter your backlinks (Yahoo calls them "inlinks") so that your own domain does not appear in the list:

filter your own site out of backlink results

  • Select Except from this domain to filter out your top-level domain, along with all subdomains on that domain.
  • Select Except from this subdomain to filter out only your specific subdomain. For example, if you have a blog on the blogspot.com domain, selecting this option will show links from other blogspot.com blogs, but not your own.

Like always, Yahoo shows incoming links even if they contain the "nofollow" attribute. This underscores the point that the nofollow link attribute is quite different from the nofollow command in the robots meta tag. Links that contain the nofollow attribute are recognized as links and crawled just as any other link. They're simply not offering an authoritative "vote" that might help the recipient site's rankings.

Posted by erik at 12:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Pay Per Call - eStara, Ingenio

It's been a while since I've written about PPP or PPCall as some of my counterparts like to call it, so I thought I'd drop an update on what’s happenin' on the pay per call front.

*eStara has been making some moves lately with the latest being a Click-To-Call pilot project with sensis.com.au. It's also worth mentioning that eStara seems to be in bed with the Yahoo! UK/Ireland.

*Ingenio was mentioned again today on Search Engine Watch discussing a relationship between InfoSpace and Ingenio where Ingenio will be the Pay-Per-Call provider for the InfoSpace network of sites which consist of DogPile, WebCrawler, WebFetch, Switchboard, and MetaCrawler.

The eStara news is interesting but not nearly as interesting as the InfoSpace deal with Ingenio.

Didn't I just post about InfoSpace doing a pay per call deal with Jambo about a month ago? Is the Jambo deal with InfoSpace dead? Was it ever inked at all? Is InfoSpace using both Jambo and Ingenio to "test" which platform performs better than the other?? I didn't see this one coming at all.

Oh yeah, Google is testing pay per call as well these days! ;^)

More to come soon!!!

Posted by sean at 10:59 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 06, 2005

To Tag or Not To Tag Your Vegetables

Coming on the heels of the much ballyhooed Tivo announcement that ads will now be searchable, it was titillating to follow David Berkowitz's prognostication of where this would all spill.

In the second-to-penultimate paragraph of this erotic thriller we reach what has to be a climax for all in our industry:

Searching within a map, a PDF, and even a PC desktop was much more cumbersome only a few years back. A former iCrossing colleague, Sara Holoubek, often illustrated the imminent pervasiveness of the Internet by noting how computers will one day be commonly built into refrigerators. By that example, searching the contents of your kitchen from a refrigerator-based console is hardly far-fetched (and given the difficulty I had finding ingredients when baking a kugel last weekend, it's a development I'd welcome).

The cold water splashed on this rock and roll search fantasy? I suspect spam will be a problem.

Posted by john at 05:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 05, 2005

Online Security - Fact, Fiction, or Perception?

I was reading a report from Consumer Reports WebWatch that talked about consumer confidence in online security. The article basically leaves the impression that confidence in online security is going down. I did a little research of my own and found the following claim from a Washington Post article, by By Caroline E. Mayer, with data from a Gartner Inc. study , "Overall, 3.9 million Americans were victims of credit card fraud in the year that ended in May, according to a study by the research firm Gartner Inc. That's down from 5.5 million the previous year.".

Huh? People think it's more dangerous, but the actual fraud is going down. Why the mixed signals? Probably in part because of the Citicard commercials and the seemingly nightly new reports of personal information theft. Being the part of America that tends to say one thing and do another, i.e. recycling is good - but I don't do it, I would tend to say the mixed message regarding online transactions is the same. Online transactions are more dangerous, but man it's nice to get my shopping done at home in my pajamas.

So is online security fact, fiction, or perception? I would definitely say perception, especially since I'm doing a good portion of my holiday shopping online this year, because I happen to perceive it to be generally safe. I think the main thing is common sense. How many of us hand our credit card to the gas station clerk without hesitation, but think twice about giving it out online. But for the record it's good to be cautious and safe. Along those lines the BBB Online has some great common sense advisement to consumers and businesses alike in regards to online shopping.

Happy Holiday Shopping Season!

Posted by brent at 12:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

The Google Discussion Panel You Shouldn't Miss

Charlene Li wisely suggests that we take a look at SiliconValley.com this week. Some of the best known minds in search are coming together - online - to discuss the "Googleverse."

If you haven't at least heard of most of these people (or what they're involved in), I'm not sure how you ended up here:

The discussion is read-only for people like you and me, but looking at the crowd above, it's hard to imagine that they'll leave any major topics unaddressed.

Following is the day-by-day agenda. You can access any day's posts from this page:

  • Monday: Search and Ads
  • Tuesday: Google and the Desktop
  • Wednesday: Google as a Network
  • Thursday: Ethics and Trust
  • Friday: The Big Picture

If Google affects you (or perhaps, if you're interested in knowing how to affect Google), this is a discussion you probably shouldn't miss.

Posted by erik at 11:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 02, 2005

Staying The Course in SEO

I ran across something in a file this week. It was a copy of our first Yahoo! Directory listing from August 1999.

An interesting indicator of the growth of our industry was revealed when I saw that only 165 listings existed in our selected category destination. A more honest number of actual SEO companies would be well under 100. For example, a site called "A Few Good Women" is listed right below us in 1999. That would be a creative name for an SEO firm, but trust me, that one didn't do SEO.

Of the 100 SEO firms, only 36 still have active sites.

Today, Yahoo! recognizes 1,074 companies in this same category. That's amost a 1000% increase. Our industry has definitely come a long way since 1999.

And so has Intrapromote.

Something else stood out to me about our now six-year-old description. We are still doing exactly what we set out to do and what our Yahoo! description says - driving qualified site traffic to our clients' sites.

Don't make top search engine placements your only SEO goal. It's all about qualified traffic spending time on your site. I'll have more to say about this soon so stay tuned.

Posted by doug at 04:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Respond to All Link Building Responses

Even if it is just a thank you for responding to your link request, respond to all responses. It is a simple, but important link building rule.

As I have often discussed in link building articles, the most important thing to establish is that you are not a machine. A personalized response shows you are a human who is really interested in a link, and that is what leads a link candidate to consider your site. Furthermore, not responding as a human has very serious repercussions. You could easily be mistaken for a spammer, and your link candidates aggressively hate spammers.

We have found that a link candidate responds to your request for only a few different reasons:

  • The person hates you(r link request). Respond very briefly with an apology. As you never want to contact someone not interested in link requests, this is a very important response.
  • The person loves you(r link request). Respond with a thank you. Let them know you appreciate their consideration.
  • The person has questions. This is an excellent opportunity to tell somebody more about the site in extended fashion. You certainly do not have this luxury in your initial request.
  • The person has objections. If the objection is valid, thank them for considering the site. If the objection stems from a misconception, politely attempt to clarify.

Any correspondence is helpful to your site. At a minimum, you are introducing your site to a new set of eyes. At maximum, you are helping to create a link with a very personal touch, which search engines love to see. Whatever the reason for the response, indulge the candidate who sent it.

Posted by tom at 10:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

December 01, 2005

Ask Jeeves Should Ask Himself

I haven't heard much buzz lately about the recently launched Ask Jeeves PPC program. Why is that? I can only imagine it's because a good majority of marketers just aren't as interested in the hassle of setting up a whole new account in Ask PPC as well as having to track yet another PPC program for ROI analysis, when they can still get Ask PPC traffic via Google AdWords. This question raises some thoughts, no doubt.

Hmmm... perhaps Mr. Jeeves should ask himself a few questions:

  • Does it make sense for me to continue PPC when I can just earn similar or possibly better revenue by just leveraging the existing relationship with Google for AdWords rev?
  • Do I really need all the additional HR, accounting, sales, etc. headaches from having in-house PPC to keep showing increased black ink in the accounting department?
  • Will I do an effective enough job in PPC sales and customer service to some day kill my relationship with Google and keep all the green to myself?
  • Why do I have less than 6% market share in the search engine war?
  • What!! I have have less than 6% market share!!?
  • Do I really stand a chance at winning this thing?...

Best of luck to ya, Jeeves!

Posted by sean at 02:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Copyright 2005-2007 Intrapromote, LLC