SEO is Dead...Really?

[jim60723]

Okay most discussed, most debated, most blogged about topic "SEO IS DEAD".

But here are some facts : Facts pointed out by at Portent Blog

A search on Google Trends
seo_is_dead_insights.jpg

Let's see what Google AdWords have to say:
seo_is_dead_adwords.jpg

Points to be looked into:

• Google Instant
• Web 3.0
• Social Networking Sites
• Personalized Search
• Search Plus Your World
• Google Panda
• Google Caffeine
• Various Google Algorithm Updates
• Google Plus
• Google Over Optimization Penalty

WebmasterWorld administrator Tedster says:

The way I see it, on-page text today is for the "relevance" part of the total algorithm. The whole algorithm is, in broad strokes, "relevance + connectedness + quality". After you've clearly stated the relevance of the page, then the rest of your ranking power comes from elsewhere.
I've added on-page bold tags with no effect. I've added or changed h1 elements with no effect. Not too long ago, those might well have done something, but that's not the game anymore.
And moving from a table layout to a CSS-P layout today might get you nowhere, too. It all depends how deeply complicated the table layout was, I think.

As David Naylor pointed out on Clickz Blog:
The problem is that many people simply don't understand SEO and how broad it is as a technical discipline. It doesn't die; it simply evolves.

So, what do you think? Please share your comments.

[PhilipDunn]

I do resonate with this statement:

The problem is that many people simply don't understand SEO and how broad it is as a technical discipline. It doesn't die; it simply evolves.

[claybutler]

I don't think it's worth spending any time on these SEO concerns du jour. If I took any of this stuff seriously I'd be one unhappy guy and constantly stressed. There's only four things you need to worry about.

1. Focused keyword rich on page content
2. Focused keyword rich title tags and meta descriptions
3. Focused keyword rich site architecture
4. Inbound links ( hopefully using your keywords...an inbound link is any citation that links to the original source)

That's it. Anyone who tells you different probably just started in the game and has no historical experience to draw upon.

[Rocketman1]

Okay most discussed, most debated, most blogged about topic "SEO IS DEAD".

But here are some facts : Facts pointed out by at Portent Blog

A search on Google Trends
seo_is_dead_insights.jpg

Let's see what Google AdWords have to say:
seo_is_dead_adwords.jpg

Points to be looked into:

• Google Instant
• Web 3.0
• Social Networking Sites
• Personalized Search
• Search Plus Your World
• Google Panda
• Google Caffeine
• Various Google Algorithm Updates
• Google Plus
• Google Over Optimization Penalty

WebmasterWorld administrator Tedster says:

The way I see it, on-page text today is for the "relevance" part of the total algorithm. The whole algorithm is, in broad strokes, "relevance + connectedness + quality". After you've clearly stated the relevance of the page, then the rest of your ranking power comes from elsewhere.
I've added on-page bold tags with no effect. I've added or changed h1 elements with no effect. Not too long ago, those might well have done something, but that's not the game anymore.
And moving from a table layout to a CSS-P layout today might get you nowhere, too. It all depends how deeply complicated the table layout was, I think.

As David Naylor pointed out on Clickz Blog:
The problem is that many people simply don't understand SEO and how broad it is as a technical discipline. It doesn't die; it simply evolves.

So, what do you think? Please share your comments.

The major change that's going to come is a lot of alleged SEO's will be unemployed when they find out they can no longer tell their off shore buddies to push out some broken English crap content and then collect $1000 per month from unsuspecting website operators. Couldn't happen to a nicer group of "professionals"

[PhilipDunn]

2. Focused keyword rich title tags and meta descriptions.

Clay,

Someone here pointed out to me, to my surprise that Google states they do not use the meta description. They provided the link and Google actually states this. The memo was from 2007. I know I've affected serps before by modifying the description. Do you believe descriptions are used by Google for SE placement?

[Rocketman1]

We have an eCommerce cart from 3dcart - The google SERP pulls up info from the listing it self - so we don't bother entering meta descriptions. If you google - Bird Cage Light & Wire Mount w/ 15 W Full Spectrum Light Bulb - Capitol Shade you'll see the description in the SERP

[claybutler]

Clay,

Someone here pointed out to me, to my surprise that Google states they do not use the meta description. They provided the link and Google actually states this. The memo was from 2007. I know I've affected serps before by modifying the description. Do you believe descriptions are used by Google for SE placement?

Yes, meta descriptions matter. Not just for ranking but for presentation and click rates. A great keyword rich title is your chance to control how Google displays you in the SERP's. Drop the use of meta descriptions and you're left with these ugly truncated snippets pulled from the pages content.

Search for "storyboard design" (with or without quotes) on Google. My portfolio the first or third result. Look at the snippet. That's my meta description verbatim and it's informative and compelling.

If I would had left it blank who knows what Google with pick from the page.

[PhilipDunn]

Yes titles and descriptions are of course very important and the descriptions important for the click through rate. I was just surprised to see this -> (And it's worth noting that while accurate meta descriptions can improve clickthrough, they won't affect your ranking within search results.) on the GWT site.
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogsp...scription.html

[claybutler]

Yes titles and descriptions are of course very important and the descriptions important for the click through rate. I was just surprised to see this -> (And it's worth noting that while accurate meta descriptions can improve clickthrough, they won't affect your ranking within search results.) on the GWT site.
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogsp...scription.html

I know they publicly state that it doesn't effect ranking but I've seen it happen over and over. But even if it was purely coincidental each time, it's still good to write great meta descriptions. Also, just because they claim meta description don't matter for search results NOW, doesn't mean it won't matter in the FUTURE.

[kgun]

I don't think it's worth spending any time on these SEO concerns du jour. If I took any of this stuff seriously I'd be one unhappy guy and constantly stressed. There's only four things you need to worry about.

1. Focused keyword rich on page content
2. Focused keyword rich title tags and meta descriptions
3. Focused keyword rich site architecture
4. Inbound links ( hopefully using your keywords...an inbound link is any citation that links to the original source)

That's it. Anyone who tells you different probably just started in the game and has no historical experience to draw upon.

Agree. And the least common denominator is. Think semantics (meaning in everything you do).