Domain Manage

Good assessment of why SEO is basically DEAD

Discussion in 'SEO Search Engine Optimisation' started by JMOT, Aug 2, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JMOT

    JMOT Well-Known Member

    Feb 2007
    Likes Received:
    Got this in my inbox today from some spammy link network i'd probably signed up to :) BUT if you take out all the "i was right hahaha" bollocks (him not me) this is actually a pretty interesting read and a lot of the theories have been proved right.

    Couple this with the fact that Google is forcing the no1 organic listing on lots of terms to only 15% exposure on the page SEO is basically dead and you need to do something else now... if you hadnt already worked that out :rolleyes:

    What the below says to me is there are potentially so many things at play with SEO now that you shouldn't actually do any. Let your users decide how to comment/link about you. Let journo's do their job. Let your users socially share you how they want. Let Google work it out themselves. Anyway I've started waffling heres the email:

    Hi Subscriber,

    I began preparing for Penguin back in February
    this year, and as a preframe, our non-IM sides
    of our business have more than quadrupled in the
    last 5 months, by the application of what I'm about
    to share.

    I wrote this post back in April just after Penguin hit.

    I never released it, but since the cat is out of the
    bag so to speak, you might as well know how to
    properly deal with Google.

    It's a long post, only read it if you want to know how
    to beat Google, or your competitors.

    Here are the sections (I've done my best to split the
    post up but I'd recommend reading all of it):

    Why Google Had To Do This, And Why You Need To Accept That Fact
    Googles Game Of Cat And Mouse Is Over... Enter The Lion... Err... Penguin.
    Using Misdirection To Keep Us On Our Toes - Googles Fundamental Shift
    What Is Link Debt
    What To Do If You've Been Decimated
    Googles Lead Up To The 4x2 Over The Back Of The Head (The Mack Truck Is Still Coming)
    Googles Change From Link Value To Link Profile
    I'm Taking My Bat And Ball And Going Home
    Enter the Link Profile
    Anchor Text Distribution
    Link Relevancy Distribution
    Link Type Distribution
    Link Target Distribution
    Link PR Distribution
    Geo & Follow/No-Follow
    What Google Will (Hopefully) Do To Combat Link Debt
    Won't This Just Be The Same In 12 Months?

    Aftermath Of The Google Penguin Update - A Public Thank You Too Google

    Thank you Google, for obliterating my competition.

    Thank you Google, for levelling the playing field.

    Thank you Google, for giving the finger to every SEO'er, white hat, grey hat, and black hat alike.

    Thank you Google, for making me realize just how easy we have had it, and giving me every damn wake up call you possibly could without actually tell me what you were doing.

    You let me figure it out for myself.

    And so I'm sitting over here, laughing my ass off watching the screaming, the crying, the bitching and the moaning, while you are sitting there, laughing all the way to the bank.

    No seriously.

    You've destroyed companies, jobs, lives, probably ruined families.

    In the last 15 years you've allowed people to grow on you, to depend on you, to love you.

    And in just 12 short months, you've completely destroyed everything you originally stood for.

    You're openly allowing active defamation to occur, the systematic destruction of a competitor.

    Something you swore would never be possible.

    But this is actually awesome.

    Actually no, it's damn amazing.

    I've never felt more excited, more pumped, more energetic about my business, my life, and what we are doing.


    Because at the end of last year, I started to get a drift of what you were doing. Then in February (it took me 12 months ok... I'm a bit thick headed), you made me sit up and take a look at our business and realize what was going on.

    Then in March I made the post about what you were doing to link builders, and what you were trying to do to improve your algorithm.

    Exerpt from post:
    TL; DR - Google's end game is the right end game to have. Expect collateral damage based on their approach. Active link building isn't bad, spammers make it bad. Kick spammers that aren't adding value in the nuts. Oh, and if you build any links... you're breaking Google's Terms of Service... sorry.

    Then along comes the Penguin on the 24th of April.


    I can hear the screams from miles away.

    And what's beautiful is that it's a mix of white hats, grey hats, and black hats.

    No one has been left unpunished.

    Now, don't get me wrong Google, you've still got a long way to go, when users start commenting about the crap that is popping up in listings for major terms, you know that something just isn't right.

    But that's besides the point. The end justifies the means.

    And really, you had no other option.

    And this is why I thank you Google, because you actually followed through this time.

    Why Google Had To Do This, And Why You Need To Accept That Fact

    To understand why they had to do this, you need to think of Google not as a company, but as a process.

    Googles algorithm was (is) fundamentally flawed.

    When Google first started, their notion of a site, linking to another site, counting as a vote of confidence (their basic premise) was perfectly acceptable.

    In the land of 1998, when keyword stuffing was all the rage, and there were a grand total of 26 million pages indexed by Google, this concept seemed valid.

    People with sites, linked to other sites they liked. They didn't talk about it on their site, that was what ICQ and IRC was for.

    Fast forward to 2011 (actually Google hasn't said anything in the last few years but in 2008 - 10 years later - they confirmed that their index surpassed 1 trillion) and the basic premise of Googles algorithm seems childish.

    How can you apply a concept that is valid in a small market place, to a market place that is not only 1000 times larger but also dynamic and constantly changing.

    It's keyword stuffing of 1998 all over again.

    Just a different kind.

    And just like it is pointless to tweak and improve any process that is fundamentally flawed, I believe Google sat down and realized (I'd say the first discussions on this would have originated in 2006, gaining weight around 2009/10 which is when the plans for Panda/Penguin would have begun), that the way they had been doing things, would no longer work.

    Googles Game Of Cat And Mouse Is Over... Enter The Lion... Err... Penguin.

    For anyone who's been doing SEO for any length of time, and actually knew what you were doing, you probably ignored 95% of the "Google updates", and the "changes to the algorithm".

    Most of the time, it was bullcrap.

    What Google (or Matt Cutts - imo one of the greatest propaganda spinners of this century) said, and what actually worked, were almost always two different things.

    But what choice did they have?

    If you cannot get a result, force that result via fear.

    It works for politics, it works for the media, it worked for Google.

    Take the whole paid links thing.

    Years ago, Google said they won the battle on paid links, that it was done, beaten (and by the way against their policies if you do it!).

    One glance at the top 10 results for almost any major keyword, confirmed that it was all talk, and any intervention was purely manual.

    Their algorithm did not have the capability to accurately detect, and subsequently apply, a penalty to paid links.

    Well guess what.

    This is the first time, where their algorithm, what is ranking in the top 10, matches what they are saying (you do however have to read between the lines and take a look at the lead up to understand it though).

    Using Misdirection To Keep Us On Our Toes - Googles Fundamental Shift

    Google can't just come out and tell us what they have done, the changes they have made, word for word.

    They are, in essence a mathematical formula, and if you know that A+B=C, to get C you just need A+B.

    And so they use misdirection to herd the sheep, and the sheep will keep baaaaaaing all the way to the baaaaaaaarn because they are told to.

    Google has fundamentally shifted.

    To understand how they have fundamentally shifted, there are two concepts you need to understand.

    Link Debt
    Link Profiles

    What Is Link Debt

    As I have covered in a previous post, Google changed their stance from "thou can do no harm to thy competitors!" to "meh, survival of the fittest boys".

    Now, let me state up front. Unless Google does something (I'll say what I think that is soon), and fast, I think they are opening themselves up to a serious lawsuit.

    Google is a platform. It has rules, procedures, and guidelines. Those guidelines now essentially state "if you want to defame your competitors, go right ahead, we'll let you, and penalize them when you do".

    Slander anyone? Lawsuits won't come from a big brand like Amazon, they are safe from all this. It will come from companies in the $50-300 million range that don't have the complete brand presence yet to hold off a heavy negative seo campaign, or companies in the $10-20 million range that are funded by the bigger companies that smell an easy fight in court.

    Why is all that relevant?

    Because there used to be an artificial link floor.

    It used to be that you could think of link value being passed through as a 0-10 range, 0 was always the lowest point, unless you linked back in which case you validated that bad link.

    Now you need to think of link value as -10 to 10.

    Yep, Google will let you (or your competitors) sink yourself into a hole.

    This means that links can, do, and will harm your site (I'll go into the dynamics of how this works later) if you build them incorrectly.

    This is why you are seeing brand new domains ranking with no content for terms they shouldn't be.


    Because on a Balance Sheet (remember Link Debt), 0 is better than -1.

    This is why if you have an amazing domain, great content, built for the user, aged, and you've done everything "by the book" by Google for the last 10 years, you might be scratching your head going "why have I been smashed!".

    Because you're Link Debt is -1 or -2 or something below that 0 threshold.

    All that amazing content that Google told you to build and would safeguard you Mr Whitehat against any changes they might make... well... sorry. They lied.

    What To Do If You've Been Decimated

    If you have an amazing site, and have been totally decimated by the latest update, you've got four choices:

    #1 - Wait to see if they revert... I don't like your chances

    #2 - Evaluate your Link Assets vs Link Liabilities - Work out whether it's worth the effort to over the next 6-18 months build enough Link Assets and remove enough Link Liabilities, and if not...

    #3 - Start a new site (0 is better than climbing out of a -9 hole) OR

    #4 - Work out whether you can give Google the finger and add more pillars of traffic to your site ASAP

    Unfortunately if this is you, you're what I would call, collateral damage.

    And it sucks. It really does. My heart goes out to you, I'm all for Evolution, for improvement, but when innocents get slaughtered along the way... it's not something I'd be willing to do.

    You are not the kind of person or site that should be affected by this.

    But Google also gave a 12 month (or more) lead in time to this.

    The signs were there, we were just not looking.

    Googles Lead Up To The 4x2 Over The Back Of The Head (The Mack Truck Is Still Coming)

    The initial roll out of Panda - designed around the quality of a site (To me, I think of Panda as the site performance checker, were you doing the right thing by the user, building for the user, or were you just building crap)

    The introduction of secure search - if you monitor your conversion rates (and you should be - hint hint performance), there is probably a reason why the (not provided) visitors are converting up to 6x higher than any other visitor (this is taken from our own Ecommerce stores - I hated the (not provided) until I found this out - again, thank you Google for profiling people) - this was designed to match sites with people, what they were interested in, at what stage of a buying cycle are they.

    The continued iterations of Panda - iterations designed around identifying site performance as compared against those in the industry - again, more on site stuff

    Private networks beginning to get deindexed - BMR was the showcase - it wasn't the first one. Private networks have been systematically hunted down and tanked for the last 3 years. But it's all been manual, in the case of BMR and others, it became algorithmic detection, followed by manual intervention.

    Google issues WMT warnings enmass - this should have been the big one. Something was coming. Google timed this perfectly.

    Issue mass WMT warnings, check.

    Make a HUGE statement about blog networks re: BMR etc. Check.

    Misdirection, check.

    Screaming sheep, check.

    Sites scramble for reinclusion - "to do it or not to do it" - Googles timing had people freaking out. Exposing themselves, exposing networks, it was golden. But for anyone who actually went through a reinclusion process, and saw it through to the end, probably found out that it came down to a person, with a set of guidelines, and rules, not an algorithm, making the decision.

    Case in point:

    This was on a site that had no unnatural link warning, it was just dropped. They initially told us it was thin content. So we cleaned it up, removed what we thought were "thin" pages, and then the goodness.

    "Thank you for cleaning up pages that were thin on content. This will
    provide an overall better experience for users of your site and users of

    However, we recommend for you to look again for possibly artificial or
    unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate

    A few more examples of pages that contain inorganic links to your site: (I've removed the links here but I'll explain what they were)
    Link #1 - Anchor: Blue Widgets - a link on a page, that pointed to a 404 page on our site - wait... so Google counts links pointing to 404 pages now as valid?
    Link #2 - Anchor: Blue Widgets - a link that was from a Press Release. Ahh the irony. Surely no legitimate business would EVER do press releases. Shame on those black hat press release people!

    Once you have updated your site, reply to this email noting the specific
    changes you made. Only after there has been a significant decrease in
    unnatural linking will we consider reviewing your reconsideration request
    again. If there are still links that you could not remove, we will look
    for an explanation of why you were unable to do so.


    The Google Search Quality Team

    (bolded part for emphasis) - so what they were saying, is that I didn't have to remove all my links... I just needed to show enough effort.

    So I could have bad links... and I'd be added back in... hmmm... very interesting... very interesting indeed...

    Now what confirmed to me of what was coming, was what they picked up on in those 2 links.

    It wasn't the link type (although the first link was pretty bad) - it was the anchor text. They were the same, and they were emphasized.

    Googles Change From Link Value To Link Profile

    Forget what Matt Cutts and Google are trying to shove down your throat as examples of Penguin, and OOP (Over Optimization Penalty) - though OOP is still a valid point.

    This is about the change to Googles algorithm that is at their fundamental core.

    How they value links.

    Let's look at how Google has tackled these issues in the past.

    Previously, Googles weapon of choice for SEO (blackhat) destruction has been one of link devaluing.

    A type of link works to well, what do they do? Put in place a modifier that says that "if link x matches abc parameters, assign value from 1 to .2".

    Simple, rankings realign, anyone that was reliant on that type of link, removed from their rankings.

    But what about paid links and blog networks.

    How do you algorithmically detect and devalue a link that is at its absolute core artificial, and yet is incorporated into the very fibre of the internet in a naturally occurring way?

    The answer is, they can't.

    Or couldn't do it the traditional way.

    This is why blog networks were so powerful.

    Why sites in the top 10 serps were rampant with paid links.

    Because they worked. Period. End of story.

    And there was nothing Google could do about it.

    But here's the think about what works. If it works, people do more of it.

    So sites that buy links, and get results, buy more links, and get better results.

    They don't do anything else because they are only interested in what works.

    *light bulb*

    Enter Penguin.

    Google realized that they couldn't beat these people at their game by changing the rules. So they changed the game.

    I'm Taking My Bat And Ball And Going Home

    That's probably a bit harsh, and I'm sure Google looks at it a little differently, as the triumphant victory (and in reality they should because it's about bloody time).

    Googles spent the last 15 years collecting data.

    What data?

    All of it.

    It's estimated that Google has anywhere from 900,000 to about 1,700,000 servers.

    That's a LOT of data.

    And this gives them a unique view on what real companies are doing.

    On how real companies "build links".

    Because their only answer up until now has been "build good content and uhh... yeah... it'll get picked up..." - guess no one told them about the chicken or the egg story.

    Enter the Link Profile

    For the last 2 months I've been training my team around the changes that I believed were coming.

    The 24th April 2012 and Mr Penguin confirmed I was right.

    What follows, is information that I am betting my business on.

    I spent from January to March in data analysis mode.

    I've looked at more link profiles, more analytics, more metrics than I probably have in my entire career. Because a change like this is fundamental and monolithic.

    What follows is what you need to do, to survive over the next 2-3 years (not just the next 12 months) through any Google update (much like we've survived through every update up until now, and even then the damage we've sustained is minimal).

    Here is a very sexy, fantastically drawn (you can tell I'm an artist surely!) illustration on a whiteboard I did while training my team recently in Manila (note, this was well before Penguin hit).

    There are 7 parts to your link profile that you need to consider (there will likely be more but for now these are the primary that I have identified).

    3 of which you need to consider right now.

    Primary 3:
    - Anchor Text Distribution
    - Link Relevancy Distribution
    - Link Type Distribution

    Secondary 2:
    - Link Target Distribution
    - PR Distribution

    Other 2:
    - Geo Location
    - Follow/No-Follow

    If you've been decimated recently, I'll bet you've broken at least one, if not all of the primary 3, and in some cases the secondary 2. I'm yet to see any examples of Geo location or follow/no-follow.

    What does each mean?

    Anchor Text Distribution

    Anchor texts can be broadly defined into 3 areas:
    - Targeted (keyword rich)
    - Branded (your name, company name, site name or url)
    - Generic (phrases, click here etc.)

    The best type of link, is a targeted keyword rich link. So... that's what everyone built.

    Real businesses, real companies that had a following, who had content picked up or did viral campaigns, ended up with targeted keyword rich anchor text more in the 10-20% (or less) range.

    A good profile for me is one that has approximately:
    10% targeted keyword rich phrases (this will be diluted by viral/passive link building)
    60% branded
    30% generic

    Link Relevancy Distribution

    Pretty simple. Is a link relevant? Is it on topic?

    Googles Wonder Wheel did an amazing job of telling what type of words linked with other words, but sadly they removed that... so how do you define relevancy?

    Google still lets you browse through related areas, you just need to know how to look in their search results for it.

    But it's not natural to have ONLY relevant links... in fact, most sites that link would actually not be that relevant, somewhere to the tune of a 40% (relevant) to 60% (not relevant) split.

    Link Type Distribution

    The days of relying on one type (or even 3 types) of links are gone.

    Sad, but true.

    In our analysis we've identified 36 (I've covered a handful below) different consistent types of links spread across 4 areas:

    Passive Link Building

    Link Bait... that's it - put out great stuff... and only great stuff, all the time. It's not about the links it will build, it's about the benefit to the person reading it (hopefully like this post since I know no one listens to a crazy aussie from down under! Except you... yes... you're the only one... shhh... keep quiet!)

    Community Link Building

    Rule #1 - Never ever ever ever ever EVER give the job of community link building, to a link builder. All they will think about is "how do I squeeze a link into this forum post"

    That's the only rule.

    Engage in your community, help them. Actually care about people. Fancy that.

    Things like:
    Forum links - signatures and in posts where relevant
    Forum profiles - this is your ad for your site or yourself after someone reads your amazing posts to get them to check out your site
    Blog comments - "ZOMG GREAT POST - CHECK OUT MINE!!!!" - No... just... no... engage, give feedback, help other commentors
    Social interaction - social signals, Twitter, Facebook, Google+ etc.

    Active Link Building (traditional)

    You need to shift yourself from thinking as a "link builder" to one as "business promoter" - the links you actively build should be primarily for the purpose of building traffic from the sources you go to. The link is the secondary benefit.

    Things like:
    Press releases - simple really, like the one we got flagged for above - hehe
    Web directories - Dmoz, well trafficked directories
    Guest posts - contact other people in the industry, get the word out
    Social bookmarking - where it's relevant to do so, get your link bait content published
    Video marketing - Zappos is a great example of this, I think their last count is 90,000 videos


    I used to hate paid marketing.

    It is my new best friend.

    It builds me links.

    Links Google loves.

    Things like:
    Ebay - I finally figured out how that damn site is ranking above me!
    Classifieds - Craigslist anyone?
    Paid links - *gasp* that means No Follow Paid Links Mr Whitehat :D The purpose is buying the link for the traffic, not for its value (but it still formulates part of your profile)

    The end result, is you should have a good range of link types (12+ is my minimum now) with no link type exceeding more than 15% (20% in some cases) of total links.

    Link Target Distribution

    Where do the links point to?

    Home page?


    Internal pages?

    We've always advocated this, so it hasn't really changed much.

    The distribution we try to follow is:

    Home Page - About 10%
    Category Pages - About 20-30%
    Internal Pages - About 60-70%

    Link PR Distribution

    Contrary to popular belief having all high authority links, is actually a bad thing and is a clear indication that you are trying to manipulate the search rankings (remember, Googles definition!)

    A healthy PR distribution of links (and yes, this even holds true for sites like which are meant to be the king of king of white hat) is very heavy on the PR 0-3 range, with the higher the PR of the link, the lower the quantity.

    I mean seriously, how many PR 9 or 10 links do you think are actually out there that you even have a chance of getting? Cmon.

    Geo & Follow/No-Follow

    I do not believe these two (and to a certain extent the first 5) are in full effect but will be phased in over time.

    What I do believe, is that for the next 6-12 months, we are going to see Google making changes towards perfecting their algorithm around just two areas.

    Site Performance (aka Panda)
    Link Profile (aka Penguin)

    What Google Will (Hopefully) Do To Combat Link Debt

    I also believe they will give webmasters the ability to validate bad links and to have them flagged as either to be removed, or simply reduced back to the baseline of 0.

    I also believe that they already have this functionality built into their system.

    Note: Matt Cutts recently hinted at this being something they will implement (I've added this in for the purpose of this email)

    Which is why you could go through a re-inclusion process, have a horrible link profile, and still be fine in this latest update. The links that you couldn't remove yourself, Google assigned their values to 0 for you. (and if they don't, well, bring on the lawsuits!)

    Won't This Just Be The Same In 12 Months?


    The problem that Google will face in 12 months, is when people have figured out how to build links in the new manner purely to avoid detection, basically spamming the crap out of all types of link building efforts.

    A link profile is a game of 1's and 0's it's an algorithm detection process. Avoid detection, stay fine.

    So my prediction is that in 12 months (or thereabouts) Google will take a heavier stance on a few things (they have hinted at some already):

    Link context - there are three areas that this will be comprised of:
    - Context of the page - the words, images, are they relevant to...
    - The anchor text & link
    - The location they point to - ideally, these three match or at least 2/3 with context and location pointed to being the deal breaker (if they don't match its bad)

    Link intent - certain types of links, are built in certain ways because they are built naturally that way. This is a "model" and that model can be applied and factored against to detect whether someone is doing something legitimately (e.g. a forum post with an anchor text link is rare to happen naturally, it would either be a phrase, or a url)

    The third element they will put into practice as an Interactivity score.

    This is like the "social signals" everyone talks about.

    But the Interactivity score goes one step beyond that and takes into consideration the pulse of conversation around your brand.

    Starting slow, and building up. Those that fuel, that help, that converse, that interact, that are advocates for the customer and user, will do well. Those that ignore it. Will die.

    Here's to beating Google and your competitors ;)
  2. Domain Forum

    Acorn Domains Elite Member

    Likes Received:
  3. tifosi United Kingdom

    tifosi Well-Known Member

    Oct 2004
    Likes Received:
    Anything that kills off the spammy link building perpetuated by the - mainly - indian/chinese companies is fine by me. IMO its the real reason got the panda/penguin update. The internet was/is becoming an absolute mess with spam links.

    I still get the emails from these SEO companies telling me that they will get me up the rankings by by submitting my sites and by generating links on x forums and blogs. This is now a guaranteed way to get your site battered - and rightly too.

    As a webmaster I simply either turn off commenting on sites or heavily moderate them and enforce nofollow rules on ALL links I've not explicitly set as content for the comments I do allow.

    The new mantra - content is ALL, valid content is ALL, proper content is ALL.

    If you build it, don't expect them to come. But if you build it and keep building it, eventually someone will. And it will only take that someone with a lot of friends to create a lot of natural traffic.

    Last edited: Aug 2, 2012
  4. Blossom United Kingdom

    Blossom Well-Known Member

    Oct 2010
    Likes Received:
    Your standard badly-written 'sensational'-style internet marketer newsletter. What was he trying to sell, out of interest?
  5. namdas

    namdas Active Member

    May 2008
    Likes Received:
    the three most dangerous negative seo tactics you can suffer from today..

    - "seo is dead, give up and go home"
    - "build it and they will come"
    - "remove your 'dodgy' links even if you weren't affected by penguin"

    notice how they're all self inflicted? the fundamentals are the same - though it is true the biggest worry is Google reducing the visibility of organic results. TBH I think penguin etc has just been a smokescreen as they crank up their drive to push serps down the page.
  6. retired_member33

    retired_member33 Retired Member

    Apr 2010
    Likes Received:
    Stopped reading after a few words..

    Stop bitching and start creating quality websites.

    Seo is not dead, it just became a bit harder...You can no longer buy an exact match domain, buy a few forum profile links, scrape some content and make money from it.

    You actually have to work for it these days.
  7. WalkinDude United Kingdom

    WalkinDude Active Member

    Jul 2012
    Likes Received:

    Thanks, interesting stuff.
  8. Ashton United Kingdom

    Ashton Well-Known Member

    Feb 2010
    Likes Received:
    A few months ago I was reading all kinds of posts like this, and they always contradicted each other, one pillar of the community said this, another one said that. It's all just bullshit.

    Do your own testing, try your own things, look at other peoples backlink profiles and learn what works yourself, don't listen to anyone else.
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2012
  9. cc976a

    cc976a Well-Known Member

    Jun 2007
    Likes Received:
    In reality SEO is still alive and thriving and can still make you rich with your idea.

    SEO is Search Engine Optimisation. Yes it's optimizing your site so the search engines can find you, read your site, clarify you are not trying to trick or deceive (doorway pages, cloaked text, spammy links etc...) and categorize you for the most relevant keyword you and Google feel is most suited to the site.

    It is what SEO become that's the problem. In reality it's backlinks that has changed. Those very things people were begging for, cheating for, lying for, automating tools for and basically underpinning the sites success for.

    Crap links now equals no boost in the SERPs. That's it. Yeah true there are categories that Google are trying to dominate and organic space is reducing - in fairness I'd probably not try and tackle those industries anyway.

    Build your site for customers first, search engines second.

    There are still millions of niches and sub-niches out there, all within reach of making you money relatively easily via Google. Some £100 a year, some £1,000, some a lot more. Even after Panda, Penguin and forthcoming Armadillo, Anteater and Duck Billed Platypus.

    How many of us have turned an idea and a simplistic site (relatively speaking) in to a £x,xxx a year earner that over time becomes passive - quite a few I'd imagine. My problem is I kept selling them too early and saw £ signs. It was necessary at the time due to a renovation, but now I need to be a hoarder.

    If I'd kept all the sites I had that were making regular passive income, and they'd all stayed consistent, I'd be close to passively earning high £xx,xxx a year now.

    There's a sobering thought.
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2012
  10. seemly

    seemly Active Member

    Feb 2011
    Likes Received:
    But that's the point - SEO isn't dead.
    SEO still exists, but seemingly only in a negative sense - with regards to speed/impact of results.

    Yeah, yeah, build it and they will come bollocks.
    Create great content and people will find it... yada-yada.

    Piss off a competitor that is aware of negative SEO, get some shitty links pointing at your site, then goodbye rankings and the time/money investment in that great content/site.

    The 'fix' for this? The general consensus seems to be "get a new domain and start again"... then what? The whole cycle starts again?

    Fuck affiliates, what about genuine quality small business/company start-ups that have the potential to add something special to a market if they could be discovered - but a dodgy algorithm stops this from happening?

    If organic results can no longer be manipulated for the positive (good on page semantics, quality content, good site architecture, internal link structure, inbound links and keyword ratios, etc), then how/why does the negative exist and have such an overpowered impact? If the positive manipulation is deemed no longer in existence, then how the hell does a negative still exist?

    If companies/individuals should no longer rely on a free lunch from Google with regards to organic results, what is the point in organic results even existing (or is that the ongoing plan)?
  11. johnnyboy United Kingdom

    johnnyboy Active Member

    Aug 2009
    Likes Received:
    You're talking as if search engines are the only form of marketing; SEO should play one part in an overall marketing campaign, whether it's for a man with a blog or a multinational organisation.

    If a small business has a product or service they believe is special and will benefit others, they'll market it any way they can, whether it be TV, radio, forum links or social networking. They shouldn't just rely on search engines for business.

    With regards to websites, content is the product and links to it is the marketing. If the product is good, people will visit and talk about it; if it's bad, it will get bad-mouthed and avoided, just like any physical product.
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2012
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page