Top 10 web design firms use black-hat SEO

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Okay... I don't expect you to divulge those tools but I will say the following about "on page value"...

It is not about divulging any tools. They are tools created and ongoing improved which we created for internal use.
Today we got an email about the free tool we have and share with the public, and which is being upgraded and shall be launched middle of October:

hi,

just a quick note to say that I love your seo website tool checker.

I have used it on two of my sites over the last few months, I kept making small changes until I got between 90% and 100% for all areas and now my search engine listings have improved 10 fold. My website hits have doubled, and some days tripled.

I trust it so much I have made a lot of changes over the last 48hrs to my other site using this tool.

I gave you the suggested donation today as it is nothing compared to what it delievers...

keep up the good work.. I have tried others and they did not cause me to make much in the line of search engine gains.. yours is excellent

Tracey

Originally Posted by crankydave

It cannot be known what a SE takes into account on a page. It can only be assumed what is taken into account and exactly how much "value" is placed on the things that are taken into account.

For example: Avoiding Keyword Stuffing Ban

Originally Posted by crankydave

It cannot be known if a search engine depricates/ignores/equalizes certain factors on a page. It can only be assumed or guessed.
Then so far our guesses seem to be very accurate.

It cannot be known how multiple on page factors affect the other factors on the page. There are so many things that simply cannot be known.

John... I'm not suggesting anything about the "value" of your tools, just that there are too many things that cannot be known.

For good reasons I cannot tell in the public what we are can do and what we can see. If you want I can interact with you on this topic though PM or IM if you would be interested. Or we can interact in the closed area of our forums "Search Editors Lounge" if you want.

[crankydave]

John... As I said, I'm not suggesting anything about your tools.

There are simply things that cannot be known. No tool can look at a page and know what a SE places value upon and how much. No tool can tell you if a SE discounts/depricates/equalizes something on that page.

Dave

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

OK, would have been nice if you had PM'd me about the sig links rather than deleting them when someone reported me. Guess that was my slap on the wrist

No i'm not thinking these give the site value, least not the link exhanges. I would have thought they would hinder the site not help it.

The search phrase is 'web design suffolk' on google.co.uk
The site is at position 1 at the moment. Mine is currently number 2.

The only thing with my site that I am aware of is that I need more backlinks. I'm not going to do that yet as i'm planning a complete redesign soon. Still i'd be interested to hear what you have to say.

Thanks for taking the time to look

Purely looking at something on-site that they have as an advantage over your site is this:

"Web Design for Suffolk" (in the footer)

Proximity algorithms will prefer that over what you have closest together:

"Web Design & SEO Services in Ipswich Suffolk"


They are also doing that better in the title. Why don't you try to experiment with these things a bit and see if you can take over the number 1 spot. Maybe it might just do it. (if both site's backlink factors are fairly similar for that keyword phrase.)

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by crankydave

John... As I said, I'm not suggesting anything about your tools.

There are simply things that cannot be known. No tool can look at a page and know what a SE places value upon and how much. No tool can tell you if a SE discounts/depricates/equalizes something on that page.

Dave

Interesting...

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Interesting...

Let me see if I can clarify John since you leave me with the impression I didn't explain my point very well.

Let's take this thread and page for example.

We know that the SE's can "see" the links on the page. What we don't know is if the SE's "count them" and for how much when it comes to ranking. Another example might be with the actual links themselves. We don't know if "more" ranking value get's placed on a link that uses the anchor text in the URL and if so how much more ranking value.

Same kind of thing can be said of the text. We don't know whether or not the text that's in close proximity to the link makes it stroger or weaker and importantly, how much stronger or weaker if it does. Page placement as well. We don't know how much stronger or weaker page placement affects things on a page and again importantly, by how much if it does.

Dave

[janeth]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Let me see if I can clarify John since you leave me with the impression I didn't explain my point very well.

Let's take this thread and page for example.

We know that the SE's can "see" the links on the page. What we don't know is if the SE's "count them" and for how much when it comes to ranking. Another example might be with the actual links themselves. We don't know if "more" ranking value get's placed on a link that uses the anchor text in the URL and if so how much more ranking value.

Same kind of thing can be said of the text. We don't know whether or not the text that's in close proximity to the link makes it stroger or weaker and importantly, how much stronger or weaker if it does. Page placement as well. We don't know how much stronger or weaker page placement affects things on a page and again importantly, by how much if it does.

Dave

Just a thought,

If you had a tool that was constantly measuring, updating and changing, I'd think you could get a pretty good idea of how things worked.

Even more so if it was doing on lots of sites on many different topics and comparing the data.

You would not know for sure but you'd have a pretty good idea.

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Let me see if I can clarify John since you leave me with the impression I didn't explain my point very well.

Let's take this thread and page for example.

We know that the SE's can "see" the links on the page. What we don't know is if the SE's "count them" and for how much when it comes to ranking. Another example might be with the actual links themselves. We don't know if "more" ranking value get's placed on a link that uses the anchor text in the URL and if so how much more ranking value.

Same kind of thing can be said of the text. We don't know whether or not the text that's in close proximity to the link makes it stroger or weaker and importantly, how much stronger or weaker if it does. Page placement as well. We don't know how much stronger or weaker page placement affects things on a page and again importantly, by how much if it does.

Dave

Experience tells us that we do know. Not the exact values, but even Google doesn't know what the exact values are because in their algorithms everything is relative. They don't compare to a set standard. Their algorithms are created in such a way that they compare to what's available online. Just like a human would do. Give a human 10 pages to order based on a keyword and he will put them in order from 1 to 10. Not place them in positions 4, 8, 28, 31, etc. which would happen if you'd compare to a set standard.

By experience you know that if you put the right keywords in the anchor text of menu links for example, you get more visits for those keywords. By experience you know that if you put keywords in titles.. you get more visitors for those keywords. By experience you know that when you put keywords in the content (text) you get more visitors for those keywords. By experience you know that that when you have more backlinks with the right anchor texts, you get more visitors for those keywords.

The really smart SEO's figured out that if you focus all those factors on the same keywords,.. you get really high positions.

The exact values are irrelevant.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by janeth

Just a thought,

If you had a tool that was constantly measuring, updating and changing, I'd think you could get a pretty good idea of how things worked.

Even more so if it was doing on lots of sites on many different topics and comparing the data.

You would not know for sure but you'd have a pretty good idea.

I don't disagree. There are a lot of things that could be analized that would help give you an idea. I wasn't trying to suggest otherwise.

With well over 200 factors taken into account (I believe that's a correct number) it would be virtual impossible to isolate the effects of any one of them and virtually impossible to measure all the different combinations of effects each one has on the other including any external effects on what is internal or on page.

Now I say virtually because if one had access to the total algorithm (including any filters) then one could determine what is "valued" how and why.

Dave

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Experience tells us that we do know. Not the exact values, but even Google doesn't know what the exact values are because in their algorithms everything is relative. They don't compare to a set standard. Their algorithms are created in such a way that they compare to what's available online. Just like a human would do. Give a human 10 pages to order based on a keyword and he will put them in order from 1 to 10. Not place them in positions 4, 8, 28, 31, etc. which would happen if you'd compare to a set standard.

By experience you know that if you put the right keywords in the anchor text of menu links for example, you get more visits for those keywords. By experience you know that if you put keywords in titles.. you get more visitors for those keywords. By experience you know that when you put keywords in the content (text) you get more visitors for those keywords. By experience you know that that when you have more backlinks with the right anchor texts, you get more visitors for those keywords.

The really smart SEO's figured out that if you focus all those factors on the same keywords,.. you get really high positions.

The exact values are irrelevant.

Again I'm not disagreeing with many/most of these points. Yes, experiences help teach you what may or may not work better.

My comments/opinions were directed towards the very specific things that was causing a particular page to rank and that defining on page ranking values was possible. No more no less.

Dave

[janeth]

Originally Posted by crankydave

I don't disagree. There are a lot of things that could be analized that would help give you an idea. I wasn't trying to suggest otherwise.

With well over 200 factors taken into account (I believe that's a correct number) it would be virtual impossible to isolate the effects of any one of them and virtually impossible to measure all the different combinations of effects each one has on the other including any external effects on what is internal or on page.

Now I say virtually because if one had access to the total algorithm (including any filters) then one could determine what is "valued" how and why.

Dave

I agree.

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Purely looking at something on-site that they have as an advantage over your site is this:

"Web Design for Suffolk" (in the footer)

Proximity algorithms will prefer that over what you have closest together:

"Web Design & SEO Services in Ipswich Suffolk"


They are also doing that better in the title. Why don't you try to experiment with these things a bit and see if you can take over the number 1 spot. Maybe it might just do it. (if both site's backlink factors are fairly similar for that keyword phrase.)

Hi Peter, yes I was thinking that all I need to do is repeat 'web design suffolk' two more times in the page title lol.

Whats amusing about the other site is that when I was number 1 (before I met webnauts and we targetted more phrases) that was MY page title, the guy almost copied my meta tags too. All he did is change ipswich to sudbury.

His domain isnt even more than a year old! He has a lot less inbound links than me. Surely these onpage factors cant be the reason he's ranking above me?

I've got over double the amount of traffic to my site too!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

He has a lot less inbound links than me.

The number does not matter. How many do you have with that as the anchor text?

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Hi Peter, yes I was thinking that all I need to do is repeat 'web design suffolk' two more times in the page title lol.

Whats amusing about the other site is that when I was number 1 (before I met webnauts and we targetted more phrases) that was MY page title, the guy almost copied my meta tags too. All he did is change ipswich to sudbury.

His domain isnt even more than a year old! He has a lot less inbound links than me. Surely these onpage factors cant be the reason he's ranking above me?

I've got over double the amount of traffic to my site too!

Well, I didn't know about all that history and came up with the exact same thing that you changed and then dropped 1 position...

There are no "Surely's" in marketing.

[kevsta]

Originally Posted by crankydave

I don't disagree. There are a lot of things that could be analized that would help give you an idea. I wasn't trying to suggest otherwise.

With well over 200 factors taken into account (I believe that's a correct number) it would be virtual impossible to isolate the effects of any one of them and virtually impossible to measure all the different combinations of effects each one has on the other including any external effects on what is internal or on page.

Now I say virtually because if one had access to the total algorithm (including any filters) then one could determine what is "valued" how and why.

Dave

this is very true. but I would counter that there's likely a lot more than 200 things all going on at once, simultaneously in your average modern fighter jet.

i'd bet the best pilots in the world don't know exactly what, how much, when and why all of it pulls together to get the result, but with a lot of practice some of them can really fly the things.

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by kevsta

this is very true. but I would counter that there's likely a lot more than 200 things all going on at once, simultaneously in your average modern fighter jet.

i'd bet the best pilots in the world don't know exactly what, how much, when and why all of it pulls together to get the result, but with a lot of practice some of them can really fly the things.

Interesting to note may be that the only ones that know exactly all the details of the fighter jet, are the designers. Not even the builders and maintenance people know all the details.

And none of those people know how to fly it.

Who knows how to use it best is somebody not involved with design, construction or maintenance.

Translating this logic to our world,... Nor the designers, constructors or maintainers of Google, know how to use it best. It's the pilots (many of them among us in this forum) that know best how to use Google...

Just shows that: A piano maker never is the best piano player.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Hi Peter, yes I was thinking that all I need to do is repeat 'web design suffolk' two more times in the page title lol.

If you want your other keyterms to lose weight, just do that!

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Whats amusing about the other site is that when I was number 1 (before I met webnauts and we targetted more phrases) that was MY page title, the guy almost copied my meta tags too. All he did is change ipswich to sudbury.

Did you rank nr. 1 for that term before you met me? I can't remember exactly what we discussed that time.
Now let me give you a tip: Change you title and type exactly the same he does. You will sure outrank him, no matter if his off-page optimization is better, but you will outrank for other terms i.e "seo services".

Side note: You are ranking Nr. 1 today. How did that happen? In my experience, this fluxing is obviously an off-page factor. End of story!

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

His domain isnt even more than a year old! He has a lot less inbound links than me. Surely these onpage factors cant be the reason he's ranking above me?

He has more IBLs than you? Is that another joke? How often should I tell you that quantity is not what counts. It is about the quality!!!

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

I've got over double the amount of traffic to my site too!

Then what is your problem?

After all, if you want to dominated him, get quality IBLs.

A quote from Eric Ward:

"The most successful SEMs -particulary link-building SEMs - have been those who understand link trust from search engine's perspective, and implement strategies that earn content-driven link trust, rather than begging, borrowing, or stealing it."

How about you brother?