Ive read through all threads on DP relating to wordtracker, and I gather not many of you pay to use it? Is this because Shaun's keyword tool is similar/better, or because Wordtracker is just not worth paying for? I was considering paying $7 for the one day usage and just do a whole lot of research that day. But I want to know if I should bother first. Is there information I can only get from wordtracker, or are there other free tools I should just use instead. All Im wanting to do is find keywords relating to my website so I can write articles based around them.
We use DP tool to get an idea about the potential of the website we are planning to develop. When we see that the topic is worth our efforts and time we always buy WordTracker subscription to target 'the right keywords'. They are not expensive if you get them for a day or a week.
So wordtracker is useful because it gives you more detailed information? How is it better for you than DP's tool?
Wordtracker is fine for what it is. And for $7, you'll get a lot of information to digest in a single day to find a profitable niche, which after all is the point of the exercise.
Here is something that might interest you about wordtracker and webposition. Don't use unauthorized computer programs to submit pages, check rankings, etc. Such programs consume computing resources and violate our Terms of Service. Google does not recommend the use of products such as WebPosition Goldâ„¢ that send automatic or programmatic queries to Google. Foudn on Googles guidlines page. http://www.google.com/webmasters/guidelines.html
Wordtracker got all the data from MetaCrawler.com and DogPile.com, but who use these SE? The average user go to Google or Yahoo.
As I mentioned in another thread WordTracker does not query or get results from DogPile.Com. We called DogPile.Com ourselves and were told that WordTracker does not have access to the DogPile.Com search results and what not. There is no possible way that WordTracker's keyword searches are accurate or in any way would help.
Maybe instead of looking for programs you could pay for but won't buy it, instead you could find quality free products. http://www.gotlinks.com It's a pretty good website that makes reciprocal linking automatic and easy as long as your site is indexed by Google! This means that your PR will easily increase because Google Indexed Sites are linking to you.
Nope - it's worth the price! Many times I have found a keyword I had not thought of that really paid off. I think it is well worth it, no question. As for gotlinks, search this forum for gotlinks first.
Might want to look into the definition of a "Link Farm" before you start signing up for these programs.
I was not speaking against Wordtracker. I use it myself. however I think it is interesting that Google names WebPosiotion (which uses Wordtracker.) Here is another online tool that uses Wordtracker results. http://www.submitexpress.com/keytracker.html
I beg to differ. Wordtracker can help you identify terms you would have never thought of otherwise. I use Wordtracker 4 - 5 times a week, every week. IMO - worth every penny.
Hello there I read this thread with interest but I am afraid I have to dispute the substance of it. As Customer Support Manager for Wordtracker I can categorically confirm that we DO get our data from Metacrawler.com and dogpile.com via our partners Infospace. These have been our data sources for 5 years. We do have articles to substantiate this but unfortunately I cannot post the links. If you would like them please drop me a line. If you have any questions regarding this please feel free to contact me via Merry Christmas Anne Curtis Customer Support Manager Wordtracker
I'm relatively new to SEO but I used wordtracker in late July '05 to identify keywords for my site. In the past 3 months, my number of unique visitor has more than doubled for the same time period last year. And sales have increased 130%. The price for access for one month was well worth it for me! -peter
Great to see an official word on that here, nice to see you reading the threads too. Thanks for the info Anne.