Educated Guess

[DrTandem1]

I said IBLs are the single most important factor, not the only factor.

I have friends at the Pentagon, so what? (Sorry, I can't drop their names.)

I think you meant "insight." Anyway, Google tells you what they want you to know. Unless they totally blow it and publish proprietary, internal memos on the internet, again.

Sorry, too late to qualify your claim regarding the importance of domain names. I gave you an example, your own example, that proved it not to be true in all cases.

However, you're the "expert." I think everyone should agree with you that making 95 web sites using 95 domain names that only differ in location for the same business is wise. After all, those domain names all carry so much weight! I guess we should all ignore the weight given to directories and file names and make separate sites for every facet of a business.

"We" are now finished. You may continue this nonsense.

[rumblepup]

I said IBLs are the single most important factor, not the only factor.

I have friends at the Pentagon, so what? (Sorry, I can't drop their names.)

I think you meant "insight." Anyway, Google tells you what they want you to know. Unless they totally blow it and publish proprietary, internal memos on the internet, again.

Sorry, too late to qualify your claim regarding the importance of domain names. I gave you an example, your own example, that proved it not to be true in all cases.

However, you're the "expert." I think everyone should agree with you that making 95 web sites using 95 domain names that only differ in location for the same business is wise. After all, those domain names all carry so much weight! I guess we should all ignore the weight given to directories and file names and make separate sites for every facet of a business.

"We" are now finished. You may continue this nonsense.

I am going to refrain from discussing your inanities as well. I think you've completely gone off the deep end, and I'm trying to figure out why.

Scratch that, I'm not trying to figure you out at all. I don't care enough.

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by rumblepup

See, I actually went and met with people like Danny Sullivan, Mike McDonald, Rand Fishkin, Lee Odden, Todd Malicoat, Dave Davies, Bill Slawski, Ken Jurina, Curtis Duek, oh, and throw in Matt Cutts, Vanessa Fox, and hang out with two of the best SEO's that I know, Brian Mark and David Brown, and I got to meet a bunch of cool people. It does not make...(snip) my opinion any more informed than yours. I readily admit that.

Emphasis mine: rumblepup:

Well, is that really true? If person A is more knowledgeable by virtue of his associations than person B then in fact he would be more informed. In the world of seo where a person like myself possess what people like yourself would consider very little knowledge (yet still managed to climb atop the organics ) it's fair for one of the first questions for a noob, or anyone really, to ask in relation to advice given: "by who's authority do you speak"? "what study have you done and where are some citations to articles from industry leaders?" This is most needed in areas of speculation and inexact sciences....of which the world of seo qualifies

Your desire to downplay your expertise in this area makes Dale Carnegie proud.

Btw, I caught the cough (or was that a wink?).. my name is in fact "Rick Anderson"

Life's too short to be anonymous.

Thanks for the help.

Regards
Rick

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

Well, I generally prefer not to send people off the forum, but this survey of SEO experts on ranking factors rates keywords in domains as a moderately important factor - 3 on a scale of 1-5. FWIW.

Hi mj

Outstanding link. Thanks

Regards
Rick

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by rickanderson

Hi mj

Outstanding link. Thanks

Regards
Rick

You're most welcome ... that is a very helpful resource ...

Cheers, MJ

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by rumblepup

If that where the case, why are sites with 600 IBL's beating sites with 8000 IBL's?

It is about quality not quantity.

[rumblepup]

It is about quality not quantity.

Yes siree bob, uhm Jaan. LOL

Great Link MJ, BTW.

Rick, thanks for your confidence in my, ahem, expertise. I'm not a great seo, just a successful one.

However, let me take this opportunity to apologize to DrT. I don't know why I did it, but I shouldn't have reacted the way I did. I'm leaving my remarks up so that others can see why I'm apologizing. Not the way I should act as a mod.

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

It is about quality not quantity.

(emphasis mine)

In response to someone whom you felt was stressing the inverse to what you allege here you go ahead and say the very same thing, only changing "quantity" to "quality".

I fully expect it's about *both*...and definitely not about *all one*.... or the other.

Ones ebony and ones ivory...but together they live in perfect harmony.

Regards
Rick

[incrediblehelp]

Sure Rick getting many quality backlinks is the goal, but their is not magic number that should be achieved for any website. Thus quantity has nothing to do with my link building goals. Just getting the most relevant links possible is the idea here.

[Feydakin]

I'm with Jaan, with link building I'm not sure you can use quantity as a metric since there is no such thing as "enough" links.. A long term, successful campaign will involved getting as many quality links as possible and never stopping..

[wige]

Of course, from a Google standpoint, quality is determined based on quantity. If you consider pagerank as Google's quantification of what they consider the relative quality of a web site (which is more or less the language used in the original patent filing) quantity of links is what determines the quality of pages, so the higher the quality of the sites that link to you the more sites that link to them and so on.

But I tend to agree that the quality of the link, both in terms of pagerank and relevance, is more important because one high quality link can have more impact in the SERPs than dozens of low quality links.

[RichAtVNS]

Wige - then can you explain Plastercraft.com for me .... because I don't see a lot of quantity going to or from them...

Thanks....

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Sure Rick getting many quality backlinks is the goal, but their is not magic number that should be achieved for any website. Thus quantity has nothing to do with my link building goals. Just getting the most relevant links possible is the idea here.

My inbound links are abysmal. What specific plan can I implement in the new year?

Thanks
Rick

[imsickofwebpro]

Dr. T... I'm with you buddy! lol

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Google,

Please stop highlighting synonymous search words in urls and subpages as it has no bearing on the actual relevancy of the search.

I have included a sample search for your review: Marketing Best Pratices
www.causemarketingforum.com/bestpractices.asp <--Terrible Glitch

Thank you kindly,
The SEO Guru

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[crankydave]

my goodness...

My apologies if I've not absorbed each and every one of your comments completely but, the jist of what I'm getting is multiple domains, what to do.

As I believe has already been been out, if you have the time and resources to develope each one, or any number of them, to provide something unique and useful to the potential visitor why not?

Dave

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by DrTandem1

I said IBLs are the single most important factor, not the only factor.

I have friends at the Pentagon, so what? (Sorry, I can't drop their names.)

I think you meant "insight." Anyway, Google tells you what they want you to know. Unless they totally blow it and publish proprietary, internal memos on the internet, again.

Sorry, too late to qualify your claim regarding the importance of domain names. I gave you an example, your own example, that proved it not to be true in all cases.

However, you're the "expert." I think everyone should agree with you that making 95 web sites using 95 domain names that only differ in location for the same business is wise. After all, those domain names all carry so much weight! I guess we should all ignore the weight given to directories and file names and make separate sites for every facet of a business.

"We" are now finished. You may continue this nonsense.

You have already established to me, personally and directly, you have no problem in leveling accusations for which you cannot provide a shred of anything backing your allegations/assertions.

You accused me directly and personally of being a scammer/spammer based on nothing more than your imagination.

You made bold claims then as you do now citing nothing.

I'll request the same thing now as I did then, produce ANYTHING to back your claims as well as producing ANYTHING to back your accusations against me.

"We" are not finished. If you think for a second I've forgotten, you are sorely mistaken.

Dave

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by crankydave

my goodness...

My apologies if I've not absorbed each and every one of your comments completely but, the jist of what I'm getting is multiple domains, what to do.

As I believe has already been been out, if you have the time and resources to develope each one, or any number of them, to provide something unique and useful to the potential visitor why not?

Dave

Hi Dave

Thanks for the advice. I think the plan will be do develop another 8-9 full sites, all with unique content....covering a distinct geographic region.... my market needs it. As for the remaining 85 key-word rich domains related to the industry in which the 8-9 new site will be built.. do you have any suggestions on how to make them work in my favor without spending an exorbinent amount of money *or* raising the ire of the wizard?

The suggestions thus far have been to park them, 301 them (still don't know if thats the same as "park"?), save them for future use or burn them to the ground. I will be sure to re-read this entire thread and take as much as I can to formulate my strategy.

Btw, **we** are not done by a long shot pal....***we're*** just getting started!



Regards
Rick

[crankydave]

Rick...

A 301 is a redirect so when the searcher or SE reaches that URL, they are automatically redirected to the target.

A parked page is a page that, for the most part, contains no content per se just PPC ads for example.

Dave

[mjtaylor]

More on 301s: it is the considered the most search engine friendly way to redirect one URL or page to another page or URL. It passes PR.

There is another way that a host can "park and point" a domain name to another domain, but we need to call in wige, probably, or Inc'help to sort that out ... and for your purposes, I would say go with the 301 redirect.

For more than you want to know about redirects Google this: site:webproworld.com 301 redirect

Cheers, MJ

[rickanderson]

Thanks MJ

I will check that out.

Regards
Rick

[Kate Lennon]

"The domain name has virtually no weight in the SERPs. I can cite many examples of sites that are in the top SERPs for their business, yet have no keywords in the domain name. Domain names are for people. Domain names resolve to numbers. The names are used to make it easier for people to remember them."

That may be the theory, Tandem, but in practice - and certainly in my experience with a number of websites - the domain name and title were enough by themselves (ie, before the sites in question had *any* inlinks) to cause them to be displayed on page #1 of Google (and other search engines, if it matters) for relevant key terms.
Far from having "no weight in the SERPS, the domain name and title are *the* most important factor, and really are, as I said. 90% of the whole ball game.

If you wanted to launch a website dealing in, say, real estate in California, then the optimum domain names would be "realestatecalifornia.com" and "californiarealestate.com" - assuming that these terms - "real estate california" - were the terms most used by people searching for property in California.

Okay, I've just Googled "real estate in California", and California Real Estate Home Page (CRE.com) turned up on page one, 1st position:
real estate in california - Google Search

The site isn't particularly well optimized. I suggest that its domain name and title ("California real estate") are the main reasons for its position at the top of Google's search results for these terms.

The website I launched recently, which I referred to in previous posts, has a similar domain name (with the name of a region in Spain instead of California), and it too went straight to the top of Google's search results before it had a single link pointing to it from other websites.

I've had the same experience with several other websites. If the site has a strong, generic title (containing popular search terms), and a title which reinforces this title, it almost always goes straight to the top of Google, with or without inlinks.

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by Kate Lennon

Far from having "no weight in the SERPS, the domain name and title are *the* most important factor, and really are, as I said. 90% of the whole ball game.

Kate

As much as I would love to believe that what you say is true there just seems to be too much evidence to the contrary.

Did you see the link mj put up?

Merry Christmas btw.

Regards
Rick

[Kate Lennon]

"Kate
As much as I would love to believe that what you say is true there just seems to be too much evidence to the contrary.
Did you see the link mj put up? Merry Christmas btw.
Regards
Rick"


Rick,
I can only go by my own experience. Almost everything you hear from "experts in SEO" is contradicted by other "experts". Just look at the arguments over whether link exchanges are effective, or whether PR has any effect on positioning in search results. Most SEO companies can't even get their own websites on the first pages of Google.
I currently run eight websites, covering different areas/services. Seven of the eight are found on the top half ("above the fold") of the first page of Google search results for relevant (and most common/popular) search terms. All eight sites - including the one that does not turn up in Google searches (in fact *especially* this site) are doing good business. So, feel free to go with the accepted wisdom and the "expert" advice. I'll keep applying what I've learned from experience.
Happy Christmas to you too (and to everyone here).
Kate

PS - It just occurred to me... I'm launching a new website in a few weeks. It might be an interesting experiment to see how quickly it can be propelled to the top of Google's search results without inbound links.

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by Kate Lennon

"Kate
As much as I would love to believe that what you say is true there just seems to be too much evidence to the contrary.
Did you see the link mj put up? Merry Christmas btw.
Regards
Rick"


Rick,
I can only go by my own experience. Almost everything you hear from "experts in SEO" is contradicted by other "experts". Just look at the arguments over whether link exchanges are effective, or whether PR has any effect on positioning in search results. Most SEO companies can't even get their own websites on the first pages of Google.
I currently run eight websites, covering different areas/services. Seven of the eight are found on the top half ("above the fold") of the first page of Google search results for relevant (and most common/popular) search terms. All eight sites - including the one that does not turn up in Google searches (in fact *especially* this site) are doing good business. So, feel free to go with the accepted wisdom and the "expert" advice. I'll keep applying what I've learned from experience.
Happy Christmas to you too (and to everyone here).
Kate

PS - It just occurred to me... I'm launching a new website in a few weeks. It might be an interesting experiment to see how quickly it can be propelled to the top of Google's search results without inbound links.

Kate

I think it comes down to the competitiveness of the search. The more people who want to lay claim to a certain search the more variables used to determine how the loot is divided. People who experience a meteoric rise in the generics based soley on a rudimentary effort (of which I qualify), will in due course find themselves scrambling to maintain that position if they don't do all those other things that seem as first blush to be inconsequential.

Can we ever utter the same words about seo that Christ said on the cross?..."it is finished"

Regards
Rick

ps

I look forward to seeing how your new site fares as well. My new one goes up any day now too.

Maybe we should do launch together.

Love this room.

Regards
Rick

[Kate Lennon]

Rick,
It doesn't come down to the competitiveness of the search. The property-related search terms my property sites are found for on the top of Google are the most popular terms. Other companies are paying up to 10 Euros per click for them on sponsored links. It comes down to 1. Having a strong domain name (dot com, not dot anything else), 2. Having a title which reinforces the name of the domain, 3. Having a site with plenty of text content, 4. Updating and adding to your site frequently, 5. Using key terms in text links (to pages on your site and to other websites), 6. Having links on your site to important websites offering goods/services/information related to your website. Having inlinks from other sites is one of the least important factors, in my experience.

I'll let you know when my next site is ready to be launched, then you can see for yourself whether it goes to the top of Google (as I'm confident it will) without having any sites linking in to it.

[Webnauts]

I took the time to read the whole thread and for sure there are points where I agree and other points where I disagree. But to be honest I do not want to go into details, as I am sure this thread will become everlasting and possibly very confusing.

Because the original poster's primary concern is the local search, I just thought of adding my article about this issue: Local Search Optimization Tips - SEO Workers

Good luck.

[rumblepup]

Having inlinks from other sites is one of the least important factors, in my experience.

Is your experience with MSN?

I'm sorry, but I just can't see this no IBL scenario as playing out with Google. Very possibly one of the other SE's, MSN for instance, but NOT for Google, or Yahoo, which bases some of it's technology off of Google Technology. (Didn't know that, huh?).

It's not the quantity of links, but the quality of links, that can push you to the top. But links MUST be there for Google to gauge the importance of a site. It goes against Google's stated Mode of Operation.

The Google algorithm will just not respond to your site for a competitive keyword without a link from another site.

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I took the time to read the whole thread and for sure there are points where I agree and other points where I disagree. But to be honest I do not want to go into details, as I am sure this thread will become everlasting and possibly very confusing.

Because the original poster's primary concern is the local search, I just thought of adding my article about this issue: Local Search Optimization Tips - SEO Workers

Good luck.

Hi Web

Thanks for posting that, I just read it. One of the topics discussed was including one's home address on every page. I use to do that until my best friend of 27 yrs, business partner and mentor said when asked why he doesn't do the same thing: "nothing good can ever come from it" . I understand the 'trust' issue and that customers might prefer to see that info but if you're in an industry where you have to occassionaly fire a hot head then it might not be the best way to go. My accountant also said the same thing....and he's a low key Jahovahs Witness.

Regards
Rick

[rumblepup]

Rick,

I do think that this thread has exhausted itself. If their are any more points to be made, I suggest we stop this thread here, and start up a new one for that point.

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by rumblepup

Is your experience with MSN?

I'm sorry, but I just can't see this no IBL scenario as playing out with Google. Very possibly one of the other SE's, MSN for instance, but NOT for Google, or Yahoo, which bases some of it's technology off of Google Technology. (Didn't know that, huh?).

It's not the quantity of links, but the quality of links, that can push you to the top. But links MUST be there for Google to gauge the importance of a site. It goes against Google's stated Mode of Operation.

The Google algorithm will just not respond to your site for a competitive keyword without a link from another site.

Hi rumblepup

Merry Christmas. You said what I always felt about this one issue....maybe (she's) right for se *other* than Google but surely not for Google. Google makes you work harder, it's as simple as that.....or, as *hard* as that.

Regards
Rick

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by rickanderson

Hi Web

Thanks for posting that, I just read it. One of the topics discussed was including one's home address on every page. I use to do that until my best friend of 27 yrs, business partner and mentor said when asked why he doesn't do the same thing: "nothing good can ever come from it" . I understand the 'trust' issue and that customers might prefer to see that info but if you're in an industry where you have to occassionaly fire a hot head then it might not be the best way to go. My accountant also said the same thing....and he's a low key Jahovahs Witness.

Regards
Rick

The address on pages is not only for customers trust. It is also an issue for being trusted by the search engines.

[Kate Lennon]

I'm talking about Google searches.

"The Google algorithm will just not respond to your site for a competitive keyword without a link from another site."

This is simply not so. I've put several websites onto the first page of Google search results without their having any inlinks from other websites. You're perfectly free to disbelieve (is that a word?) me, but I can assure you it's true. The same sites also appeared (and still appear) on page one of Yahoo and MSN searches; in fact two of these sites have position 1, page 1 on MSN for relevant search terms. As I said, I'm launching a new site shortly. Anybody here willing to wager a little bet on whether I can get it on page 1 of Google's search results without inlinks?

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by Kate Lennon

I'm launching a new site shortly. Anybody here willing to wager a little bet on whether I can get it on page 1 of Google's search results without inlinks?

Hi Kate

I won't wager on it but if you tell me the name of the site, what it sells and where it sells it I will tell you how much revenue you can generate from licencing a new idea you will have off the third transaction of the fourth franchise.

Let's just call it Ricky's algorithm.



Rick

[rumblepup]

Anybody here willing to wager a little bet on whether I can get it on page 1 of Google's search results without inlinks?

I'll wager it's not a competitive keyword.

Look, I'm sure you have the experience you say you do, but it's very difficult to believe that your ranking for a term by circumventing the basic rules of Google's search criteria.

If you'd like, why don't you PM me one of the sites. I will not mention it in any post. you tell me the competitive term it ranks for, and how you are not getting that SERP any IBL. If you prove to me that what you say is true, I will make a very PUBLIC POST to proclaim that you are getting a 1st page search position for a competitve term.

Again, I don't believe that IBL's are the only factor. I've beaten IBL's. What the one thing you cannot do is beat high quality IBL's. You need Higher Quality IBL's to do that with.

But I don't believe you can get to the first page of a competitve search without at least 1 high quality link, like 1 link from The New York Times might give you a first page.

(Man I wish I could get me one of those) LOL

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by Kate Lennon

I can only go by my own experience. Almost everything you hear from "experts in SEO" is contradicted by other "experts". Just look at the arguments over whether link exchanges are effective, or whether PR has any effect on positioning in search results. Most SEO companies can't even get their own websites on the first pages of Google.
I currently run eight websites, covering different areas/services. Seven of the eight are found on the top half ("above the fold") of the first page of Google search results for relevant (and most common/popular) search terms. All eight sites - including the one that does not turn up in Google searches (in fact *especially* this site) are doing good business. So, feel free to go with the accepted wisdom and the "expert" advice. I'll keep applying what I've learned from experience.

You are right, there are many topics on which the "experts" contradict one another, but whether inbound links are critical for Google SERPs on competitive terms is not one of the areas where you will find any contradictions.

And if you can only go by your own experience, I wonder why you would be spending time on a forum such as this one.

Originally Posted by Kate Lennon
Far from having "no weight in the SERPS, the domain name and title are *the* most important factor, and really are, as I said. 90% of the whole ball game.

I don't think you will find an expert that will agree with you on this one, either Kate.

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by rumblepup

But I don't believe you can get to the first page of a competitve search without at least 1 high quality link, like 1 link from The New York Times might give you a first page. (Man I wish I could get me one of those) LOL

Hi rumblepup

We could get into circular reasoning if we're not careful. If a person gets to the top of the organics without at least one high quality link then you would simply declare it non competitive. I made it to the top without any ibl to speak of but I wonder how competitive my industry really is? Is there any way to gage the "competitiveness" of a particular search...other than just noting the quality of the first two pages of results and the sponsored links associated therewith?

Regards
Rick

[mjtaylor]

Originally Posted by rickanderson

Hi rumblepup

We could get into circular reasoning if we're not careful. If a person gets to the top of the organics without at least one high quality link then you would simply declare it non competitive. I made it to the top without any ibl to speak of but I wonder how competitive my industry really is? Is there any way to gage the "competitiveness" of a particular search...other than just noting the quality of the first two pages of results and the sponsored links associated therewith?

Regards
Rick

There are software applications that assess the competitiveness of keywords ... it's called KEI - Keyword Effectiveness Index ... try this search in Google to find threads in the forum on it: site:webproworld.com KEI

Cheers, MJ

[rumblepup]

Rick,

I need to know more about the search result to give you a definitive anwer.

Remember, an IN Domain link is also a link. If your front page has a first page result for a competitive term, and you used both on page factors, url name, etc, AND some ibl's, then you've established your site as an authority to that semantic subject. Thus, you've granted yourself some authority on semantically related subjects.

So, if your site is the source for information on shoes, of which you only went out and got about 10 IBL's from high quality, relative sites, whith the anchor text of shoes, you have gained an authority for that term.

So, let's say that you also have pages or content that is all about "tennis shoes." Don't you think that since you got authority on the BIG TERM, the related term might get a benefit in the form of SERP's?

Now, THAT could happen.

To me, a competitive term is a term that, when used, is most often used when a searchers intent is on buying or converting to a buyer. It's impossible to outline intent, but from a marketers point of view, researching traffic is great, but no guarantee of a buy. Buyers traffic, though less, is MUCH better. So, if you get a search term like

Apartments, although highly trafficed, is mostly research. Apartments in New York, is distinctive because it's intent is a little more straightforward. Apartments is research, Apartments in New York is competive.

[wige]

Originally Posted by RichAtVNS

Wige - then can you explain Plastercraft.com for me .... because I don't see a lot of quantity going to or from them...

Thanks....

Are you asking me to explain their rankings or their toolbar PR? I don't see how the site violates my comments about quality being more important than quantity, or how it relates to my comment that quality for Google is based on quantity...

Originally Posted by Kate Lennon

I'm talking about Google searches.

"The Google algorithm will just not respond to your site for a competitive keyword without a link from another site."

This is simply not so. I've put several websites onto the first page of Google search results without their having any inlinks from other websites. You're perfectly free to disbelieve (is that a word?) me, but I can assure you it's true. The same sites also appeared (and still appear) on page one of Yahoo and MSN searches; in fact two of these sites have position 1, page 1 on MSN for relevant search terms. As I said, I'm launching a new site shortly. Anybody here willing to wager a little bet on whether I can get it on page 1 of Google's search results without inlinks?

I'm going to pretend I am in a gaming forum for just one moment... Screenshot or it didn't happen.

To make a claim like this, which goes against the general consensus so much, you have to provide something beyond your assertions that you saw it happen. Tell us the site and the keyword, and let the readers independently verify it. Otherwise, you have no reason to be surprised when everyone dismisses your claim out of hand.

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by rumblepup

Rick,I need to know more about the search result

Hi rumblepup

I have had a stranglehold for 4-5 yrs now on two of the top searches in my (local) industry "painters vancouver" and "painting vancouver"

I plastered the landing page as you can see. Painters Vancouver. Maybe I went overboard? That always concerns me....Googles ratio..% of key words in relation to text.....if there is *even* a ratio? Least thats what someone told me once.

Regards
Rick

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by Kate Lennon

Rick,
It doesn't come down to the competitiveness of the search. The property-related search terms my property sites are found for on the top of Google are the most popular terms. Other companies are paying up to 10 Euros per click for them on sponsored links. It comes down to 1. Having a strong domain name (dot com, not dot anything else), 2. Having a title which reinforces the name of the domain, 3. Having a site with plenty of text content, 4. Updating and adding to your site frequently, 5. Using key terms in text links (to pages on your site and to other websites), 6. Having links on your site to important websites offering goods/services/information related to your website. Having inlinks from other sites is one of the least important factors, in my experience.

I'll let you know when my next site is ready to be launched, then you can see for yourself whether it goes to the top of Google (as I'm confident it will) without having any sites linking in to it.

Kate,

You seem very convinced that backlinks have little value. What you described above is a big part of the whole SEO mix, which may make it look like backlinks don't do much as you may get them naturally.

You also mentioned before that you had sites show up in high positions without any backlinks. That is in fact possible, if you submitted your site to Google once when the domain was just up. If you didn't do that, then you can be sure that somebody put a link up to your website. It's either that or submitting your website to Google, otherwise Google wouldn't even know that your site exists.

Perhaps you don't know that it takes a while before Google shows a backlink. I don't know how much you know about this of course, but I'll just say it. Please don't feel like I'm insulting your intelligence,.

Google doesn't show all backlinks. Do a search in yahoo to get a closer aproximation of all your backlinks. You can also use Google webmaster tools to get an even better indication.

Backlinks from other website do help, but what is often extremely underestimated by most SEO's, is the fact that internal backlinks are very powerful. (because you controll them and you can make as many as you want). That is a point that you seem to have developed pretty well in your description of the way you work.

My view is that backlinks are important. There is not much difference in (SEO) value between internal backlinks and backlinks from other website. I guess this seems so simple most SEO's don't want to believe in it.. . Of course you do need some backlinks from other sites. Otherwise Google won't stay interested in your site. But it's kind of impossible to not get at least some backlinks naturally if you have a good site.



Just to give you an idea of backlinks that Google shows. The site in your profile has 28 backlinks according to Google. But Yahoo says it has 11,100. Google knows about those 11 thousands links too. They just don't show them.

[rumblepup]

Being that the words are in the url, and you have one listed link for it, with a keyword as the anchor, your at a 50/50 right now.

Then I checked more backlinks.

You have about 230.

And yes, you blasted that front page.

However, you might not know this, but I think your more convertible term is "painters in vancouver".

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by rumblepup

Being that the words are in the url, and you have one listed link for it, with a keyword as the anchor, your at a 50/50 right now.

Then I checked more backlinks.

You have about 230.

And yes, you blasted that front page.

However, you might not know this, but I think your more convertible term is "painters in vancouver".

rumblepup

Thanks for the new convertible term. I will tweak the landing page and use it in my blog.

Regarding the backlinks....I wasn't even aware that I had 3 let alone 230...wt*?

Ah, are they any good and how to get more? Is a backlink the same as an IBL?

THanks for helping the noob.

Rick

ps

wait a minute...I have google analytics set up.....won't that give me this info?

[rumblepup]

not on backlinks. Check your webmaster tools, or do a link:mysite dot com

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by mjtaylor

There are software applications that assess the competitiveness of keywords ... it's called KEI - Keyword Effectiveness Index ... try this search in Google to find threads in the forum on it: site:webproworld.com KEI

Cheers, MJ

THanks mj

Rick

[kayd]

Rumblepup - was your offer to privately validate kate lennons claims that a site can rank high in a competitive market with zero (nada, zilch, zero, etc) IBLs taken up?

Sorry to resurrect a december post but this is like one of those soap cliffhangers when you dont know if a character has died or not!

[rickanderson]

Originally Posted by kayd

this is like one of those soap cliffhangers when you dont know if a character has died or not!

Kayd

May I suggest some ocr software then?

The 'character' has indeed passed on. The only question that remains is whether it was Mrs White, in the library, with a rope or Colonel Mustard, in the billiardroom with a candlestick. I'm betting on the Colonel, if for no other reason than his propensity for scratching his balls.

Love this room.

Regards
Rick