Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtaylor
Well, I like SeoMoz's survey of SEOs and their take on the weight of SEO elements. |
MJ, i completely agree, this is the best
SEO advice ive read and i regularly read through it as a pointer for my work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thindenim
Just to jump into the domain age argument for a second. My bands website has been up for about 10 years and I haven't touched it for 5. The optimisation is very spammy by todays standards, and the code is horrendous (remember this was done 5/6 years ago). There's only a few pages, hardly any content and very few in bound links.
Despite all that, it ranks 2nd in the uk for a search on they keyword "surround" ( surround - Google Search), which has over 67 million results. I can only assume this is simply due to the length of time it has been there and the trust it has built. |
This is my experience time and time again! There are so many sites that look like a front page job from 97 (not saying you band website does denim!), with no content or links but they are still ranking really high year after year. I am 100% positive that domain age is the only reason for this. When people say "my sites only 12 months old and its in the top 5 for everything!" they assume that domain age means nothing, but, this just proves that you can do well with only certain "pieces of the pie".
I completely agree that all the
SEO factors are mutually reliant but it would seam that you can succeed just by having certain parts of "the pie" filled. The reason i use the pie analogy is because it is the way i explain
SEO to a customer who knows nothing about
SEO. Maybe in this situation the pie, being finite, is not right. and it should be...erm...a roast dinner coz all the ingredients separated are pointless (who wants to eat sprouts on their own!) but together it makes a great meal! And the more gravy (links) the better!!!