New Title Tag For Organic Results

[SemAdvance]

I would like to get some more opinions on another experiment I have undertaken.

I want to see if getting more clicks on my organic search result, will get my # 1 position back from Forbes.com for the term 'richest women'.

So I went in last week and made some changes to the title tag on my index page to draw some attention to the SERP result and get some clicks!!!!

Here is the title in the Google SERPs

@|@ -->> Richest Women Top 10 Rich Womem --Click This Link!!!!!
Offers Top 10 Richest Women Worldwide Forbes Magazine Verified Rich Women Information Resource.
@|@ -->> Richest Women Top 10 Rich Womem --Click This Link!!!!! - 12k - Cached - Similar pages - Note this


I hope others will try this and let others know the results as well.

A special acknowledgement to BlueHatSEO for this hack.

You can read the whole story along with the actual images on my search marketing blog ! mediaviper.com

Peace

[Webnauts]

I was just wondering how a screen reader user would like that. But thats business.

[SemAdvance]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I was just wondering how a screen reader user would like that. But thats business.

I thought of a lot of issues more related to SEO side effects.

Had not thought of the speech readers...

After some other views in another forum I edited the title yet again to read

<title>Richest Women Top 10 Rich Womem<-<--Click This Link!!!!!</title>

I think this looks a lot better and will look better on the SERP page and probably draw more clicks.

Thank you for the input....

[4bidden]

Interesting....

But you might want to spell women right in the title

[bj]

I bet you'll be #1 for the search terms "@|@ -->>" and "womem"

[DrK]

I assume the typo is intended: 'womem' -or?

[Dinghus]

Hey, whatever (pretty much) that gets traffic to your site.

[rickvidallon]

@|@ - search on Google turns up nothing, nada, zip, zppo, goose-egg.

[SemAdvance]

Originally Posted by rickvidallon

@|@ - search on Google turns up nothing, nada, zip, zppo, goose-egg.

Right because the bots don't read these characters thereby I am not reducing my title weight or density in their usage.

It should be noted I corrected the spelling (Thank you Jeremy & Bj) of the obvious typo...hasn't worked as intended anyway.

I also removed the @|@ -->> part as mentioned earlier... I think that was a bit overboard.

New title looks like so

<title>Richest Women Top 10 Rich Women<-<--Click This Link!!!!!></title>

[chrisJumbo]

I tend to ignore sites with "special" characters. They either look spammy or like someone made an error and there are plenty of sites that don't look like they will be fraught with error.

I am curious what kind of experience you have though. So please post back whether it helped or not.

[davss]

it might take up to three months to see any changes on SEs...

If you intend to play around with it I'd suggest a line in your metadata:

<meta name="revisit-after" content="1 day">

I searched in google.com for "richest women" and came up as the fist link.


Ciao
David

[Peter (IMC)]

I never understand why a reasonable technique needs to be abused like that.

if you'd simply did something like:

>> Richest Women Top 10 Rich Women

Probably Google won't make a problem out of it. Many people use some special characters to make their titles look nicer. But overdoing the way you do, is asking Google to take you out. Literally asking for it!

Do you think Google wants it serps to look like that?

[rickvidallon]

This is kinda related to title tag and SEO. I have always maintained 60 characters in my title tags. I am wondering at what point extending a title tag description helps or hurts SERPs? I know this would also depend on page content and other factors.

Anyone have any feedback or experience with short or lengthy title tags?

Also does it matter if you use a space, comma or dashes in the tag?

Example;
Green Onions, Big Green Onions, Green Onions in Virginia
Green Onions - Big Green Onions - Green Onions in Virginia
Green Onions Big Green Onions Green Onions in Virginia

Thanks,
Rick

[activeco]

Yes, you're already 1st now.
But probably your blog and this thread helped too.

[bj]

Right because the bots don't read these characters thereby I am not reducing my title weight or density in their usage.

Well, I learned something new today, though I think this could be a useless piece of info.

[stuart888]

Those techniques don't work, looks like spam and people can see it. Your url is list for people to see in the search results, and people look at that before clicking. Keep the title tag real to the message and related to your url.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by davss

If you intend to play around with it I'd suggest a line in your metadata:

<meta name="revisit-after" content="1 day">

That is non-sense. Sorry.

Google says about that:

Originally Posted by Google

More pages use the completely worthless <meta name="revisit-after"> than use the <em> element!

See here: Google Code: Web Authoring Statistics: Metadata

[google junky]

Your domain is richestwomen.info

1. There is really nothing on google for the .com version of that name "richestwomen". 5 pages with no descriptions with the urls.
2. There is no site with the .net version of that name "richestwomen"

I see this as a no-brainer that you would be near the top having the domain of the same search phrase in the title and any other repetitive places in the page you have placed it.

I'm not sure you have enough Google ads on your page though LOL

[Matteo]

What entices me to click on a title tag is pertanent information.
Information that I have been looking for. I wade through dozens of emails that say "LOOK HERE:" "CLICK HERE" and with each punch of the delete key my animosity for such schlocmeisters grows exponentially. My first reaction to your your title tag was a red light.....phish food. My second reaction was a glowing ember of anger. My very last reaction would be to click on that link. Mind you, I am not the type who will be searching for the world's richest women, so it may not matter at all.

[MarcGrobman]

I agree with matteo. That looks like a spammy entry and i'd be less likely to click it. You can be enticing without the schlock value. (The forbes headline actually does it well. It is creative but to the point).

And it seems a little grey to me. I don't think Google wants their results filled with "click me" stuff and they could quash it.

[john@kapoo]

Hi there

As already mentioned by several in this thread - Your original tester title tag just looks way too spammy... In fact, looking at my junk email folder now, it looks very generic to some of the spam I currently have sitting in there, desperately trying to sell me viagra or... extenders. Keyword - "desperate".

<title>@|@ --> > Richest Women Top 10 Rich Women --Click This Link!!!!!</title>

Your new title tag is now less intrusive than the above, but I hope people do not try and follow in your footsteps with trying to be 'eye-catching' with special characters all over the place, because it would just be so hideous to see search results with all this in... Oh and not to mention if everyone does it, it isn't exactly eye catching anymore.

When creating title tags, I tend to keep them short as possible and to the point:

<title>Section Name | Sub-Section Name | URL (If keywords in it or name of site)</title>

J.

[activeco]

Originally Posted by Matteo

I wade through dozens of emails that say "LOOK HERE:" "CLICK HERE" and with each punch of the delete key my animosity for such schlocmeisters grows exponentially.

Most of us here have built-in animosity for such things.
But as the world has been proving all the time, the average Joe is an idiot.
And that's where most of the politics and businesses are aiming: at the average imbecile.