Top 10 web design firms use black-hat SEO

[Web-Design-Guy]

I've just posted an interesting article revealing how three of the top 10* web design agencies we compete with are using black-hat SEO. (*all three are in the top 10 in Google search results)

Hope you find it interesting (and it encourages you to wear white hats !!! )

Top 10 web design firms use black-hat SEO : iOnline - Musings of a Perth Web Designer

[Peter (IMC)]

They´re web design agencies,... Probably they do know that it is not completely the way the search engines prefer it, but I doubt they give it that much importance. Different way of thinking.

[Web-Design-Guy]

Yes - design / development primarily ... but they_all_promote their SEO expertise/services !!

[crankydave]

Define "black hat". If you can do so without using "Google" or any other companies "guidelines", companies whose business model is derived upon, predicated upon, making a profit based upon their "product", you win a cookie.

If you cannot, then you're simply "outing" your competitition rather than outperforming them.

Dave

[janeth]

According to Google anything you do to your website with the search engines in mind is black hat.

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by janeth

According to Google anything you do to your website with the search engines in mind is black hat.

That's not true anymore. They updated their guidelines and now say not to do anything primairily for the search engines.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

That's not true anymore. They updated their guidelines and now say not to do anything primairily for the search engines.

Thats fine to. In the article were he is accusing others of being blackhat he says.

It’s perfectly reasonable to have a heading at the very top of your page like this (and notice the use of <h1> and <strong> tags which are important in SEO):

That would be black hat because the only reason he says to use it is for the search engines.

I wish people would spend more time running their own business and less time pointing fingers.

[Peter (IMC)]

yes that I can agree with. But you can be sure that there are many more real business people that don't point fingers. But those you never hear anything from...

[Webnauts]

From my experience, you can have the best results with search engines, if your optimize sites to be accessible to people with disabilities.

Appropriate implementation of the markup elements and web navigation, is what people call today on-page SEO.

[Web-Design-Guy]

Interesting debate.

If you cannot, then you're simply "outing" your competitition rather than outperforming them.

I think if I'd named them that would be outing. I could have made up examples of 'dodgy' tactics but I felt it was more relevant to use actual snippets to illustrate the point.

I wish people would spend more time running their own business and less time pointing fingers.

Pointing fingers? This was certainly not my intention. Pointing out, was where I was coming from - as a prelude to encouraging more above-board SEO methods (than hiding keyword-stuffed elements from all but search engines).

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Web-Design-Guy

Interesting debate.



I think if I'd named them that would be outing.

And it takes about 3 seconds to find out who they are

[MuNKyonline]

Web Design Guy just ignore Janeth mate, no idea why people even bother conversing with her on these forums...

We're having a similar discussion on David Castle's forum about blackhat technques. There's a site that keeps jumping above me on google.co.uk and .com and they're using the same hidden keyword stuffed h1 sitewide, keyword stuffed titles and they are even doing link exchanges with non relevant sites.

Makes me wonder why I even bother with whitehat techniques if Google doesnt even pick up on the blackhats.

Originally Posted by webnauts

From my experience, you can have the best results with search engines, if your optimize sites to be accessible to people with disabilities.

Appropriate implementation of the markup elements and web navigation, is what people call today on-page SEO.

Fully agree

[janeth]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Web Design Guy just ignore Janeth mate, no idea why people even bother conversing with her on these forums...

Maybe some people like to learn the truth. Unlike those people (like yourself) that post incorrect information as being the truth.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

We're having a similar discussion on David Castle's forum about blackhat technques. There's a site that keeps jumping above me on google.co.uk and .com and they're using the same hidden keyword stuffed h1 sitewide, keyword stuffed titles and they are even doing link exchanges with non relevant sites.

Makes me wonder why I even bother with whitehat techniques if Google doesnt even pick up on the blackhats.


Fully agree

There is nothing that can be done with black hat techniques that can't be done with white hat techniques.

Done correctly any white hat site can outrank a black hat site. And keyword stuffing will only get you so far.

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by janeth

Maybe some people like to learn the truth. Unlike those people (like yourself) that post incorrect information as being the truth.

*YAWN* OK janeth go ahead and prove that anything i've said on this forum is not the truth

Back on topic...

Out of interest, has anyone actually had any success from reporting one of these sites via the Google report tool?

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Web Design Guy just ignore Janeth mate, no idea why people even bother conversing with her on these forums...

We're having a similar discussion on David Castle's forum about blackhat technques. There's a site that keeps jumping above me on google.co.uk and .com and they're using the same hidden keyword stuffed h1 sitewide, keyword stuffed titles and they are even doing link exchanges with non relevant sites.

Makes me wonder why I even bother with whitehat techniques if Google doesnt even pick up on the blackhats.


Fully agree

First, please restrict your replies to the comments/opinions being made and NOT the member making them.

Now... You are assuming that the site ranks where it does because of the hidden keywords and <h1> tags. You are assuming that the site ranks where it does because of nothing else. You are assuming that if those elements were removed it would not rank where it does. You are assuming that the link exchanges have value.

None of these things you can know.

Tell you what, if you'd like to post or PM me the site I'll bet I can find the reasons it ranks and for reasons other than what you posted.

Dave

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by janeth

Maybe some people like to learn the truth. Unlike those people (like yourself) that post incorrect information as being the truth.

That's enough please.

Dave

[janeth]

Originally Posted by crankydave

You are assuming that the link exchanges have value.

I missed the link exchanges, where were they talked about and are you saying that you feel that link exchanges have no value?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Tell you what, if you'd like to post or PM me the site I'll bet I can find the reasons it ranks and for reasons other than what you posted.

Dave

Do a search for this text

website Designers & Web Developers Perth WA, Websites,
Multimedia, Flash HTML web site Western Australia,
graphic design company javascript business scripts
internet Perth WA artwork database development desktop
publishing html dhtml cd software website hosting

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Tell you what, if you'd like to post or PM me the site I'll bet I can find the reasons it ranks and for reasons other than what you posted.

Dave

Great idea! Darren please post the link here.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by janeth

I missed the link exchanges, where were they talked about and are you saying that you feel that link exchanges have no value?

Not at all. It was one of the "reasons" munky gave for the site ranking where it does...

...are even doing link exchanges with non relevant sites.

My point is that it cannot be known what "ranking value" they have if any.

Dave

[crankydave]

Is this the site Darren... andrewbryson.com.au?

You believe it ranks because of the things you listed above? I'd say at the very least it ranks in spite of those things.

Dave

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by crankydave

First, please restrict your replies to the comments/opinions being made and NOT the member making them.

Now... You are assuming that the site ranks where it does because of the hidden keywords and <h1> tags. You are assuming that the site ranks where it does because of nothing else. You are assuming that if those elements were removed it would not rank where it does. You are assuming that the link exchanges have value.

None of these things you can know.

Tell you what, if you'd like to post or PM me the site I'll bet I can find the reasons it ranks and for reasons other than what you posted.

Dave

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

[janeth]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

they are even doing link exchanges with non relevant sites.

I do not see that is being black hat.

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by janeth

I do not see that is being black hat.

Yeah it isnt blackhat. I was just using it as an example of something bad they're doing and yet they're still rnaking above me.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

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.

Darren at this point you are doing a huge mistake. If you can get back links, your excuse not to build links is against yourself. Remember that IBLs value is based on several factors, which one of them I have to mention here, is their age of the IBL. If your theme will remain the same, then you got something wrong brother. If urls or navigation structure will change, that is not a reason either, since we have the blessings of the 301 redirects.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Yeah it isnt blackhat. I was just using it as an example of something bad they're doing and yet they're still rnaking above me.

Why is that bad?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Darren at this point you are doing a huge mistake. If you can get back links, your excuse not to build links is against yourself. Remember that IBLs value is based on several factors, which one of them I have to mention here, is their age of the IBL. If your theme will remain the same, then you got something wrong brother. If urls or navigation structure will change, that is not a reason either, since we have the blessings of the 301 redirects.

I agree, marketing the site is something you can never stop doing. If you wait it will be that much harder to get ahead of them when the time comes to do so.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Yeah it isnt blackhat. I was just using it as an example of something bad they're doing and yet they're still rnaking above me.

I would not necessarily define keyword stuffing as a black hat technique, but its is a violation of the guidelines of all major SE, and you may be confronted with penalties, not necessarily being banned. Maybe being outranked for keyterms, etc.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I agree, marketing the site is something you can never stop doing. If you wait it will be that much harder to get ahead of them when the time comes to do so.

Very well said.

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by janeth

Why is that bad?

Because they are in the footer, look like paid links, are not relevant to the site and are not nofollowed.

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Darren at this point you are doing a huge mistake. If you can get back links, your excuse not to build links is against yourself. Remember that IBLs value is based on several factors, which one of them I have to mention here, is their age of the IBL. If your theme will remain the same, then you got something wrong brother. If urls or navigation structure will change, that is not a reason either, since we have the blessings of the 301 redirects.

All the text, structure and meta infomation is going to change on the site and so I was waiting until I've decided on new data to submit to web directories that will more relevant to the new site.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Yeah it isnt blackhat. I was just using it as an example of something bad they're doing and yet they're still rnaking above me.

Some time ago Matt Cutts revealed that they take into consideration reported sites or sites that are implementing techniques which violate their guidelines, and not take action right away, if those violations are not too serious. The reason for that is that they take advantage of those cases, so they can improve their algorithm. Once they will have improved, the site your mentioned will be picked up by the Coroners of Google. Stay tuned.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Because they are in the footer, look like paid links, are not relevant to the site and are not nofollowed.

I agree than.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

All the text, structure and meta infomation is going to change on the site and so I was waiting until I've decided on new data to submit to web directories that will more relevant to the new site.

If your business model/site theme will remain the same, like web design and/or search engine optimization, I can assure you once again that you are doing something seriously wrong. If you are planning to add new services upon the services you already provide, I repeat, you have no excuse from not building links. End of story man.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Because they are in the footer, look like paid links, are not relevant to the site and are not nofollowed.

Well one thing we both can't tell there, how much value Google gives to those links.

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

If your business model/site theme will remain the same, like web design and/or search engine optimization, I can assure you once again that you are doing something seriously wrong. If you are planning to add new services upon the services you already provide, I repeat, you have no excuse from not building links. End of story man.

LOL ok man Can you order me another few hundred links then please

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Well one thing we both can't tell there, how much value Google gives to those links.

Yeah you're right.

Where'd Cranky go? I wanted to see what he had to say about all this.

[crankydave]

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

Point taken Darren. It wasn't meant to be a "a slap on the wrist". I have found that changing the links to what I do, has far better response time across the board than PMing or issuing an official warning or infraction. What can tend to happen is that multiple reports get made when a change is not made right away.

Dave

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

LOL ok man Can you order me another few hundred links then please

I will do that. You already know the process: Titles & Descriptions please.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Yeah you're right.

Where'd Cranky go? I wanted to see what he had to say about all this.

Still here Darren... wanted to respond to your point directly (which I did above) and read through the other comments. You guys are posting too fast.

From what I can tell, the site ranks above you for a lot of reasons, many pointed out by John and Janeth. There really is no way to "know" exactly why they're where they are because what don't know what value, if any, and how much gets placed on all the variables.

There's really no reason why you can't move up by sticking to the positive things. Let's take the phrase you mentioned above. When I search it from the US I don't see that site and see yours at #2 in addition to the local listing. I also see another page from your site at #13 on page 2.

Dave

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Point taken Darren. It wasn't meant to be a "a slap on the wrist". I have found that changing the links to what I do, has far better response time across the board than PMing or issuing an official warning or infraction. What can tend to happen is that multiple reports get made when a change is not made right away.

Dave

Ok no worries, think my new links are better now anyway

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I will do that. You already know the process: Titles & Descriptions please.

OK i'll sort that out when i get home tonight

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by crankydave

My point is that it cannot be known what "ranking value" they have if any.

Allow me to partially disagree Dave. Defining on page ranking values are possible. Off-page obviously not, or not really accurately.

[MuNKyonline]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Still here Darren... wanted to respond to your point directly (which I did above) and read through the other comments. You guys are posting too fast.

From what I can tell, the site ranks above you for a lot of reasons, many pointed out by John and Janeth. There really is no way to "know" exactly why they're where they are because what don't know what value, if any, and how much gets placed on all the variables.

There's really no reason why you can't move up by sticking to the positive things. Let's take the phrase you mentioned above. When I search it from the US I don't see that site and see yours at #2 in addition to the local listing. I also see another page from your site at #13 on page 2.

Dave

My domain is about 4 years old now, theres no html errors sitewide. Scores 100% on all pages on our SEO tool. H1's, page titles and meta's are all unique. Havent overused keywords.

Whats really strange is most of the time my site is no1. Has been for a while now. Google shuffles a bit and then i get bumped to number2. I bet in 24 hours i'll be back at no1 again without making a single change to the site.

Dont know if this will show the you the same results as me?
web design suffolk - Google Search

[chiron]

Showing second fiddle USA-side right now.

The other site's loaded first loaded paragraph loaded is annoying loaded enough I'd suspect you'll win the point that matters more - generating business.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Allow me to partially disagree Dave. Defining on page ranking values are possible. Off-page obviously not, or not really accurately.

How so John?

Dave

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by crankydave

How so John?

Dave

We have developed tools for internal use in our labs area, which we can retrieve information and evaluate stuff that cannot just be done by the public or existing tools that someone can purchase.

[kevsta]

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

My domain is about 4 years old now, theres no html errors sitewide. Scores 100% on all pages on our SEO tool. H1's, page titles and meta's are all unique. Havent overused keywords.

then its all about the links brother.

Originally Posted by MuNKyonline

Whats really strange is most of the time my site is no1. Has been for a while now. Google shuffles a bit and then i get bumped to number2. I bet in 24 hours i'll be back at no1 again without making a single change to the site.

this isnt strange its perfectly normal until you get significantly ahead in linkstrength.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

We have developed tools for internal use in our labs area, which we can retrieve information and evaluate stuff that cannot just be done by the public or existing tools that someone can purchase.

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

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.

It cannot be known if a search engine depricates/ignores/equalizes certain factors on a page. It can only be assumed or guessed.

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. Just because a SE "see's something doesn't automatically mean it has "value" and there's simply no way to know how much if it does.

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

Dave