Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design

Most Liked Content

#349975 Video: Drunk Usability

Posted by cre8pc on 12 June 2014 - 01:17 PM

#346940 Matt Cutts Warning: Guest Blogging Is Done

Posted by seosmarty on 20 January 2014 - 07:13 PM

I really think with his following and influence, he needs to think twice before pushing "Publish" to avoid edits like that :)

#351229 Content Metadata Widget - My First Official Wordpress Plugin

Posted by DonnaFontenot on 09 September 2014 - 06:49 PM

I feel like I've just given birth - to a WordPress plugin!


It was nerve-wracking to go through all the steps (and there are a number of rules and steps to adhere to), to bring my first WordPress plugin to fruition and into the WordPress repository.


It's not a plugin that many will need, most likely. But whether 10 people need it or 10,000, it's a living, breathing plugin available for free to everyone. 


To most, it's not that big of a deal, but to me, it's both an accomplishment and a learning experience.  Yay!


So what is it? Nothing too fancy, but something I couldn't find already out there. Here ya go.




Display the current page or post's metadata (title, author, publication date, categories, tags) in a sidebar widget, outside of "the loop".



#349562 Creative Tomorrow Could Be Amazing

Posted by DonnaFontenot on 20 May 2014 - 12:01 PM

Nothing exemplifies the title of this forum, Creative Tomorrow, like this! This would be world-changing.




#349215 Image Slider

Posted by cre8pc on 01 May 2014 - 11:25 AM

Before adding a slider, what do you want visitors to do when they land on the homepage?  Every study done on sliders has shown that they are ignored and interfere with conversions because:


You have 5 seconds to communicate that you have what your visitor needs and why they should choose your company.

Your call to action should be above the page fold, and sliders push them down.

Animation is distracting.  Moving images are distracting.

Sliders provide "maybe" a 1% conversion rate.  

People don't read web pages - they scan.


I instruct all clients to use a "hero" image instead.  This is a static image, and can be large but allow room to the left or right side of it for text content focused on answering top questions about your product/service/value prop.


If a slider is beloved, I instruct clients to put content on it with a value proposition on each slide, and place a big call to action button on the image that clicks to a page in a sales funnel.  Do not put the slider on automatic scroll.  Make it manual and show arrows, etc. for controls to let users stop, look, read, and click at their own speed.


TEST on mobile devices.  Sliders are terrible on small screens.  

#348888 Whiteboard Videos -- Anyone?

Posted by socialwebcafe on 13 April 2014 - 02:54 AM

Hi Donna,


First, thank you for your patience in my extremely delayed response.  I am definitely a work in progress on that.


Thank you for your response.. got me thinking :)


Your list of alternate names is great!  I forget sometimes that there are phrases like "Explainer Videos."  I keep calling them whiteboard videos and then I get lazy and call it whiteboarding which sounds more like something one would do at the beach.  Great to have the list, so thanks for putting that out there for us, Donna.


Yes, I'm like you.  I like to add something that has zing.  I like to do it more than I do it, but that is more of a time limitation.  That is where tools like slideshare or even embedding an instagram or pin are helpful, just to get something, even a fizzled zing in there.  (Yes, and I say that I am writing a post that is zingless.  lol.)

So, for your question, yes, Sparkol is something that you can do yourself.  Though, I didn't find that it was instantly intuitive.  It isn't like I signed up and all of a sudden was producing masterpieces.  There is definitely a learning curve.  But, I think, as with all things, once you get the hang of it, you can spit out videos quicker.  Sparkol does have some how-to videos and my recommendation is to watch those and watch them a couple times to really get the hang of it.  Then, give yourself some slack and allow yourself to mess some up :)


BTW - I agree, I do feel like watching whiteboards that are well done help to drive the info home for me.


The whiteboard, above, is not all Sparkol.  I made a whiteboard via Sparkol and then brought it into Final Cut Pro and enhanced it.  That certainly isn't a requirement and is more of a case where I am so comfortable using Final Cut Pro that it was like breathing to just add a few things like flares, music, transitions, etc.  However, Sparkol does offer these things so that you do not need any other programs.  There is the availability for music and different options for your transitions, too.


Here are some tips, off the top of my head, for whiteboard videos, no matter what tool you use to make them:

  • Keep them relatively short, or modular (like under 3 min) ... unless it is meant to be a full length teaching session or something.
  • Keep a variety.  For example, use the hand to write out part, and then slide in the next part.
  • Keep it moving.  If it is too slow, people will stop watching it and leave.
  • Use the spacers (watch the instruction videos for how-to), to create a pause after the text is added.  This gives viewer time to read it.
  • If you are inserting an image, lower the timing from the default 30 seconds to 7 seconds.  What will happen is the drawing will start slow and then all of a sudden instantly finish.  That is ok.  The viewer will be intrigued by the first part, but you won't lose them by it taking 30 seconds for the full picture.

Some of the tips above hit on some things that have worked really well for us in the video business.  The process of illusion.  Just because you *can* let every image be hand-drawn for 30 seconds each doesn't mean you should.  Do you want to watch a video move at a non-engaging snail speed?  No, if it bores you it is going to bore your viewers too, so keep that thing hopping.  Adding music, change of color, change of image, anything to keep it going. You can give the illusion that the viewer is watching the entire cat being drawn without actually waiting for the entire cat to be drawn.  As long as the full kitty is shown at the end of that piece, you have successfully provided an engaging moment with the illusion of the full drawing process.


Til next time,


#347684 What Do You Consider A Spammy Image File Name?

Posted by WPMuse on 12 February 2014 - 04:01 PM

Great minds think alike! Let the test begin!  ;-)



#347012 I Want To Merger All My Sites

Posted by evolvor on 21 January 2014 - 09:26 PM

The first thing that pops in my head here is not to think about this as "how can these fit into one website" but more like "can these fit under a brand". I think they all could probably fall into a brand, with even more doors opening based on how that is developed.


If you went to a newsstand you'd find all sorts of magazine brands (think "lifestyle" magazines) that could sell any of those products (but perhaps with specific angles - "Better Homes & Gardens" has a certain demographic, "Style" another, etc.)  Perhaps thinking about a brand and building that, then incorporating all the products under it would make sense. If done well the sky is the limit for what else could be sold under the brand. 


If there is a shared demographic among those who visit these sites or purchase these products, then you have an opportunity

#346777 $60,000 In 6 Months? Part 1

Posted by ShawnaSeigel on 16 January 2014 - 01:34 PM

In 2011 I started an amazing experiment to create $60,000 in sales within 6 months by opening an online quilting store.




It had to be done using ONLY social media and of course organic SEO.

I was SO close!! After 6 months we generated $55,618.77 in sales. It took us 6 and a half :)


We shared our progress throughout and sold the store shortly after the 6 months were up.




So how did we get people to our new website?


Social Media


We blogged, we facebooked, we twittered, we flickered, and we pinned.


We emotionally connected with our customers. We let them into our lives and they let us into theirs.


It was absolutely wonderful.


Beginner's Guide to Social Media


Most people I talk with are scared to jump into the social media pool. They don't know how or even where to start.


Guess what? You are not allowed to use that excuse any more :)

Today Moz released the Brand New Beginner's Guide to Social Media:






This guide has something for everyone to learn and education is powerful if it is applied!




Let's work together to improve your social media skills. If you are going to work through the guide, let us know below!

We will check-in with your progress and make sure you are applying your new found skills.


Remember, team work makes the dream work!




Coming Soon - $60,000 in 6 months? Part 2.

Social Media helped us to get the traffic, but what did we do to get the sales?

#344942 The Words No One Noticed At Matt Cutts Pubcon Keynote

Posted by DonnaFontenot on 23 October 2013 - 12:39 PM

At Pubcon today, Matt Cutts was the keynote speaker, and the session was live-streamed at ustream.tv/channel/pubcon


I wish the session had been recorded for later viewing, because there were two very brief parts that I'd love to pull out and share. But alas, we'll have to rely on my paraphrasing because I can't recall the exact words he used. As far as I could tell, no one even noticed those few words that came out of Matt's mouth, but in my opinion, they were the most significant words in the entire hour. You can see a text recap at http://searchenginel...t-pubcon-174906 but it too failed to mention this part.


While Matt was discussing the "moonshot" changes that are taking place, such as the Knowledge Graph, Voice Search, Conversational Search, etc. he said something to this effect (totally paraphrased by me, so don't quote me verbatim):


All along, Google has attempted to organize the world's information, and nothing in that statement mentions the phrase "search engine". Users want answers, and that's what we're attempting to give them.


Later, in the Q&A portion at the very end of the session, Matt again referred to this when discussing how Google seems to be using up all the space in the SERPs with ads, toolbars, etc, so there's little room left for organic results. Another paraphrase:


Users want quick answers, and don't necessarily want to be sent off to a site to answer it. Your job is to provide content of real value that does more than just give a 3-word answer to a question so that users will want to visit your site.


I quickly tweeted about that, saying, 


Butt matt, if you give the answers, the users will never see our value.


HA! Just noticed my tweet's typo there. Bahahaha! Anyway...I digress...


My point, of course, is that as Google gives more and more "answers" in the SERPs, there's little to no incentive for users to ever leave Google, or ever have the chance to see the valuable content we have.


People say, well, it's Google's site, so they can do what they want.


That's not always the case, however.


The "answers" that Google gives is not their content. It is OUR content.


We've always had an implied "contract" with Google.


We'll let you crawl our sites, Google, if you'll send traffic back to us.


The "contract" isn't this: We'll let you steal and use our sites' content, Google, without anything in return (traffic).


Google - via Matt's brief, nearly unnoticed words today, is letting us know...we are going to keep stealing your content, because we love our users, and we don't care what you think about that.

#344852 The 100% Google Cure | Seo

Posted by WPMuse on 17 October 2013 - 09:30 AM

No wonder people are despondent, dejected, and depressed.



I know of sites totally and completely playing by "the rules" and they were put out of business by g#####'s latest attempts to stop spam.   Very cool sites, all the boxes checked.


I am now of the opinion that spam to g##### is anyone who they can squeeze ad dollars from.


We now live in a day where playing by the rules doesn't pay and the only one really listening to the market place is the NSA.


The only way to approach all this is pretty elegant in it's simplicity:


Create the best site for your market, and concentrate on providing the best product/service possible -- then nurture the customers and relationships that come your way to build partnerships for the long haul. 


That's all you can control -- so be the best at it that you can!

#353025 Youtube Is A Traffic Vault

Posted by EGOL on 29 January 2015 - 07:53 PM

We made a nice number of YouTube videos to demonstrate some of the products that we sell.   These are mostly, very short, how to select, how to use, how to adjust, how to repair, informative videos.


The first line of most video descriptions on the YouTube site includes a link to more information on our website.  On a few descriptions the link is lower on the page.


How many people click those links and visit our site?


In the last 90 days we had over 50,000 video views and over 90,000 minutes watched..... and a whopping 16 clickthroughs to our site.   That was a CTR of 0.03%.  Worse than a bad banner ad.


Was it worth it to make these videos?  Yes, it certainly was because the conversions of our products increased significantly after we added the videos to product pages and article pages.


Just sayin' here that you better not make videos if you are hoping to drive visitors from YouTube to your website.


Maybe I should have offered folks free beer at our site ?  :-)

#352526 What Will We Be Doing In 2015?

Posted by cre8pc on 19 December 2014 - 11:15 AM

I was too poor to own a camera.  There was one picture of me when my hair was growing out that was used when I was Editor in Chief of my college newspaper but its packed away somewhere.  I still remember me and my friends crammed into a car (before seatbelts), all decked out with crazy clothes and smelling like cheap perfume.  


You wouldn't believe the stories I have from my free spirit days.  The greatest nights ever were on dance floors!

#352019 Isps Say You Don' Need No Stinkin' Secure Email...

Posted by iamlost on 12 November 2014 - 10:20 PM

Sheesh. Again.

ISPs Removing Customers' Email Encryption by Jacob Hoffman-Andrews,  Electronic Frontier Foundation, 11-November-2014.

...researchers have reported ISPs in the US and Thailand intercepting their customers' data to strip a security flag—called STARTTLS—from email traffic.
By stripping out this flag, these ISPs prevent the email servers from successfully encrypting their conversation, and by default the servers will proceed to send email unencrypted. Some firewalls ... do this in order to monitor for spam originating from within their network and prevent it from being sent. Unfortunately, this causes collateral damage: the sending server will proceed to transmit plaintext email over the public Internet, where it is subject to eavesdropping and interception.
...the flag indicating that a server supports STARTTLS is not itself encrypted, and is therefore subject to tampering, which can prevent that server from establishing an encrypted connection. That type of tampering is exactly what we see today.
ISPs act as trusted gateways to the global Internet and it is a violation of that trust to intercept or modify client traffic, regardless of what protocol their customers are using. It is a double violation when such modification disables security measures their customers use to protect themselves.

There is always an excuse - apparently in this case the war on spam - but as usual the cure is worse than the disease.


#351827 Article - Google Ranking Responsive Sites?

Posted by glyn on 24 October 2014 - 03:10 AM

The search giant treats mobile searchers differently, serving them advertising pretty much wall to wall on their mobile devices, presenting ads in such a 'full-screen' way some users will likely touch the screen to scroll down and inadvertently click on the adverts instead, while the vast majority won't even know that they were adverts in the first place. These realities combined with the way the Ad-words interface tucks critical campaign modification settings out of the way of campaign managers (such as chaing the bid rates on mobile devices) mean that many small businesses probably can't work out why their adwords campaigns are not converting at all but are getting lots of visits. - ANON

#351602 What Makes A Person A Great Leader?

Posted by DonnaFontenot on 05 October 2014 - 12:14 PM

I think your definition of a leader is narrow. You are placing adjectives in front of the word "leader", such as good leader, effective leader, ethical leader, kind leader, moral leader, giving leader, etc. You may not have used those exact phrases, but your descriptions of a leader imply it.


A leader is simply someone who leads or commands a group of people. There are no moral or ethical attachments to being a leader. So anyone who has a group of followers who hang on to that person's words, follow that person's instructions, emulate that person's actions...that person is a leader of that group of followers. That leader may be the Pied Piper leading children away from their families. That leader may be H i t l e r (this stupid software wouldn't let me type his name). That leader may be Ghandi. That leader may be the latest SEO guru. That leader may be the head of a street gang. That leader may be the authority figure of a family. I could go on and on.


So yes, anyone who has a following can call him or herself a leader. If you are looking to narrow down things, then you need to really specify that.


Are you looking to define an ethical business leader (a CEO who thinks first of his employees and clients over self-profit?)

Are you looking to define a benevolent dictator for life, such as Linus Torvalds? 

Are you hoping to define a leader who can get things done, keep a company from falling to pieces, and help its employees retain their jobs, but the price for doing so might be to make a few handshakes that are a little on the gray side of ethical?

Are you seeking to define a political leader who may have to make some concessions in order to achieve peace?


What I'm saying is that there are many types of leaders, and many ways to define a leader. Even the worst leaders in someone's opinion can still be called a leader, if he or she led a group of people through a set of actions or thoughts or beliefs. But most of the time, a leader will never be completely white-hat, completely ethical, completely moral, or be able to live up to the highest of standards. Leadership almost always requires some form of concessions "for the greater good". Deals must be made. Negotiations must be made. One leader must give a little to get a little. Keeping employees happy with big salaries may cut into the profits so much that the business fails and the employees no longer have jobs. So salaries may need to be lower than what would be satisfactory for the short term, to prevent long-term failure. A politician may have to agree to give assistance to a country, despite the fact that the leader of the country is evil. But in return, the politician gets the evil leader to agree to stop torturing innocent citizens of that country.


Good, effective leaders are often required to make decisions that live in the grayer areas of ethics. Those leaders who are 100% ethical, moral, kind, and good - and are also effective - are rare, and probably never existed. Even ghandi probably made a few less-than-perfectly-ethical decisions but we may never know about those. For sure, Ben Franklin would have, and Nelson Mandela did. Leaders are human. There are good ones and bad ones and ones of every kind between those extremes. Being effective doesn't require goodness, it just requires getting the job done in a timely manner, with the least cost. That effectiveness may involve ethics and morals - or may not.


Of course, your definition of a leader is a nice ideal. Great ideal, in fact. Just not very realistic is all. That kind of leader might be able to thrive in small groups, in a small way. But add more people to the mix...more clients, more employees, more population, more countries, more religions, more belief systems, more anything...and that ideal will quickly have to make concessions.


Or so it seems to me. 

#350976 Adsense Publishers: Https Might Tank Your Income

Posted by EGOL on 21 August 2014 - 02:14 PM

I just read on SearchEngineRoundTable that moving an Adsense site to HTTPS could tank your earnings.  Barry says that his site took a hit when he moved to https and a commenter pointed to an Adsense document that says your income WILL TAKE A HIT ON HTTPS.   See link below and relevant quote.





HTTPS-enabled sites require that all content on the page, including the ads, be SSL-compliant. As such, AdSense will remove all non-SSL compliant ads from competing in the auction on these pages. If you do decide to convert your HTTP site to HTTPS, please be aware that because we remove non-SSL compliant ads from the auction, thereby reducing auction pressure, ads on your HTTPS pages might earn less than those on your HTTP pages.



Google's Search team is telling webmasters to do things that could drop Adsense and other revenue so low that they could be put publishers out of business.


My reading of this information makes me think that some advertisers have technology or content that will cause Adsense not to deliver their ads to websites on https.


Sometimes it pays not to jump when Google search tells you to do something. 


* wondering if you can say stuff like this on WMW *

#350639 :-) In A Title Tag ?

Posted by Grumpus on 03 August 2014 - 07:57 AM

Google ignores punctuation, as far as I know.



#350278 Latest Design Trend I Hate Because It Costs Visitors Money

Posted by wiser3 on 02 July 2014 - 04:16 PM

Technologies used to make interactive web sites are getting out of hand to the point it can cost your visitors money.


I like the use of technologies like AJAX that update page content on the fly as i click and explore the page. But i'm afraid it's going to far. First we got ad areas where the ads would auto rotate. I didn't think much of it. But now those ads are often streaming video. Sports teams seem to be the worst. There are several areas of auto rotating ads and worst of all streaming video areas of game highlights that the visitor can't shut off.


Why is this a problem you ask? Because i visit the site as part of my morning routine then return that evening with the page still open. I just went way over my internet usage limits for content that i wasn't in the room for and didn't take any action to get. I've been going over my internet usage limits, AND PAYING EXTRA, for some time now and finally realized why.


I'm bringing this up in hopes of spreading the word and stopping this trend before it gets worse. In the meantime - always close your browser! Don't let all that unwanted content make your internet bills go up.

#350268 Page Title And Branding Revisited

Posted by Grumpus on 02 July 2014 - 12:03 PM

I was unable to find the thread, but way back in the olden days, we had a discussion going here about branding and title tags. It was a fairly long thread with a whole lot of spirited but well thought out disagreement. Reading Kim's "All I Want Is Rank" thread got me to thinking about this again. In her thread there, she's talking about other things on the web site that are more important than rank. For me, I was looking at taking all of that, but also looking into what I can do on the search engine side of things.

Nowadays, the paid placement results look very similar to the organic results. Back in the day, a #1 Organic result was the prominent link on the page. Now, it's #3 or usually #4 at best. The only real differentiation is the yellow "ad" tag in the listing.


A Brief History of the Debate


That old thread that I cannot seem to find was basically discussing the format of a title tag. Do you put your brand label at the beginning or the end of it? Most seem to agree that the answer is "at the end." Your page title should be "Page Title and Branding Revisited - Cre8asiteforums" because it gets the most relevant keywords at the beginning of the title.


I, especially with the advent of dynamic content and less control over the length of page titles, always thought that the opposite would be better. My argument was that if you put it at the end, the brand label will often never even show up in the SERPs. "Cre8asiteforums" is too long for this. Even "Cre8asite" is a smidge to long. I want something unique and 4-5 characters long (7-8 in a real pinch). For this site I would be tempted to just go with "Cre8" (unless I found a lot of others using that). So if it were up to me (and my research confirmed that this was unique enough to distinguish us) I'd make this page title be "Cre8-Page Title and Branding Revisited."

Why I Believe This (and Why It's Even More True Now, IMO)


If you are searching for information about a movie, and you see "IMDb" in the page title, you pretty much know what you are going to get. Even if this is the third or fourth result, you see that IMDb in the title and you may be tempted to click it. The trick with that is that some movies have very long titles - like this. (I'll attach an image here to ensure that you see what I see).




As you can see here, the IMDb result is there, but you have to look at the URL to see it - the instant, at-a-glance credibility that IMDb has is lost, here. If I was looking for a review, that Rotten Tomatoes link would be something I'd consider clicking - but alas, I can't see that it's a review, or from Rotten Tomatoes without looking at the URL under the title.

Wikipedia and Filmsite.org take another approach that isn't as bad, but still not the best way to go, IMO. They (usually) make sure that pages have a short enough main title (and abridge it if it gets too long) to ensure that their brand tag appears at the end. The trick there is that as page title lengths vary, the position of that brand icon moves around and it's still harder to spot.

For me - Amazon has the best listing there. Their brand is right out front, so at a quick glance, whether I'm looking for reviews, or to buy the DVD, that one is an obvious choice - even though it's the last one above the fold.

Grumpus, You're An Idiot. Most Site's Don't Have The Luxury Of Having A Recognizable Brand, So It's Useless!!!


This is usually what I hear next when I am trying to explain my logic here. The answer to this is easy. Back when they first started, IMDb, Amazon, Rotten Tomatoes, and all of these sites didn't have a recognizable brand either. The developed it by - guess what? - exposing us to the brand.


If your site can appear anywhere above the fold (and on mobile devices, anywhere on the page because you often have to scroll just to get past the ads in the first place), your brand is going to be seen by a the person doing the search. Generally, people tend to search the same types of things over and over again, so over time people will - without even knowing it - start to have some brand recognition.

"Hmmm. Every time I search for advice on what to do about my web site, I always see that Cre8 site. Maybe I should..." >>click<<


If person clicks once on your site and they got what they wanted from it, having your brand there out front is more likely to generate a click because of that positive experience, too. If they don't spot your brand in that 0.78 seconds (or whatever it is) that their eyes are scanning the results for the site they believe is most likely to deliver the answer they are looking for, then there is no added recognition, no added reinforcement, or anything.

Plus, if your brand is up front and it's fresh in their minds, on the click they DO make, that brand is already there in your head before they get to the site - and what they see once they get to the site has something (the "Cre8" brand marker, in our case) to mentally attach itself to.


Psychological Elements of Your Brand Label


The stuff I'm going to describe here falls into the user experience aspect of things - and leveraging the search engine to begin the user experience before they even leave the search engine.


First off, your brand label isn't your brand - it's the "attachment point" for it. Nike has its "swish". Coke has its own "swish". We can't put graphics in our search engine results, so for that we need a short string of characters. IMDb has IMDb. Amazon has Amazon.com. etc.

By themselves the swishes and letter sequences don't mean anything. But, our brains automatically take those as sort of the File Label as we gather information about our experiences. A television advertisement contains some sort of a "message" that they want you to attach to their "brand label". {Nike Swish} Just Do It. or {Big Yellow M} I'm loving it. Every time you go into McDonald's restaurants, you see the big yellow M and whatever experience you had in there also gets attached to that label. "{Big Yellow M} These french fries are pretty good - and only $1.25" Good experience or bad experience, good message or bad message, every thing you see and attach to that brand label becomes part of your perception of that brand. 9 out of 10 times, you aren't even aware that you're doing it.


By putting your brand name at the front of your page titles, you're presenting the brand label to them. Even if they don't specifically get anything to attach to it - you are still developing recognition at a subconscious level.


But it also has a message, too - even without a click. What does Cre8asite Forums do? "{Cre8} Page Title and Branding" and "{Cre8} All I Want Is Rank" and anything else you manage to get popping up into a search engine. If you can generate a click, then you get "Ahhhh. {Cre8} A forum with a lot of people talking about web site related stuff!"


If you are an unknown company, then to me it's even MORE important to get your brand out front and not leave it out there at the tail end of the page title (or worse - to allow it to fall out of the page title altogether). Even if you don't get the click right away, you're already establishing "something". Maybe the user is aware of it. Maybe it's just a subconscious thing. It doesn't matter.


Eventually someone will say, "I keep seeing that site every time I search for this type of thing... I really should check it out..."


Long Term, Not Short Term


Finally, this isn't a "quick fix" type thing. And to get your pages to rank a bit better, having the keywords near the beginning of the title rather than the end is a slight advantage. (Though, over the years, I've seen some evidence to show that Google can usually recognize consistent usage of the brand label out front and eventually even that effect becomes questionable). This whole thing also doesn't suddenly make everyone in the world aware of your site and make you a household name. It builds up over time, and it definitely has an effect on the user experience - if only to give them a strong label to attach their experiences with your brand.


Getting rankings is good. And it's important. But if you have a bunch of high ranking pages but no one can remember you, then what have you solved? With this option, you plant a seed of them remembering you - even if you never get a click. It's a seed for the future. Something that evolves like anyone's brand perception.




So, there you go. There are my thoughts on this. Feel free to agree, agree with an exception, or pooh pooh on the whole notion. I'd like to hear what you all think now that a decade has passed since the last time I talked about this.




P.S. I wasn't sure if this should be in Marketing, SEO, or what - feel free to move it if you feel it belongs in a different/better spot.