SEO Future?

[pntglobal]

I've been reading quite a bit of material on Google recently and I've personally come to the conclusion that sooner rather than later, search engines such as google will almost dismiss the current SEO techniques used today with a couple exceptions. I would think that Keyword rich content, Titles, links etc are and will always be very important, but the older Google gets possibly 99.999% of it's results will be based on content and interaction only? Think about the difference from 2001 to 2006 and how much less value h2 tags etc give to SEO now. (this is all of course an assumption).

Question-!

My question is, from what you all know, is it really worth the time to label images and make sure h1 h2 tags etc are labeled with Keywords ?? and if so what % would you give to the "tried and true techniques" ? At this point I think it's still important enough to spend some time on, but what do you all think??

Thank you for your input! =)

[subhzash]

Hello,

H1 tags are always good. But it depends on how you devided the tags. Remember H1 is only for the main headings. Your site should have only one heading. Inspite of this SEOs are using more H1 tags to attract the search engines.

I would suggest H1 tags for the main headings and H2 tags for sub-headings and so on.

[tamecrow]

The current on-page techniques will always be important but will be increasingly devalued in favour of behaviour tracking and personalisation.

[Tubby]

if someone is serious about finding specific content. . they will search until they find it. (despite search engine preferences)

SEO is more of a public service. . It enables webmasters to poke a website up Googles nose . . because Google is to flaming dumb to find it on there own.

The only real problem is the imbalance between cash available from better funded sites. This causes the same pages to keep turning up whatever you are looking for.

serious searcher will eventually muddle through to find what they need.

I think there is a great future for seo. . As a 'middle man' working for web searchers. enabling searcher to locate the site they want to find.

I think the future of Google is PPC, and I think Webmasters will chuckle quietly in a few years time at the stupidity of what could have been a great search company.

[incrediblehelp]

Google will never be able to control how you make your website popular with off-site techniques i.e. link baiting and social media techniques

[david_us]

yes links and keyword rich content is always important in seo field , related link partners also

thanks

[kgun]

Google will never be able to control how you make your website popular with off-site techniques i.e. link baiting and social media techniques

Should it be control 100 %? And there is always a risk of ...

[Peter (IMC)]

I've been reading quite a bit of material on Google recently and I've personally come to the conclusion that sooner rather than later, search engines such as google will almost dismiss the current SEO techniques used today with a couple exceptions. I would think that Keyword rich content, Titles, links etc are and will always be very important, but the older Google gets possibly 99.999% of it's results will be based on content and interaction only? Think about the difference from 2001 to 2006 and how much less value h2 tags etc give to SEO now. (this is all of course an assumption).

Question-!

My question is, from what you all know, is it really worth the time to label images and make sure h1 h2 tags etc are labeled with Keywords ?? and if so what % would you give to the "tried and true techniques" ? At this point I think it's still important enough to spend some time on, but what do you all think??

Thank you for your input! =)

You´re looking at SEO the wrong way. The HTML part of SEO is less than 10% of the total. It's merely a requirement.

What makes a site rank high are factors like focus, hiarchy, marketing, quality, etc. The technical aspects are irrelevant. You just have to get them right.

[cz]

I have given some thought to this very issue. What intriques me is if search continues to lean toward

behaviour tracking and personalisation

- then it makes sense that the most visited sites will be at the top due to their garnering most of the click-thoughs.

It follows that they'll retain this position because of behavioral tracking because of their placements, so how can a newer site or one that is trying to gain links, write/add content, optimize titles and descriptions - ever unseat them for a top spot? The top spots will always be tracked as having more click thoughs and higher amounts of unique visitors by nature of their SERPS - placements.

This seems like a self perpetuating "lock" for the top listed sites. The only way that this tracking and interaction method could be cracked open, would have to be Incredible's suggestion of link baiting and Social Media involvement which can bring torrents of vistors to your site by means of an interesting title or subject material.

But would Google for e.g. track the hits and visitor behavior coming from "all" sources and factor them in this method? Or, only from their listed sites in their database?

Good post!

[Janna122003]

I think related links and content would always be important on SE no matter how they change the algo.