Home – New Forums Marketing mastery Website Promotion

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 61 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1022043
    JohnSheppard
    Member
    • Total posts: 940
    Up
    0
    ::

    How long would you say it took you to become an SEO guru? Seems to me like a good 6 months to a year of good hard focused work, and constantly effort and changing environments.

    It depends on business and the traits/desires of the owner of course, but I thinks it’s best outsourced, It’s not that core to many businesses is it? Why not pay a specialist?

    #1022044
    businesstrader
    Member
    • Total posts: 77
    Up
    0
    ::

    I have been experimenting with SEO since 2003. To be honest I am still learning and trying to keep up with the game.

    If you don’t have the time to learn, outsourcing your SEO services is definitely the way to go, however finding a reputable SEO firm in Australia is hard to do.

    pete

    #1022045
    Aidan
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,125
    Up
    0
    ::
    businesstrader, post: 27120 wrote:
    Aiden,

    When you block an url in a robots.txt file and then link to this url from your homepage for example (or external links), it will still accumulate a small percentage of pr, however the remaining pr is pushed through the page and to the more important ‘followed’ links.

    This should clearly answer all the sceptics about robots.txt and page rank.

    http://www.searchenginejournal.com/bot-herding-pagerank-sculpting/10352/

    Webnauts is one of the top SEO’s in the world today, if not the best!

    I hope this helps.

    Pete

    Pete,

    Read that article again more carefully and while you are at it also bear in mind it was written in May of last year, before the world had copped on to PR not being ‘sculptable’!

    You cannot sculpt PR with the robots file any more than you can with noFollow, its simply not possible for reasons one of which the writer actually states, the page may have links from other pages!

    Removing the ability for a page on your site to get some PR does not give the other pages more PR no matter what way you try to remove that ability!

    Now don’t get me started on the dangling links thing it’s suffice to read carefully what the snippet from Mssrs Page and Brin actually says.

    Once again it is worth re-stating that PR has nothing to do with your rankings in the search engine results. A PR 0 can easily outrank a PR 5 as they so often do. Even Google is trying to get webmasters to stop thinking about PR!

    A lot of what you have said in this thread is the kind of stuff that shonky SEO’s try to bamboozle poor innocents with, the old ‘blind them with science’ sales approach. I do hope someone has not done it to you.

    Again I’m glad you have had such great ranking success, I wish you quadruple the amount for the future but there is no point believeing it was all from PR sculpting or bot herding, it wasn’t.

    To quote the SEO gurus – correlation doesn’t always equal causation!

    BTW – I enjoyed doing some research on the RDFa stuff you heads-upped earlier though for 99% of the readership here it will have little effect any time soon and I still don’t see it as a ranking factor any more than meta description – next to zero!

    #1022046
    Ali Dark
    Participant
    • Total posts: 101
    Up
    0
    ::
    TheBifoldDoorsMan, post: 26054 wrote:
    I’ve tried google adwords but is there anything else i can do to promote the site.
    Absolutely. Start a blog on your site. Each blog page is another page search engines can index. Your more personal perspective on your industry will make you seem like an expert. I mean, you probably are, but this makes you stand out from the next guy. It also makes you real, human. It’s also a lot of fun because you’ll be focusing on the parts of life/work that are interesting.

    If you’re interested, check out http://bcosuluvit.com. I’ll be adding more advice and an ebook there as time goes on (free) – so sign up to the newsletter.

    Ali

    #1022047
    businesstrader
    Member
    • Total posts: 77
    Up
    0
    ::
    Aidan, post: 27186 wrote:
    Pete,

    Read that article again more carefully and while you are at it also bear in mind it was written in May of last year, before the world had copped on to PR not being ‘sculptable’!
    That is exactly the point. Webnauts told me that time that he noticed the nofollow attribute was not behaving as it used to do was December 2008. On the 15th of June 2009, Matt Cutts confirmed that clearly.

    Aidan, post: 27186 wrote:
    You cannot sculpt PR with the robots file any more than you can with noFollow, its simply not possible for reasons one of which the writer actually states, the page may have links from other pages!
    Webnauts told me that he used that time the term PageRank Sculpting in the title of his post, first because people would not understand the meaning of bot herding, and second as a linkbait.

    Five days after Webnauts posted that, Rand Fishkin tried to promote the idea as his own with his post here, but he screwed it up: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/headsmacking-tip-13-dont-accidentally-block-link-juice-with-robotstxt

    Read the 2nd comment of the blog post of Andy Beard. Is he wrong too?

    Aidan, post: 27186 wrote:
    Removing the ability for a page on your site to get some PR does not give the other pages more PR no matter what way you try to remove that ability!
    Using noindex in the robots.txt, or meta robots or X-Robots does not remove the ability to pass PR. The noindex page accumulates and passes PR, but passes the most to the pages it is linking to.

    Matt Cutts confirms: http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/interview-matt-cutts.shtml

    Also watch the slide show of Spencer, slide 7: http://www.slideshare.net/1ereposition/google-bot-herding-pagerank-sculpting-and-manipulation-presentation

    Aidan, post: 27186 wrote:
    Now don’t get me started on the dangling links thing it’s suffice to read carefully what the snippet from Mssrs Page and Brin actually says.
    If you are linking to a page that has no outbound links, you generate nodes. Can you prove here that the algo have changed on that? There is nowhere on the entire Internet such information.

    Aidan, post: 27186 wrote:
    Once again it is worth re-stating that PR has nothing to do with your rankings in the search engine results. A PR 0 can easily outrank a PR 5 as they so often do. Even Google is trying to get webmasters to stop thinking about PR!
    PageRank is important for rankings, but it not the only rankings factor. It is one of over 200, but still a very important one. Therefore your argument is poor. LOL

    Aidan, post: 27186 wrote:
    A lot of what you have said in this thread is the kind of stuff that shonky SEO’s try to bamboozle poor innocents with, the old ‘blind them with science’ sales approach. I do hope someone has not done it to you.
    Webnauts is the most ethical SEO I know on the web and we have worked together for many years. I would be careful when I make such rude statements about an SEO you do not know or ever worked with.

    Aidan, post: 27186 wrote:
    Again I’m glad you have had such great ranking success, I wish you quadruple the amount for the future but there is no point believeing it was all from PR sculpting or bot herding, it wasn’t.
    I do not care about rankings. I care about traffic, and this month is double than the same month last year. Do you want a screenshot from my Google Analytics?

    Aidan, post: 27186 wrote:
    To quote the SEO gurus – correlation doesn’t always equal causation!
    Webnauts or I never claimed to be guru’s.

    Aidan, post: 27186 wrote:
    BTW – I enjoyed doing some research on the RDFa stuff you heads-upped earlier though for 99% of the readership here it will have little effect any time soon and I still don’t see it as a ranking factor any more than meta description – next to zero!
    RDFa is not a ranking factor. It is search engine marketing strategy, that can increase your CTR, exactly like the appropriate implementation of meta descriptions.

    For further reading:

    RDFa not important? http://www.webproworld.com/search-engine-optimization-forum/97442-you-working-rdfa-framework-into-your-search-engine-optimization-campaigns.html#post491401

    PageRank Not Important?
    http://www.webproworld.com/google-discussion-forum/93106-any-penalty-adding-too-many-pages-once.html#post476773

    Is Bruce Clay is wrong too?
    “PageRank Leakage: If you’re using Robots.txt Disallow, you’re probably leaking PageRank. Robots.txt Disallow and Meta Roberts Noindex both accumulate and pass PageRank.”
    http://www.bruceclay.com/blog/2008/06/organic-track-bot-herding/

    I guess my post here all questions raised in the entire thread.

    Enjoy. :)

    #1022048
    Chris Bates
    Member
    • Total posts: 966
    Up
    0
    ::

    I think we’re all on different pages here.

    The way you originally explained it (or the way Aidan and I understood it) was – that you were saying by NoIndex’ing a page you could manipulate the way other pages accumulate PR. Meaning by NoIndex’ing page A, your other pages accumulate more PR overall.

    http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/interview-matt-cutts.shtml explains it better.

    You’re talking about NoIndex’ing a page (page A) so that outbound links (Page B, C, D) can still accumulate PR from page A.

    You’re in no way “sculpting” PR at all – you’re merely controlling GoogleBot the correct way, as to get the most out of the way it crawls and not stopping PR from distributing naturally.

    Really it’s a NoFollow vs NoIndex debate.

    Touching on the original topic (even knowing that’s long gone, haha) – I don’t think this tactic is relevant to a lot of brochure sites. They’re unlikely to have any content they want/need to hide from Google.

    I won’t comment on RDFa – that’s new to me, something I will read up on when I find some time.

    #1022049
    Webnauts
    Member
    • Total posts: 11
    Up
    0
    ::
    Chris Bates, post: 27253 wrote:
    I think we’re all on different pages here.

    The way you originally explained it (or the way Aidan and I understood it) was – that you were saying by NoIndex’ing a page you could manipulate the way other pages accumulate PR. Meaning by NoIndex’ing page A, your other pages accumulate more PR overall.
    Aidan said:

    “Pete,

    Read that article again more carefully and while you are at it also bear in mind it was written in May of last year, before the world had copped on to PR not being ‘sculptable’!”

    The article was valid before the world had copped on to PR not being sculptable and after that. The article was not about PageRank Sculpting, even if the title might have been misleading.

    Therefore Adrian could not have understood something else. He disapproves the techniques I wrote in my article, considering obsolete.

    Also other statements of Adrian in the same post do not leave me any space to believe that there was a misunderstanding. But Peter replied accordingly and I fully support he long but excellent post above.

    Anyway, Peter is not an SEO but a site owner and webmaster trying to learn SEO, so I would say that he is more advanced than the majority of guys out there calling themselves SEOs.

    Don’t you agree?

    #1022050
    Chris Bates
    Member
    • Total posts: 966
    Up
    0
    ::

    As any industry – there will be cowboys. I actually have a major chip on my shoulder regarding SEOs and the price they charge, I think it’s criminal!

    I won’t speak on behalf of Aidan, but my post above explains how I interpreted the subject.

    I’ll let Aidan reply himself.

    #1022051
    Aidan
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,125
    Up
    0
    ::

    I, like others, was indeed responding to the original posts by Pete – Go read those original few posts!

    I did not at any stage suggest that Webnauts or Pete were shonky seos, indeed there was no mention of Webnauts being involved at that point, just that Petes original posts sounded like the ‘blind them with science’ approach the shonks have and indeed I expressed the hope it had not happened to him.

    Now if you want to read my original posts I asked for some more info for my own education on anything to do with validation or bot herding improving ranks, it does not appear to have been answered.

    If Webnauts mis-titled an article and it was mis-interpreted by some, that’s no skin off my nose but I stand by my overall sentiment here. The excellent ranking achieved by Pete is nothing to do with his PR sculpting, robots file or his XHTML/RDFa validation.

    I’m now off to enjoy a cold beer and suggest you do the same Pete, when you have cooled down read through your latest counter arguments again and you’ll see how you have mis-interpreted several of mine.

    No I don’t need your analytics, no I didn’t say you claimed to be a guru, and read again what I said about PR flow.

    Over and out ;)

    #1022052
    Aidan
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,125
    Up
    0
    ::

    Postscript

    I’ve had my cold beer and also read the article by Webnauts and I will apologise for dismissing it as irrelevant.

    It is actually a great article on the subject of PR flow it is not at all about PR sculpting!

    In my haste I looked at the title of the article (which is VERY misleading, deceitful even…it’s linkbait), skimmed the content and saw mention of dangling links, checked the publish date and drew the ‘obvious’ conclusion, that it was irrelevant to the original question.

    Having said that, I do not recommend it as a read for the majority of folk here, it is only going to cause confusion but if you are well into SEO it is a great read if you dismiss the title.

    Now how relevant is it all to the question that was posed? I still agree with some other comments here. You see if you find yourself at the point of worrying about squeezing PR flow (that’s flow, not sculpting) as a sub component of your seo efforts and wondering if dangling links are having a significant impact on your business, you are not likely to be a small business Flying Solo-ite type! In fact you are not likely to be involved in your own SEO anymore, you will probably have Webnauts or Rand Fishkin doing the worrying!

    So, Pete and Webnauts if you are still monitoring the thread, my apologies for the dismissal of the article (even if the title is misleading)!

    #1022053
    Adam Randall
    Member
    • Total posts: 382
    Up
    0
    ::

    If the energy that has been put into these technical variances, was put into improving user experience / value, how much would it have improved the number of visitors to the site?

    Improving the conversion rate & or enquiry rate is more important than spending time and effort on this stuff I would of thought.

    Anything that has the word “sculpting” in it should have the word “manipulation” put in its place.

    You know what Google does with sites that manipulate?

    #1022054
    Webnauts
    Member
    • Total posts: 11
    Up
    0
    ::
    Aidan, post: 27341 wrote:
    So, Pete and Webnauts if you are still monitoring the thread, my apologies for the dismissal of the article (even if the title is misleading)!
    Hi Adrian,

    I did not want to return to this forum after those offenses in my introduction thread, but I did not unsubscribe from the threads I am in, so I came back to reply to your post.

    You are right that the article title was misleading, so I asked SEJ to change it after all, because you are not the first one who considered it as misleading.

    The title now is reading: Bot Herding: The Ultimate Tool for PageRank Flow
    http://www.flyingsolo.com.au/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=27341

    I am glad you understood the concept, as many SEOs out there did not.

    Thanks for the reply and nice to meet you.

    #1022055
    Webnauts
    Member
    • Total posts: 11
    Up
    0
    ::
    gillian2009, post: 0 wrote:
    Hi Webnauts! I really admire your courage in changing the title and you have an open mind in accepting errors. I hope a lot of people would do the same as you did. You are really the guy!
    Gillian, thank you for the kind words. But I honestly don’t understand why should I need courage to accept a mistake and try to correct it. :)

    Human nature is not perfect. Therefore, myself either. :)

    #1022056
    Aidan
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,125
    Up
    0
    ::
    Webnauts, post: 27598 wrote:
    Hi Adrian,

    I did not want to return to this forum after those offenses in my introduction thread, but I did not unsubscribe from the threads I am in, so I came back to reply to your post.

    You are right that the article title was misleading, so I asked SEJ to change it after all, because you are not the first one who considered it as misleading.

    The title now is reading: Bot Herding: The Ultimate Tool for PageRank Flow
    http://www.flyingsolo.com.au/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=27341

    I am glad you understood the concept, as many SEOs out there did not.

    Thanks for the reply and nice to meet you.

    Sounds Great Webnauts,

    and just so you know there is no ill feeling on my part, the next time I have someone asking for a high end SEO, I’ll recommend they see you :)

    (I’m really more involved with small businesses, most of which would not likely need your services, however I do get asked for recommendations for larger projects from time to time.)

    All the Best.

    #1022057
    TheBifoldDoorsMan
    Member
    • Total posts: 8
    Up
    0
    ::

    Thanks for the response folks and i’ve enjoyed the lively debate. Although the talk of beer made me thirsty.

    I’ve made some changes to my site following this thread:

    • Created a robots.txt
    • Restructured the site with directories/page names which have the keywords in
    • More Alt tags with kewords
    • Changed title tags
    • Sitemap xml
    • More inbound links using keywords
    • More internal links using keywords
    • Changed content to incorporate keywords.

    So let me try a be specific about what i want to achieve and i welcome advice if it’s possible/achievable.

    I want to be number 1 in google for anyone typing in bi-fold doors if this relates to more site visitors i’ll see.

    Currently I rank number 5 in google when searching for bi-fold doors perth but when i search for bi-fold doors i don’t even appear!

    I’ve noticed that some of my changes haven’t been re-indexed by good yet, i.e. the home page title etc so perhaps i just need to wait?

    Any thoughts?

    Thanks

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 61 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.