Thread

And the secret for getting a ‘gazillion relevant’ backlinks is (besides writing great content is) ...

Did I mention that it takes plenty of work? A secret implies there’s an easy way. This plugin. That plugin. Subscribe to this. Add this code. Structure code and links and keywords and titles this way or that way. Those are the easy elements of SEO, but they’re all aimed at the #2 component, which, as it happens, is also the one of diminishing returns. Lots of effort, nominal return.

The hard work goes into generating enticing, compelling content, and then promoting and marketing the site’s content so it earns those back links from other relevant sites.

I’ve used ScribeSEO on a few sites. It helps to focus on those elements of the #2 component of SEO (above). From what I see, Wordtracker does something similar. My point is, neither are silver bullets. Neither provide a ‘do this and visitors will come running to your site’ results. Improvements? Yes. If your site’s content is not compelling to readers, and other sites don’t link back, all that extra SEO effort provides nominal gains.

And, there are many components to SE rankings. Google Page Rank is merely one. Getting a site to a PR of, say, 4/10 is not difficult. Going from 4/10 to 5/10 requires plenty of work (content, links, not just SEO manipulation) and getting anything 6/10 and above puts your site into the top 1/10th of 1 percent of all sites.

Excellent post, grrramps ... plenty to think about. And from what I’ve been reading, I agree that ‘backlinks’ are what gets you seen for your key terms. So it sounds to me that you don’t put any extra effort into SEO other than writing/producing the best content you can ... is that right?

And from what I’ve been reading, I agree that ‘backlinks’ are what gets you seen for your key terms. So it sounds to me that you don’t put any extra effort into SEO other than writing/producing the best content you can ... is that right?

No, not quite. Content is king, so to speak. But you have to promote and market access to that content. That’s not easy. It’s not something you simply buy and then click to accomplish. It’s work.

That said, the other SEO components have to be adhered to, but EE makes those drop dead easy. It’s a ‘keyword density’ thing. You want a page’s content keywords to match the Title to match the URL string to match the keywords as much as possible.

And don’t go crazy.

127 keywords in Meta matched to a URL string of 127 words matched to bold facing 127 keywords in the content which match the 127 keywords in the Title is a bit much, no? There’s no indication from Google that they care about that extreme. But there’s a whole industry of SEO specialists who want you to believe that SEO to the nth degree is the cat’s meow. It’s not.

So, I try to match up Title with keywords in meta with keywords in content with URL string. That’s it. There’s no magic formula or magic number which make those keywords ensure your site’s higher SE ranking. After that, it’s diminishing returns, increased effort.

I’ve seen keywords stuffed into the opening body tag ad nauseam. Sorry. Waste of time. There’s no proof that stuff gets a site’s content ranked higher in SE’s for given search words.

Common sense prevails.

I’ve used ScribeSEO on a few sites.

Grrramps ... anything notable about your experience using SEOScribe? Would you use them again?

Thanks.

... anything notable about your experience using SEOScribe? Would you use them again?

It was difficult to see that what ScribeSEO did was noticeable. Seriously. In the end, that’s what you’re after. Higher rankings, and more visitors from SE results. We did get some tips on where and what else to tweak, but it wasn’t much beyond the above basics. I would use it again only if a client requires it.

Regarding {title} ... {alt_title} and SEO:

I read an article at Copyblogger that talks about using a title and an alt_title for SEO, the same topic was also covered at eeinsider.

It’s my understanding, based on my (newly begun) SEO studies, that Google frowns upon and penalizes a website that shows one thing to a user and another to the spider; keywords for example.

So is it ok or not to have a public-facing <title> for the human reader and an <alternative title> for google?

Thanks.

So is it ok or not to have a public-facing <title> for the human reader and an <alternative title> for google?

I tend to look for what I call a “compelling reason” when making such changes. Google doesn’t care (but may penalize?). Readers don’t care. So, why bother?

I like the folks at Copyblogger. Great site. Plenty of good site development and writing tips. I think they’re also the folks behind the highly acclaimed StudioPress Genesis framework for WordPress. Well done. And, I believe they’re also the folks behind ScribeSEO.

As to keywords, they could not be more overrated in overall SEO.

So is it ok or not to have a public-facing <title> for the human reader and an <alternative title> for google?

Absolutely not - Google’s aim is to give the reader the best possible experience (and in the process make the most possible money for themselves of course) and their view is that what’s good for the reader is good for Google - you don’t try to trick Google (or the reader).

Regarding meta keywords, as far as I know, they’ve been completely deprecated with Google for a long time because of people overusing and abusing them.
I personally never use them anymore.

That brings up a couple of interesting questions:

What percentage of visitors to your sites come from Google referrals? What percentage of all search engine referrals are from Google?

That brings up a couple of interesting questions:

What percentage of visitors to your sites come from Google referrals? What percentage of all search engine referrals are from Google?

Grrramps ... what’s implied in your questions?

...what’s implied in your questions?

Nothing sinister, actually. All search engines are not created equal, but sometimes I think we refer to SEO when it’s really Google Optimization. I’m curious to know how much traffic comes to sites via Google vs. other search engines. And, how much traffic comes to a site via all search engines (as a percentage).

For example, I manage some sites where Google accounts for about 90-percent of all search engine traffic, and over 50-percent of all traffic. Those numbers go up and down depending on the site, traffic spikes, of course, but not dramatically. At times it’s almost as if Bing, Yahoo!, et al, do not exist in a meaningful way.

Hello, I know that Google frowns on duplicate content. Considering this, for SEO purposes, I have several clients who want to review my business on different directory sites like Yelp, BOTW, HotPot and others.

My question is this: If someone takes the time to write a thoughtful, considered review and posts it on multiple sites:

A) Is there an advantage to doing this?
B) A disadvantage.

Thanks for your insight.

Ramone

Good advice on this thread.  Thanks everyone.

Best off trying to outsource the work to some pro’s and see what results you get then.