SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 64 of 64

Thread: SeoBook.com

  1. #51
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    ri
    Posts
    71
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    thanks for the kind words Harvey

  2. #52
    SitePoint Columnist DanThies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Posts
    86
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The average web site probably gets fewer than 50 uniques a day. If I can believe the data I have, "most web sites" are well below average - the median point on the curve falling well below the average. "Most sites" is a pretty low standard, since most web sites are doing nothing for search engines.

    Fun with numbers: Google claims to have 8 billion URLs in their database. Let's believe them just for laughs. Next, let's pretend that there are 200 million searches a day on Google. No doubt that's a bit low, especially when you account for all their partners (AOL, etc.) but I am too tired for real math today. Let's go ahead and say that these are all 10-result SERPs, so that there are 2,000,000,000 top 10 listings available every day on Google. Based on these numbers the "average" URL will appear on a Google SERP once every 4 days. Let's give the average top 10 Google SERP appearance a 5% click through rate, so the average URL will get a referral from Google once every 80 days.

    Tripling that is certainly possible within a couple months, but you're not necessarily going to accomplish it with nothing more than tweaking existing pages. An effective link building campaign can certainly do that, but if Chris won't allow you to build links or add content, it's a much steeper hill to climb, isn't it?

    Why don't we skip the semantics discussion, though, since y'all aren't going to agree on definitions. I probably don't agree with either of your definitions. To me, SEO is any activity that helps a web site get better traffic from organic search engine referrals. This activity may result in the site appearing in more search results, fewer but more relevant search results, or even the same search results as before but with a more appealing/clickable listing. Quality is at least as important as quantity, as Chris has no doubt pointed out at least once in this thread.

    In all likelihood, the "average site" could significantly increase its search engine referrals simply by adding the words "click here" to the beginning of every page title... until every other idiot in the world decided to do the same.

    Could you triple the search engine traffic (quantity) for "most web sites" in a couple months? Yeah, unless they're new sites (<1 year old), you probably can. I don't think it's an outrageous claim, just a very low target. But geez, Chris, can we please do some keyword research and implement a content strategy that fits? "Most web sites" probably only have one page...

  3. #53
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Tampa Florida
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    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.
    Just to back this guy up. These results could be real if you implement the tricks and tips that he suggests. This guy knows what he is doing.

    I have been watching this SEO-Guy and he has a great reputation in the SEO industry. He is a moderator on the SEO Chat forum and has connections that are far beyond my reach. His website used to rank very high for keyword "SEO" and others and had a website with PR8. I think it has since decreased since he now focuses more on other ways of income.

    I read Dan Thies previous book and it was very informative to me, so newbies will really learn a lot. Defentely should be worth buying his new book. Buying SEO books just saves you a lot of time of having to scim all the posts.

    My 2 cents
    Internet Marketing Web design eCommerce

  4. #54
    Web Design Ireland cianuro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Dublin Ireland
    Posts
    914
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I fully agree.

    "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."

    Not true AT ALL. While in some cases, it will depend on your content or niche, in others, it will be the target audience.

    I have gotten a brand new site indexed in Google in 21 hours from time of domain registration. I optimized the site (Actually using a lot of methods from Aarons wonderful book) and also used a few of my own little tips. (Including interlinking and of course sitemaps. Some may argue I got luck, I do not.

    One of my sites traffic increased ~1100% in 3 months. It is certainly not a load of crap.

  5. #55
    Business Growth *******s, Inc
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    374
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chromate222 View Post
    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.

    Just reading this old thread... from a marketing and business perspective I must say that if your statement is true - Aspen's business is relying on something uncontrolable - which is a very bad thing.

    You can keep optimizing pages, but when Google doesn't want your site at the top 10 - they throw you out. It's much better, therefore, to build a business upon other traffic streams then just SEO.

    Not blaming/flaming Aspen here, just trying to share my 2c.

    Oh, btw - if the author is making such claims as 'triple your traffic in 90 days' then it's his choice. If that's his guarantee and he refunds buyers when they don't get there (with action on their part) - he runs a completely clean business.

    -Dave

  6. #56
    SitePoint Evangelist Chromate222's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    422
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Wow, this is a blast from the past! I can hardly even remember what the thread was about exactly and can't really be bothered to go back through it.

    There's nothing wrong with relying on good search engine rankings - so long as you have a lot of them, spread over a good few sites, on different IP addresses etc. Basically spread the risk, just as you would with any investment.

    As for it being something uncontrollable. To an extent yes, but it's not completely uncontrollable - otherwise no one would bother with SEO. But I do get what you're saying. If Google wanted to, they could wipe us all out in seconds. However there are probably very few situations in business where one has complete control.

    It all depends on the level of risk you're comfortable with.

    Just for the record, I think Aaron's SEO book is a good resource, mainly for those starting out. I have nothing against Aaron Wall at all - I respect him. I still think the "triple traffic in 90 days" is a bit far fetched (which I think is what the thread was about?). But as you say, people can get their money back if they want, so whatever. I don't even know if that statement is still on the site, I don't ever look. One thing's for certain - I'm definitely NOT going to start debating it all again


  7. #57
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,424
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Edora View Post
    Just reading this old thread... from a marketing and business perspective I must say that if your statement is true - Aspen's business is relying on something uncontrolable - which is a very bad thing.
    The problem with resurrecting an old thread is that the information is no longer accurate. He is very diversified now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chromate222 View Post
    Just for the record, I think Aaron's SEO book is a good resource, mainly for those starting out. I have nothing against Aaron Wall at all - I respect him. I still think the "triple traffic in 90 days" is a bit far fetched (which I think is what the thread was about?). But as you say, people can get their money back if they want, so whatever. I don't even know if that statement is still on the site, I don't ever look. One thing's for certain - I'm definitely NOT going to start debating it all again
    I think it is a bad resource. It is full of misinformation and he [i]knows[i] that. That's a terrible thing to do IMHO. But he's out to make a buck and probably doesn't care if his customers are successful or not.

  8. #58
    SitePoint Evangelist Chromate222's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    422
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    The problem with resurrecting an old thread is that the information is no longer accurate. He is very diversified now.
    Actually I think Chris still relies, for the most part, on search engine rankings. I'm sure he'd be happy to attest to that - because there's nothing wrong with it. He has forums, repeat traffic, etc which is undeniably important. But I think organic search engine rankings are still his bread-and-butter.

    I could be wrong of course, I haven't been paying that much attention.

    (not wanting to turn this into an analysis of Chris's business! )

    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    I think it is a bad resource. It is full of misinformation and he [i]knows[i] that. That's a terrible thing to do IMHO. But he's out to make a buck and probably doesn't care if his customers are successful or not.
    I have to admit, I haven't read the latest version. I based my comments on fractions I read years ago. Sorry, I should have made that clear.


  9. #59
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    87
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    I think it is a bad resource. It is full of misinformation and he [i]knows[i] that. That's a terrible thing to do IMHO. But he's out to make a buck and probably doesn't care if his customers are successful or not.
    That would be a bad thing to do but can you substantiate that statement?
    In the form of a bullet list what information is misinformation in your opinion?

  10. #60
    Non-Member Waraas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Idaho Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    350
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by petertdavis View Post
    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.
    http://www.google.com/search?q=seo&i...ient=firefox-a

    found this site on page 1

  11. #61
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,424
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    This is an old thread. You're replying to posts that are two years old.

  12. #62
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    87
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Your statement i referred to was made Oct 5, 2007, 07:09
    It seems to me you have a more personal problem with Aaron then a valid point.

    But that is only a feeling i get from the level of negativity in the post i referred to.

    I read Aaron's blog regularly and i find it very educational, if i am being mislead as you say, then giving a valid explanation upon questioning your statement would be the responsible and right thing to do.

    Fair enough right?

    Negative gossip doesn't have any value for anyone.

  13. #63
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,424
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Actually my reply wasn't to you. It was to the post above mine. I've commented on this quite a bit in these forums so I won't do so again here. Do a search for seobook and you'll see my reasoning.

  14. #64
    SitePoint Guru Webinsane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montenegro
    Posts
    898
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ahh multi quote discussion.

    To answer the original question. If you know how to search sitepoint, digitalpoint, namepros, searchenginewatch and many other forums and blogs...or just search Google then this book is not for you.

    Anyways, most of the information is gathered elsewhere and by the time that gets from some post into the book that it is available to many other subscribers...hmm think about it.
    CUBE SCRIPTS MEDIA
    REAL ESTATE SCRIPT 2.0 | Software for Real Estate Agencies


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •