Do you remember how you found out about Google? Do you remember if it was a Goolge advertisement or Word of Mouth? I can almost bet that it was "Word of Mouth" My point is that so many SEO's are trying to defeat the Google algorithm, when Google itself didn't become a household name through search engine results. Google is known for their search engine but I never did a search to find Google on any search engine. I have searched for other sites from Google, but years ago how did I even find out Google existed? I heard it somewhere! I read it somewhere! A friend told me! I don't remember, but I know I didn't search for it. Some webmasters put to strong of an emphasis on SEO. SEO is only a piece of the pie. It's one thing to get someone to your site, but its another thing to get a visitor to your site and have them to continually return. SEO is indeed a treat, a thrill, and is needed, but there is such a thing as "overagressive SEO". As stated SEO is only a piece of the pie. Webmaster focus should be in the following order before any design is started: 1. Visitors / Members 2. Partners / Advertisers 3. Search Engines / Directories 4. Site Advertising / Marketing 5. Site Design / Layout Anyone wish to share their thoughts?
Site design would be one of the top concerns for me. Would you rather eat at an ugly restaurant full of cockroaches or at a clean one where you feel very comfortable? Wondering how you first found Google is a waste of time. What's the point? Who cares? However, I'm sure you didn't get to all the sites on your current bookmarks by listening to what your friends said, you did a search and found most of them. You need something, you search for it. SEO is very important, unless you want to live your life paying big bucks at adwords and other advertising networks. Nothing beats free traffic.
I think this is a totally wrong understanding of the market. Of course companies like Google, Microsoft, Apple, Dell etc. don't need good SE positions because everyone knows them. But what if you have a company for hydraulic engineering called Hydroconsult GmbH based in Austria. How would you find out about it as a US citizen if not by a search on MSN or Google for hydraulic engineering??
Well, like it always has been. As long as in the past there only was one good fisherman, we all bought it there. As soon as there was enough competition, there existed marketing, one fisherman gave better service. SEO is just one tiny tool, of the big mix of marketing. To some companies SEM is needed, to some, that are big or unique enough, it isnt. Still the world of SEO is big enough to make Shawn a multimilionair if he could get only 5% of the SEO market in the US. Whats really the big deal? Doesnt this count for everything? (marketing related?)
Launching a website is an iterative process imho. This is a which-was-first-the-hen-or-the-egg matter. Imagine someone telling you "that fancy dot com looks so clean and nice, blabla"... or "yeah, there are some really nice pics of Gwen Stefani on poor design dot com"... which one would be your next stop? I'd go for the content, and thats what we all did for Google, I remember someone said to me "this G's got 4 billion pages indexed, you can find anything" - of course I checked it out, and use it first choice ever since, like the most of you too, I guess. Naturally i'd like less monopoly in any existential matter, but thas an other story...
well I think especially in the matter of which search engine I use the amount of content doesn't count but the quality of content, I study law and often search for topic specific court decision and Google is totally unusable for that while MSN delivers very useful results although they show 20% of the pages that are shown by Google in some cases.... maybe the reason is that search-engine-hacking, spyware, malware and dialer websites made it into Google and now move the 20% from MSN to the #100+ position while MSN doesn't even index those dialer sites that appear on Google. My point is that quality comes first then comes quantity, because as you said I go to a clean restaurant with just 5 cocktails on the menu more likely than I go to a dirty restaurant with 20 cocktails on the menu.
It doesn't matter about site design if you haven't thought through a plan for the others. You can have the best site design, but if you don't have a plan to deliver it then no one will ever see it. 1. You must first know your market and target audience (visitors)....and majority of your site must be beneficial to the visitors...this goes beyond design. 2. You must then think of ways that your site theme and approach can benefit and entice advertisers/partners....and think of building around that 3. You must then consider SE's, which ones will you focus on for ranking...before you design a page and have to redo the entire thing 4. Then you must consider other methods of advertising (banner, ppc, email, etc.)....how will people find your site 5. Then you can begin designing a site for success, otherwise you will take the long way and will have to constantly redesign your site to fit in all the missing pieces. In no way am I suggesting that this is an order of importance but this is an order of preparation. The order of importance depends on the site, the business, and the webmaster. But this order of preparation should be beneficial for any site. SEO is very important, but it is only a piece of the pie. Many believe once you rank top of the SERPs then the hard part is over. That is very untrue. The hard part just began. Not even mentioning the fact that you have to remain your position on top. Let's assume widget.com just became number #1 on the SERPs. For the past year widget.com has focused on SEO 90% of the time...and finally has made it to the top. Reluctantly widget.com has not focused on its visitors or any other median. It concentrates on SEO which brings the traffic to the site but it does not guarantee the traffic or make visitors return. There must be an equal effort on all sides of the pie to make the site successful and useful. Some webmasters have not grasp that fact yet. My point with Google not becoming a household name because of SERPs is it represent that Google and others had to work hard for their branding. Overnight success was not their goal or mission. Google site (homepage) is probably the simplest of any site, but is also the biggest and most re-visited. Webmasters seem to lose their heads and primarily focus on SE's, building their sites completely around SE's. With every change or every new SEO tool that becomes available webmaster make drastic site changes. Allowing the SE's to dictate how you create and run your site is unhealthy. Visitors should be the dictators and webmasters should keep the control. If Google had allowed Yahoo or MSN to dictate how it site was designed and effected then Google probably would have called it quits...but instead Google allowed visitors to dictate the site reactions. Of each visitor Google thrived for their input and feedback to build a better site for their needs and better results....and then its focused shifted to Partners/Advertisers but still adhering to the needs of the visitors. Instead of focusing 90% of the time on SEO why not, 25% and the other 75% evenly distrubuted across all other medians.
No. I have a very good understanding of the market. I'm not denying that SEO is compelling and a needed function for any online site, but my point is that SEO focus is way too much, especially when SE's themselves did not use SERPs as their groundbreaking way into the industry. I believe in slow and gradual success, doing things the traditional way but using modern technology as an aid. If I had a hydraulic engineering site called Hydroconsultt GmbH based in Austria and I dedicated 90% to SEO only, then when visitors come to my site what will make them stay? What will make them come back and return? What will make them buy from me? What will make them talk about my company to family, friends, co-workers, or others? Getting them to the site is only half the battle, keeping them returning or keeping your site on their top 5 list is the real prize! I think (actually I know) a site can be successful in the SERPs without the over-aggressiveness of SEO. It is a more slow and graceful approach but in time, it will gain momentum on the SERPs. Good judgement, moderate SE optimization, traditional site design, a focus area (target audience), patience, and dedication should yield any webmaster a steady flow of traffic and success. The standards of today's SEO is rapid or overnight success. SEO is not for ranking in the SE's but it is used for ranking in the fastest time in SE's. Instead of taking the slow and graceful approach, whereas you will rank within 1 - 2 years....take the (todays) SEO approach where you will rank in 6 - 9 months. The question remains have you gained or lost???
Well I did 0% SEO on the Hydroconsult website, it was built for users and for good content. But in my opinion building a website for users and with good content is nothing different than SEO as well. So when you have a content-rich, user-friendly website people will find your site in the Search Engines, but they won't hear about it somewhere in most cases unless it's a really really huge company that has a known brand name, as I said. The small search engines and specialized meta search engines for example are indeed found by Google, MSN or other big SEs and not know from word of mouth.