What Websites Are The Best Examples Of Perfect SEO?

I'm just curious if there is such a site in existence? What about a site that you personally look to in search of new tactics or to use as ideas for your SEO. Please post some links! Lets see the best of the best!

 

I'd love to see a few examples too...

 

I'm actually interested to see if someone would actually claim a page to have "perfect" SEO.

 

I don't think that there's a perfect SEO site.
Everysite has specific targets and ninches, so you should build upon what your visitors like.

e.g 1: if you have a more visual content, like videos, images, you should try to have more image banners, but not too many that makes your visitor confused.

e.g 2: if you have textual site, like a personal blog, tutorials blogs etc, you should use text ads.

I'm totally new to SEO, but from my short experience I can tell you that the worst thing you can do is to treat your visitors like money-clickers, if you have a website full of popups, banners, they will forget your site and they will learn to be more savvy and not click on anything.

I can give an example of a nice site, I will not say that is perfect but they have a very well structed site with ads, www.smashingmagazine.com , if you don't see the ads look closely

 

Good looking out on that link! Are there any other sites out there with almost perfect SEO?

 

I think
nytimes.com
earlier it was known as newyorktimes.com
Before redirection it was having PR 10, but after that 9.
I think it could be the best example of seo.

 

I just got on the first page for my most important keyword today. This is what I did (in this order) - it may work for you, it may not.

1. Posted to several link directories (general ones). I saw little movement in the SERPs when I did this, but I think it helped in the long run.
2. Article marketing. Make yourself stand out as an expert in your niche by writing and distributing quality articles. There are many lists of article places on this forum, but I found associatedcontent.com to be a good one and they pay you for your articles + allow some links.
3. Blogging. Set up a blog site and add fresh content to it at the very least on a weekly basis with links over to the site you are promoting.
4. Text link ads. Cough up a few bucks and buy some text link ads. This will put you on the fast track for the first page. However, plan to phase them out eventually because they could hurt you in the long run. Make sure you choose sites that are highly targeted for your niche.
5. Common links. Use a common link analyzer to find the main sites to link to for your target keywords. Beg borrow and steal until you have a link in nearly every place in the list.
6. Link exchanging. Wait until you have a Google PR before doing this or you won't get much cooperation. Find link partners that not only have a good page rank but also have another purpose other than just being a link directory. The more targeted the better.

One last tip - when you start out use long phrases to describe your site containing combinations of many shorter keyphrases. Put these long phrases as the text in the inbound links to your site. When you get closer to the first page and you start link exchanging, use the exact keyword phrases that you are targeting.

As far as perfect SEO, nobody is perfect. It is mostly a matter of trial and err. I managed to get my site to the first page of the most important keyword in under 6 months. You might not be so lucky, it all depends on how much competition there is. Also, it is usually a better strategy to go for thousands of long tail keywords rather than a specific phrase because you will see results faster.

Check out my latest endeavor at http://www.personal-injury-attorney-information.com/

 

Are you kidding me?

PR has nothing to do with good SEO, and NYTimes has horrible onpage optimization. They have massive amounts of canonical URL's

http://nytimes.com and www.nytimes.com or
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/sports/ and http://www.nytimes.com/pages/sports/index.html

They have horrible image names for instance nytlogo379x64.gif is their logo.

Their Meta keywords is bordering on outright spam:

The list goes on and on, their ranking is poor for instance search "News" and you have pages like dmoz.org/news or the PR3 boston.com/news/ beating them. I could make that thing dominate, they should give me a call i'd do it for a sitewide backlink.

 

Why you are not considering Google itself?

 

I know this might start some heated discussion, but here goes...
I dont think its about perfect SEO. If you do a Google search and a Yahoo search on a competitive niche (dating, mortgage, gambling, etc) and can find a site that ranks #1 for a spot on both pages on a high traffic keyword, you have "almost" found a perfect SEO'd page. But, theres more to getting ranked higher and getting boatloads of traffic than SEO. I think domain age, "trust factor", links, frequent/infrequent content changes/addittions, etc. And, with the constantly changing algo's, will there ever be a perfectly SEO'd site?

 

Good point.

 

Excellent post about the niche site concept! Google (et al) base your ranking on how well you fit a search that a Google user performs. Yes the big boys (eBay, Yahoo, NYtimes, etc) will generally win because they're big and popular (BMOC). You won't change the internet nepotism.

However, even with a niche, you need original content. I see that 95% of the sites that people are trying to promote on DP are link farms disguised by canned templates and copied articles. I guess some folks believe their own ego and think this will work. They are competing against the world/keywords and not against a real competitor. Google somehow weeds out this junk eventually as any one canned site never survives forever with a good ranking. That is why you see posts about lost PR - visit their sites and you will find it is a template. Google also weeds out new sites as 99% are trying to scam their way to the top.

To keep good, relevant content - you either have to work or have folks working for you doing real typing at the computer. Of course, you can get popular with visitors then the search engines will get interested too. However, let's be realistic and do some weekly/monthly grunt work.

As for my own site, it is niched and should be that way. Please visit it and you will see (in my signature). I cannot compete for the keyword STOCKS but I do ok against OLD STOCK CERTIFICATES. This is my niche, I know it, and I am not making Google, Microsoft, or eBay scared with my site. I added a lot of financial content since I know my users after 10 years.

Here are some good places to read (I have no association with them)

www.seochat.com
diagnostics.googlerankings.com

 

google.com lol

"Results 1 - 10 of about 4,870,000 linking to google.com"

they should ban there own ass, obviously they use spammy directories and bots

 

Well to talk about Search Engines for good website is not generic.
Website is optimized for SE, so you can't include here.
I don't think any certification for best optimized website for SE's.
It's just worthless post.

 

www.wikipedia.org

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=seo
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=physics
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=food

Need I say more?

 

what you think about - bigmouthmedia.com

 

Wikipedia is a high ranking website yes, but it's primarily sheer backlink numbers. It's on-page SEO is ok, but it's a long way off perfect.

 

They are certainly good at building backlinks, and it seems they are so good at that that the on-page optimization doesn't matter much.

Do you agree that they are the highest ranking website on the internet? I expect they would be the website which receives the most traffic from Google, so I think it's the best SEOed.

 

i think SEOmoz is the best example.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and say Wikipedia gets good rankings because the algo for google has been manually tweaked to artificially inflate Wikipedia's rankings.

Why?

Because Wikipedia provides good content, exactly what the user is looking for with zero ads or distractions. To google, it is a highly trusted source and it delivers what google wants - a highly relevant result to the users search.

There may be other sites that are more optimized or have more backlinks for a term, but google 'knows' that the information on Wikipedia is (mostly) reliable and trustworthy.

That would lead nicely into a discussion on 'TrustRank'...

Peter