Aaron Wall gets special treatment from Google?

Webnauts · #1 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 06:33 PM

I was just reading a post of Dan Thies that Aaron Wall (SEO Book) gets a special treatment from Google, and to be honest I was shocked. Can you please take a minute and tell me what you think? Help - Google Slapped Me With A -12 Penalty!!

Tech Manager · #2 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 06:39 PM

I think he has an extremely long road ahead of him if he attempts to prove his presupposition.

**incrediblehelp** · #3 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 06:44 PM

The fact that a relevant website, blog and subdomain rank above him is evidence of what? Try typing in "Coke"

Webnauts · #4 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

The fact that a relevant website, blog and subdomain rank above him is evidence of what? Try typing in "Coke"

So for my understanding, it is the power of the domain name? Also, did you read the description tag?

Webnauts · #5 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

The fact that a relevant website, blog and subdomain rank above him is evidence of what? Try typing in "Coke"

And let me be specific. If Aaron is not selling a book, then he is spamming. At least that is what I understand from the interview of Danny Sallivan with Matt Cutts at SMX: "You&A With Matt Cutts" Video From SMX Posted + "Give It Up" Session Embargo Lifts

**incrediblehelp** · #6 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 08:15 PM

I dont agree. He is selling a book obviously.

Webnauts · #7 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

I dont agree. He is selling a book obviously.

Sorry Jaan, but I was an affiliate and I got a message that the e-book have been discontinued. Can you tell me the link where it can be purchased?

Be aware that I did not start the thread to offend Aaron. I just wanted to figure out what is really going on.

DanThies · #8 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 08:56 PM

Well, at least my regular readers got the joke. (sigh)

Webnauts · #9 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanThies

Well, at least my regular readers got the joke. (sigh)

Oh my gosh. You do have a sense of humor Dan.

DanThies · #10 (**permalink**) 07-10-2008, 11:01 PM

I try. That one was a little too realistic for a lot of folks. Guess I need to get some sarcasm training one of these days.

I'm still suffering from a "-4 penalty" in the 5th spot for [seo book], but my little joke apparently did help gather some links from my readers. Aaron himself even chipped in with a link. #5 is probably as far as I'll get without putting actual work into it, since the top 4 results are all from Aaron's site and he's got years worth of links behind him.

Aaron's book, I am informed, is still available to those who join his ($100/month) training program, so you can actually get it, for just a few dollars more than what it used to cost.

Google giving Aaron the top 4 positions on that SERP does reveal their "treating subdomains just like folders" and "two listings per SERP" nonsense for what it is, but I seriously doubt that any searchers are bothered by this.

kevsta · #11 (**permalink**) 07-13-2008, 02:44 PM

haha...

Quote:

If the definition of SPAM is "sites positioned above mine,"

this is exactly how i look at the serps. plus I really have taken to correcting the error on my Toolbar PR with a green marker pen...

kgun · #12 (**permalink**) 07-15-2008, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

The fact that a relevant website, blog and subdomain rank above him is evidence of what? Try typing in "Coke"

That Coke should care more about the digital revolution and the related market potential.

The customer is the boss. Below him the shareholder.

kgun · #13 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgun

That Coke should care more about the digital revolution and the related market potential.

Too fast again, I did not check the site. Of course it shoud be that Coca Cola has done their job.

I thought it was CocaCola dot com that redirects to coca-cola dot com

Why do the company prefer the last name?

AVC · #14 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 11:08 AM

Your free SEO book caused Awall to quit selling his and charge "SEO's" 100 bucks a month to join his forum !!!

Why webmasters would pay 100 bucks a month to read recycled SEO content is beyond logic.

Webnauts · #15 (**permalink**) 07-18-2008, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVC

Your free SEO book caused Awall to quit selling his and charge "SEO's" 100 bucks a month to join his forum !!!

Why webmasters would pay 100 bucks a month to read recycled SEO content is beyond logic.

That was a good one AVC!

kgun · #16 (**permalink**) 07-18-2008, 10:01 AM

Or recycled thoughts

AVC · #17 (**permalink**) 07-18-2008, 10:24 AM

Maybe Google should charge a $1,000.00 a month for the original content !!!

They should charge $2,000.00 a month to read this and throw in a million clicks on Adwords !!!

kgun · #18 (**permalink**) 07-18-2008, 10:33 AM

Isn't that a recycled bit stream

?

tcqgryphon · #19 (**permalink**) 07-23-2008, 09:35 PM

Do any of us really state any CURRENT SEO truth's? We still need to keep our jobs - and our secrets - and if it works for us do we give it away?

I've thought for a while that there is more mis-information than information online....

or at least that's what Aarron tells me...

SEO · #20 (**permalink**) 07-24-2008, 01:26 AM

I am glad to see this thread.
I have been trying to share about the benefits of subdomains on this forum for a while now.

There is so much propaganda being spread around about so many topics that it is hard to know what the truth is about anything these days. If somebody can benefit from spreading false propaganda, they will.

With SEO I find that I need to, not so much listen to what others say... But look at the evidence.

I think Matt Cutts inadvertently mentioned subdomains being treated more like subfolders and it has since been blown out of all proportion. The fact is... That the evidence presented to us by Google (not just with the SEO Book example) clearly shows that Google still treats subdomains differently to the way it treats subfolders. Maybe Google does treat subdomains a little more like subfolders... but it is so little that nobody has really noticed it in the SERP's.

I personally tend to believe tangible evidence over public opinion, heresay and offhanded comments.