This is my theory from what I've seen through years of web work. I'm sure I've still got a lot to learn, but this is how it seems. SEO seems to work in layers. Essentially, on-site SEO work will only build a foundation for your site but it won't get you jack squat, it only gives more potency to..... The concentration of keywords on a page that get you ranked... Link backs (hint: quality link backs not PR) give credibility to the pages they're linking to and will ultimately determine how high that page will rank for its keywords. Is this correct? It explains why.. - You'll see highly SEO'd sites that don't rank for anything but have been online for years. - You'll see sites with one keyword, no on-site SEO, but extremely high rankings for that one keyword against competitive sites. - Sites with lots of quality articles that are ranked for their keywords but aren't anywhere near the top of the results for their keyword AND/or their site ranks high for its main keyword but its other pages are nowhere to be found. - Sites with hardly any text content that rank high for its topic. - Why you can name your site something like 'twitter' and be ranked high for the word 'social bookmarking'. Almost as if everyone in the world but you says that's who you are, then that's what you are. If you say that's who are but nobody else agrees then that's not what you are.