SeoBook.com

[tomcromp]

Hello i was wondering if any one had purchased "SeoBook" (http://www.seobook.com/buy-now.shtml) and if it was and good? was it worth the $80. im thinking of buying it but im not sure.

[petertdavis]

I think you should wait and buy Sitepoint's SEO book.

[petertdavis]

Oh, and I find it a little bit amusing that he points to the Google results for his keyword, and the only place you find his site on page 1 is in the Adwords, and mentioned by some affiliates who rank higher than his site, and the rest are competitors.

[realestate]

I bet it is a good book (I haven't read), but s e o is not something that needs much education imo. Knowing s e o, and being able to do well on competitive terms are different things. Second one requires time and money, not only skill.

[tomcromp]

http://www.seo-guy.com/seo-book/ book is also featured there and the 90 day refund if site traffic doesnt tripple within 90 days sound good and looks like he has a good repretation on some forums

[webmaster2k5]

it might be useful. it will save you some time browsing through posts in seo forums.

[aspen]

Traffic tripled in 90 days? I don't think so. People who make claims like that lose credibility in my eyes.

Also, you can learn SEO for free by reading articles. Its not anything technical.

[shabbirbhimani]

Traffic tripled in 90 days? I don't think so. People who make claims like that lose credibility in my eyes.

I buy the book and dont do anything but copy the book so No results and so I can claim the money back. isnt that simple.

[duuudie]

I buy the book and dont do anything but copy the book so No results and so I can claim the money back. isnt that simple.

probably not.
When you are actually trying your money back, in such situations, you always notice a little policy that will screw your plan up.
be careful with money back. money knows how to go away, it doesn't know how to come back.

[projectphp]

Never read the book myself, but I believe a book is probably a good starting point. No book is a substitute for learning on foprums and newsletters and the like, but for many people, a boom is simply an easier plan.

I like Dan Thies, the new SEO blog guy for Site Point, and he has a free SEO book. Start there and see what you think: http://www.seoresearchlabs.com/seo-book.php.

[tomcromp]

i purchased the book its quite good but mainly told me stuff i already know although some stuff i didnt its very detialed

[Matt Mickiewicz]

Dan Thies's Search Engine Marketing Kit will be worth the wait... He definitely knows what he's talking about. He's an executive member of SEMPO and SEOPros, two organizations for search engine professionals. He is also a speaker at all the search engine strategies conferences in the USA.

The kit has also been reviewed & edited by three experts, including Jill Whalen of HighRankings.com (another frequent speaker in the SES circuit).

I've read the kit cover to cover, and it's excellent.

[tomcromp]

When is this expected to be ready?

[awall19]

I think you should wait and buy Sitepoint's SEO book.

I probably will too. Dan Thies knows his stuff and I don't think you can ever learn "too much". In fact I was just chatting with him yesterday. I think a while ago he told me he was going to quote me in his book too, which would be really cool because I have a ton of respect for Dan.

Oh, and I find it a little bit amusing that he points to the Google results for his keyword, and the only place you find his site on page 1 is in the Adwords, and mentioned by some affiliates who rank higher than his site, and the rest are competitors.

Did you notice about a month ago that PayPal was not ranking for "PayPal".

Google rolled in a link based filter, which effected many sites. Many people picked up on the story

Before Google's recent update I not only was ranking at #1 for "SEO Book" but was also top ten in Google for "SEO". I still rank at #1 for SEO Book in most major search engines. I think my site is also #4 in Yahoo! for "SEO" right now.

My sales letter for SEO Book on my other site still ranks at #3 in Google for "SEO Book" even though that link I just included in this sentence was probably the first external link I pointed at that page. If they do not relax that filter a bit in the next few weeks I will just raise that page to #1.

It really is not that hard to manipulate the search results, the biggest problem with my site is likely that I have many unrequested links from blogrolls and other sitewide links which frequently tend to link to my site using the exact same anchor text "SEO Book."

I think my site may have got filtered in the latest update even if I mixed every link I had control over, just based on the anchor text concentration and sitewide links blogrolls gave me.

I could ask people to stop linking to my site to appease Google's new algorithm, but I am not going to alienate people who are linking to me just to appease Google's flavor of the day filter.

To put it in perspective, my sales this month will likely be higher than they were last month, even without my site showing up for its own name in Google. That really shows me how important brand is over rankings.

Traffic tripled in 90 days? I don't think so. People who make claims like that lose credibility in my eyes.

Also, you can learn SEO for free by reading articles. Its not anything technical.

Agreed most people do not need to learn SEO to a deep technical level, but to be honest about your statement what % of published SEO articles are relevant to the current market?

A site like SitePoint would take a ton of work to triple its traffic since it is already so well established (though if they went on a marketing spree I bet they could still build it up a large amount). Most sites can EASILY triple their traffic in 90 days.

My most recent client has had revenues increase by 500% in the last 5 months going into what is the slow season for his product (winter). And that is without me doing heavy topical integration or writing articles for him. I bet after I do those we could grow his business 5 fold again in the next 6 months. That would mean his business that was doing around $3,000 a month would be doing nearly $100,000 a month in business.

I buy the book and dont do anything but copy the book so No results and so I can claim the money back. isnt that simple.

some people do that. In fact I am not going to name the person in this thread who did that, but one person chatting in this thread asked for a refund faster than he could have possibly read the ebook.

And then he wanted me to give him all kinds of advice on how to improve his site. I unsubscribed him from my updates list and will not be helping that person in any way.

I could use a product like Corey Rudl's ebook protector to prevent people from being able to do that, but I would rather make it as easy as possible for me to help people.

Many days I give away more ebooks than I sell and like helping people. I also give away free stuff in all of my newsletters.

probably not.
When you are actually trying your money back, in such situations, you always notice a little policy that will screw your plan up.
be careful with money back. money knows how to go away, it doesn't know how to come back.

While refund requests are rare I understand that SEO is not for everyone.

According to my records, at 2:58AM, 5 minutes after their refund request, the person in this thread had their money back in their PayPal account and they already had a confirmation email from me.

i purchased the book its quite good but mainly told me stuff i already know although some stuff i didnt its very detialed

I tried to make it very detailed and as current as possible.

When people buy it they are paying for all my experience and the best I know. They are also paying for it to be fresh. They are also paying for customer service. Sometimes I spend a half hour or hour helping people who purchased my ebook. At its price that is a bit of a discount from my $200 an hour consulting rate.

When is this expected to be ready?

I believe Dan's book should be ready to go in early March

[aspen]

A site like SitePoint would take a ton of work to triple its traffic since it is already so well established (though if they went on a marketing spree I bet they could still build it up a large amount). Most sites can EASILY triple their traffic in 90 days.

No, they can't. A broad claim of increasing your traffic by 300% in 90 days is pure crap. First of all it can take up to 60 days for new content/links to be picked up permanently in search engines. Your optimization efforts take a couple months to work.

Secondly, not every site has the potential for 300% more traffic without adding 300% more content. And adding alot of content is not SEO.

Sure, is it possible to increase a site's traffic 3-fold in 90 days? Yes. Is it something you can guarantee will happen to everyone who reads your book? No. With such a guarantee you lose credilibity.

[awall19]

No, they can't. A broad claim of increasing your traffic by 300% in 90 days is pure crap. First of all it can take up to 60 days for new content/links to be picked up permanently in search engines. Your optimization efforts take a couple months to work.

1.) last I checked a couple months is less than 90 days.
2.) my book does not just talk about SEO. it also talks about writing articles, doing pay per click, other marketing, etc.
3.) in the last year or so I have yet to work on a site and have it not triple its traffic in 90 days.

Secondly, not every site has the potential for 300% more traffic without adding 300% more content.

I guarantee that EVERY SITE can get more traffic without adding more content - of course there would be no logical point to stop adding content unless a person was trying to make some useless arbitrary authoritative statement.

Creating content is one of the core elements to SEO.

And adding alot of content is not SEO.

I guess if content is not SEO the proper question would be "what the hell is?"

to me some of the best SEO is viral marketing. to do viral marketing you need to start with something.

to be fair about your statement I would like to see you rank a page for something like "seo" without any content.

Sure, is it possible to increase a site's traffic 3-fold in 90 days? Yes. Is it something you can guarantee will happen to everyone who reads your book? No. With such a guarantee you lose credilibity.

There is nothing you can read in which reading alone will do anything for your website.

forums, articles, books, etc etc... if you just read them and do nothing then of course you will have no success.

is your point that some people are lazy and will not succeed?

it is no secret that internet marketing is often hard work.

[Chromate222]

I remember about a year and a half back when I was just getting into web publishing, I was looking for SEO books. At the time, I thought some of them looked really good. However now, looking back, I realise that most of the stuff I read was complete trash.

Too often the author will try to assert their expertise by passing stuff of as fact, when it is not.

Example, "Google rolled in a link based filter." No, you're not a Google engineer and you don't know that for a fact. What you mean to say is "I believe Google has rolled in a link based filter, because..."

Of course, it's not a great selling point to have a book full of mere suppositions. Which is exactly why SEO books are usually full of hype, and speculative rubbish.

As Aspen says, you don't need to know SEO to a technical level. Indeed, the only people qualified to explain how pages rank at a technical level are search engine engineers - and there're obvious reasons why they don't do that

[igotdreams]

No, they can't. A broad claim of increasing your traffic by 300% in 90 days is pure crap. First of all it can take up to 60 days for new content/links to be picked up permanently in search engines.

I am sorry to say aspen, you have know idea what your talking about. For you it could "take up to 60 days for new content/links to be picked" but for the experienced it can be done much quicker. Is anyone going to step in and prove to you that it can and tell you our industry secrets? No of coarse not.

Increasing traffic by 300% in 90 days is not a far fetch at all, 90% of the web is made up of websites with little or not traffic. So to us our average client has a normal website that we inject with all our internet marketing techniques and they do indeed triple in traffic within 90 days.

One more thing, I do not think it is very professional Peter to slam one SEO Book or company for a sitepoint authorized seo book. The SEO Guy has had very successful results those results are better than any member on site points. Do I agree with ALL his techniques, maybe not, but it is an opnion game. Peter knew very well that SEO GUY's main websites got dropped by Google and was just using the lack of these placements to push Site Points book in the future.

Thank you for allowing me to express my opnions, by the way do not judge me by my links in my sig's, I never have time to work on SEO on my own sites, only clients. They pay more, then those sites will ever make, lol.

[petertdavis]

One more thing, I do not think it is very professional Peter to slam one SEO Book or company for a sitepoint authorized seo book. The SEO Guy has had very successful results those results are better than any member on site points. Do I agree with ALL his techniques, maybe not, but it is an opnion game. Peter knew very well that SEO GUY's main websites got dropped by Google and was just using the lack of these placements to push Site Points book in the future.

It wasn't a slam, merely a statement of fact. And I thought Aaron answered that very nicely. He's obviously able to remove his statement about his ranking at Google from his site whenever he wishes.

[Chromate222]

I am sorry to say aspen, you have know idea what your talking about.

That's a pretty bold comment when you consider that Aspen's extremely successful business relies on good search engine rankings.

There are glaring overviews in both yours and awall19's posts. But as they were directed at Aspen, I'll let him respond.

[awall19]

I remember about a year and a half back when I was just getting into web publishing, I was looking for SEO books. At the time, I thought some of them looked really good. However now, looking back, I realise that most of the stuff I read was complete trash.

writing a bad SEO Book is an easy business model because there is so much pent up demand for people wanting to learn how to rank their sites. its the same reason there are hundreds of blogs and forums about search engines.

for most people search engine traffic is a critical part of success online.

with that being said many of the books on SEO or SEM are not trash. you can't tell me that you read Mike Grehan's book and thought it was trash. Andrew Goodmans is a solid guide to AdWords. I am sure Dan Thies will put out something that is nothing short of spectacular. I have been told that my book is good by more than a few people. but admitidly it could be improved and so I keep learning and keep making it better.

Too often the author will try to assert their expertise by passing stuff of as fact, when it is not.

I totally agree with this and that is why a large part of my ebook is wrote more from the common sense sort of angle and less from a technical angle.

Example, "Google rolled in a link based filter." No, you're not a Google engineer and you don't know that for a fact. What you mean to say is "I believe Google has rolled in a link based filter, because..."

when you have some friends who are the largest link brokers in the world and some that can reverse engineer the algorithms they can help you figure stuff out. admitidly there are some people who know a ton more about the deep technical aspects of SEO than I do.

While I have read a good amount of research that went into making many of the modern algorithms I have not worked on mathematics in a long time and have not done any programming in a decade. Thus I don't focus on all the technical stuff.

I do collect some data and test some stuff out though.

Of course, it's not a great selling point to have a book full of mere suppositions. Which is exactly why SEO books are usually full of hype, and speculative rubbish.

I agree and work hard not to do that. I am exceptionally receptive to feedback. Notice that I am actually reading and writing in this thread.

As Aspen says, you don't need to know SEO to a technical level. Indeed, the only people qualified to explain how pages rank at a technical level are search engine engineers - and there're obvious reasons why they don't do that

I think PageRank in and of itself is rather easy to explain
PR(A) = (1-d) + d (PR(T1)/C(T1) + ... + PR(Tn)/C(Tn))

what is more difficult is explaining many of the other filiters and algorithms they layer over the top of it. Or when they use multiple different algorithms based on query type, etc.

I am sorry to say aspen, you have know idea what your talking about. For you it could "take up to 60 days for new content/links to be picked" but for the experienced it can be done much quicker. Is anyone going to step in and prove to you that it can and tell you our industry secrets? No of coarse not.

When I launch a new site the home page is always indexed within a couple days and usually a good hunk of the site is digested in the first week.

Increasing traffic by 300% in 90 days is not a far fetch at all, 90% of the web is made up of websites with little or not traffic. So to us our average client has a normal website that we inject with all our internet marketing techniques and they do indeed triple in traffic within 90 days.

Thanks for that. I think you put it more eloquently than I could.

It wasn't a slam, merely a statement of fact. And I thought Aaron answered that very nicely. He's obviously able to remove his statement about his ranking at Google from his site whenever he wishes.

Of course I can, and if my site is not ranking well soon then I will just rank the other site (which still is currently at #3 with absolutely 0 effort to rank it yet). It really is not that hard.

That's a pretty bold comment when you consider that Aspen's extremely successful business relies on good search engine rankings.

we all could be more efficient than we are. I could track conversions better, write better sales copy, learn more, etc etc etc

never does one stop learning. so long as what one learns has got them by well sofar people tend to stick with what they know.

in many situations forum flames and the like are mearly arguements of semantics. nobody wants to be wrong and forums are more interesting when people disagree.

There are glaring overviews in both yours and awall19's posts. But as they were directed at Aspen, I'll let him respond.

of course there are glaring overviews in every post. thats why threads continue on. thats why forums exist.

we all continue learning. if you stop learning then life loses its meaning.

I created a free preview of a part of my ebook (the PPC section). you can read it free here:
http://www.seobook.com/overture-adwords.pdf

if you like it, cool.
if you think it sucks, give me feedback and I will make it better.

you can't force anyone to change the way they think and we all have our own beliefs. if I came across as rude earlier it was because I was rather frustrated because I put a ton of work into my site and the thread had a fairly negative spin to it.

the truth is that nobody is univerally right or wrong and that we all keep learning. when people buy my ebook they are buying the fact that I spend a ton of time, effort, and money learning and hope to pass on the best info that I can.

[ferret77]

He's an executive member of SEMPO and SEOPros, two organizations for search engine professionals

I was under the impression I could enroll one of my pets in those organizations if I paid the memebership fees.

awall gave me a copy if his book I started reading it, I thought it was pretty good. More of makreting book then an seo book in my opionion.

I think that a lot of the concepts would be good for someone just starting out, it it introduces good concepts etc.

But I take more of a hamfisted approach to seo.

I think it very easy to triple the traffic to most newbie sites in 90 days. Just putting the right phrases in the title tags and breaking up the content can make a big difference.

That's a pretty bold comment when you consider that Aspen's extremely successful business relies on good search engine rankings.

um, so does mine, so does awalls so does many other people, it doesn't mean we can't be wrong some of the time.

[Chromate222]

um, so does mine, so does awalls so does many other people, it doesn't mean we can't be wrong some of the time.

... and so does mine. You're right - no one's ever 100% right, 100% of the time However, to suggest Aspen has absolutely no idea what he's talking about is a strange comment. He clearly has some idea what he's talking about. I just didn't find it a very objective comment, that's all.

I'm not out to cause a war. I just think people should be a bit more understanding of where eachother is coming from. I thought awall responded to my post nicely. I appreciated the chance to take a look at the PPC chapter of his ebook. I found it quite informative and easy to read. I don't object to how he presented the information at all. However learning about PPC is not really comparable to learning about SEO.

I would like the oportunity to take a look at the SEO sections. Awall, PM me

[aspen]

Fun stuff.

1.) last I checked a couple months is less than 90 days.

Wow, you really pulled one over on me there. I wasn't aware of that. I thought months were 45 days.

The point being is that you're handicapped in your time frame. Especially if you believe in the Google sandbox.

I guarantee that EVERY SITE can get more traffic without adding more content - of course there would be no logical point to stop adding content unless a person was trying to make some useless arbitrary authoritative statement.

Creating content is one of the core elements to SEO.


if content is not SEO the proper question would be "what the hell is?"

You wrote an SEO "book" and don't even know what the acronym stands for? Search Engine Optimization. Specifically the practice of optimization webpages for optimal natural search engine rankings. OF course, sarcasm aside I'm sure you knew that, but if you knew it why ask me?

And no, adding content is not SEO. Adding content will increase traffic, but not all things that increase traffic are SEO. For instance banner advertising is not SEO. Word of mouth is not SEO. Sure, these things might result in more links to your site, but thats an indirect benefit.

Of course, content is needed for good search engine rankings, but SEO is about optimizing existing content, not huge site expansions. Thats more of a site management issue.


If all your book says is "To get 300% more traffic make 300% more content" you're not teaching SEO.

Of course I'm sure your book is fine and includes more than that, and you see like a nice enough guy. However, my issue is with outrageous claims and 300% traffic increase in 90 days for everyone is outrageous. Plus your attitude that adding content is SEO. Well what if a regional restaurant chain came to you for marketing advice wanting to increase their business by 300% and you said "easy, open more stores." Thats not marketing advice, thats just expansion and any idiot can see how expansion will create more business. They were looking on marketing to increase same-store sales, and thats what SEO is. How can you make this page perform better in search engines.

Obviously adding content creates more traffic, but thats not SEO.

I am sorry to say aspen, you have know idea what your talking about. For you it could "take up to 60 days for new content/links to be picked" but for the experienced it can be done much quicker. Is anyone going to step in and prove to you that it can and tell you our industry secrets? No of coarse not.

Right, no idea. Well lets talk about Google's update cycle. The page rank/link popularity calculation is no easy task, it takes time to analyze the interconnectedness of billions of webpages. What Google used to do (like clockwork actually) was crawl the web, spend the next three weeks doing calculations, spend a week updating, then crawl again. So you ended up publishing new content right after a crawl that content might not be added permanently added with pagerank/links for 7 weeks.

Sure, Google picks up new content all the time, sometimes even hours old. But these are temporary listings and usually go away.

Now, that was a few years ago (I have been doing this awhile) and now adays Google is faster, some of my newer sites have gotten in in 2 weeks or even less. However PageRank calculations still take a long time and the results of a link popularity building campaign can still take a couple months to fully develop. So while sites get listed, their ranking isn't fully calculated. Plus, a large new site can take multiple update cycles to be fully listed (talking many thousands of pages here).

But hey, I guess I don't know what I'm talking about.

Increasing traffic by 300% in 90 days is not a far fetch at all, 90% of the web is made up of websites with little or not traffic. So to us our average client has a normal website that we inject with all our internet marketing techniques and they do indeed triple in traffic within 90 days.

Undoubtedly there are sites that are so badly optimized that you can do this. Perhaps the site has a flash based menu (or other inaccessible menu) and search engines have never even crawled the interior pages. Fix the menu issue and its like you just made loads of new content, traffic skyrockets.

Or maybe no link popularity work has ever been done. Spend a few hours submitting to directories/link pages and reap the rewards.

However, not every site is in that situation, and I believe this claim is supposed to apply to every site (triple your traffic in 90 days or your money back).

Some sites simply have traffic ceilings. One of my sites has been #1 on it's main search term (2 generic words) on every major search engine for 3 years (atleast). It also recently (last year) got #1 for one of the 2 generic words that makes up the phrase. Traffic though hasn't increased much more than the rate of inflation of the Internet population - except when I add new content. The site has pretty much reached it's traffic ceiling and I can safely say that increasing traffic by 300% in 90 days without simply adding loads of new content or spending money paying for that traffic on a per click basis would be impossible.

[awall19]

Wow, you really pulled one over on me there. I wasn't aware of that. I thought months were 45 days.

The point being is that you're handicapped in your time frame. Especially if you believe in the Google sandbox.

right, but if you are arbitrarily extending the time cycles to prove my time frame is rubbish then that has little purpose.

You wrote an SEO "book" and don't even know what the acronym stands for? Search Engine Optimization. Specifically the practice of optimization webpages for optimal natural search engine rankings. OF course, sarcasm aside I'm sure you knew that, but if you knew it why ask me?

internal site structure and how you add content to the site and how you format the site. all these things are associated with SEO.

And no, adding content is not SEO. Adding content will increase traffic, but not all things that increase traffic are SEO. For instance banner advertising is not SEO. Word of mouth is not SEO. Sure, these things might result in more links to your site, but thats an indirect benefit.

then the real question is did my sales letter say Triple the traffic of ANY site using ONLY SEO. No it did not. again, you are artificially setting up boundaries to try to prove a point.

Of course, content is needed for good search engine rankings, but SEO is about optimizing existing content, not huge site expansions. Thats more of a site management issue.

I think that is wrong. if you can create a really good idea that builds a ton of link popularity then you get a huge advantage over your competition. not all the ideas take that long to make or require that much content.

sometimes even directing people to the wrong location can be a huge way to boost traffic.
http://www.sitepoint.com/newsletter/...id=2&issue=312

If all your book says is "To get 300% more traffic make 300% more content" you're not teaching SEO.

you are using reductionism to try to break concepts down into concepts that help you prove an arbitrary point.

I wrote in the last post that I can't make people change their minds.

what I say is that people gain a ton more traffic through various means.

I am sure you are aware that typically the best type of marketing comprises a mixture of elements, no?

Of course I'm sure your book is fine and includes more than that, and you see like a nice enough guy. However, my issue is with outrageous claims and 300% traffic increase in 90 days for everyone is outrageous.

it says. Or your money back. if unsatisfied people can ask for a refund. (as about 30 out of the 3000 or so purchases have). someone in this thread asked for a refund way quicker than they could have possibly read my ebook. and they had it within 5 minutes. before 3am at that.

Plus your attitude that adding content is SEO. Well what if a regional restaurant chain came to you for marketing advice wanting to increase their business by 300% and you said "easy, open more stores." Thats not marketing advice, thats just expansion and any idiot can see how expansion will create more business. They were looking on marketing to increase same-store sales, and thats what SEO is. How can you make this page perform better in search engines.

I still disagree with your concept that the only way to do SEO is to work with existing content. it is artificially boxing oneself in to prove a point or to limit the success of SEO.

Obviously adding content creates more traffic, but thats not SEO.

if I conceeded this point, and stated that my book talked about how to organize content, how to get syndicated, how to build links, etc would you agree that 300% is not an out of range challenge for most of the millions of websites on the market.

Sure, Google picks up new content all the time, sometimes even hours old. But these are temporary listings and usually go away.

they tend to stick a bit better if you are serious about building link popularity. lets not forget that Google is only one engine. publish RSS and ping my yahoo. that gets content indexed in Y! fast. etc. lots of techniques to encourage quick and deep crawling.

However PageRank calculations still take a long time and the results of a link popularity building campaign can still take a couple months to fully develop. So while sites get listed, their ranking isn't fully calculated. Plus, a large new site can take multiple update cycles to be fully listed (talking many thousands of pages here).

and assuming the site is brand new then it is easy to triple the traffic. if it is already established then much of the database is already indexed.

But hey, I guess I don't know what I'm talking about.

well ...

I think you are just trying to argue semantics to prove a point. as mentioned in my prior post. nobody wants to be wrong.

Undoubtedly there are sites that are so badly optimized that you can do this. Perhaps the site has a flash based menu (or other inaccessible menu) and search engines have never even crawled the interior pages. Fix the menu issue and its like you just made loads of new content, traffic skyrockets.

Or maybe no link popularity work has ever been done. Spend a few hours submitting to directories/link pages and reap the rewards.

right. there are a ton of things that most any site can do. sometimes just asking a few friends to link to you or submitting to directories or improving navigation can have a huge outcome.

However, not every site is in that situation, and I believe this claim is supposed to apply to every site (triple your traffic in 90 days or your money back).

you are missing the or your money back part. if people are not satisfied with their purchase I do not want their money.

Some sites simply have traffic ceilings. One of my sites has been #1 on it's main search term (2 generic words) on every major search engine for 3 years (atleast). It also recently (last year) got #1 for one of the 2 generic words that makes up the phrase. Traffic though hasn't increased much more than the rate of inflation of the Internet population - except when I add new content.

1.) I do not think you are necissarily my target audience (when you feel you know SEO better than I or feel you can more adequately define it - as you tried to above)
2.) it would probably cost me quite a bit but I bet I could make a significant increase in your traffic if so inclined. of course this would take many hours of my time to do so and I am not sure it is worth the $$$ or time just to try to prove a point. I don't think either of are going to change the way the other thinks.

The site has pretty much reached it's traffic ceiling and I can safely say that increasing traffic by 300% in 90 days without simply adding loads of new content or spending money paying for that traffic on a per click basis would be impossible.

again, I will reiterate that my book talks about multiple marketing ideas and nowhere in the sales letter does it say

ONLY SEO - NO OTHER MARKETING ALLOWED

in fact I heavily encourage other types of marketing, as noted above by ferret77

awall gave me a copy if his book I started reading it, I thought it was pretty good. More of makreting book then an seo book in my opionion.

I think that a lot of the concepts would be good for someone just starting out, it it introduces good concepts etc.