Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

Your Choices For Search Engine On-Page Seo Ranking Factors

google bing seo search engine rank

  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 cre8pc

cre8pc

    Dream Catcher Forums Founder

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 14673 posts

Posted 19 May 2015 - 10:17 AM

Barry points to a discussion at WebmasterWorld in which a list of on-page ranking factors for 2015 are listed, with some devalued and new ones recommended.

 

It is about Google only.  

Google SEO On-Page Ranking Factor List 2015 Version

There is push-back from Barry's readers about the list, as you can see in the comments section.

 

What do you believe to be part of a solid list, for both Google and Bing rank?  Is the list at WMW wrong?



#2 TheAlex

TheAlex

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 294 posts

Posted 19 May 2015 - 02:25 PM

It's one person's opinion and doesn't seem worth writing an article about. It's interesting how he says "shorter title tags" though because I don't think I've seen anyone say that apart from EGOL (I think) and me!

 

The deprecated list doesn't make sense. Keywords? Who would focus on longtail phrases? And lean code? Lean code can provide big speed benefits over competitors, more than ever with all the bloat these days. Google wouldn't be running that minimised website test in Indonesia if they didn't care about bloated code.

 

Do you realise you've created a discussion about a discussion about a discussion? Or something like that... :)



#3 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 6320 posts

Posted 19 May 2015 - 02:58 PM

This is a fun question.

 

You know how every year some of the popular SEO websites post their big SEO ranking factors reports?   They get the data presented in these reports by sending a checkbox questionnaire out to a bunch of people who post in SEO forums and then post aggregate results.

 

A lot of time and effort goes into these reports but really, they are pure rubbish.

 

If those same reports included people's names and revealed their individual inputs then I would call them awesome!

 

Why is one of these rubbish and the other awesome! ?

 

Because there are enough drunks singing in that choir to drown out the people who know what they are takin' about.

 

However, if I could read the input from people like iamlost, Donna and MarieHaynes, then I would think those reports are worth reading.  But you take the input from those brilliant minds and average or mingle it with a bunch of other people and it isn't anything you can bet on.


Edited by EGOL, 19 May 2015 - 11:32 PM.


#4 TheAlex

TheAlex

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 294 posts

Posted 19 May 2015 - 03:46 PM

I don't know which sites you're referring to but I've only really taken notice of Searchmetrics and Moz - Moz list the participants (https://moz.com/sear...rs/contributors), and the correlation data adds merit to both of these studies. Do Moz provide a download of the data that shows individual responses? I'm not sure - I know they provide a few quotes from them.

 

Even if these studies only featured the 10 people I consider to be the best SEOs, I still wouldn't treat them as gospel. Or 10 Google algorithm employees. The algorithm is mutating by itself, it's out of control...



#5 JOSourcing

JOSourcing

    Ready To Fly Member

  • Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 20 May 2015 - 03:08 AM

That has got to be the shortest list on SEO ranking that I've ever seen! :o

 

Nevertheless, I finally buckled down and scoured through the manual that Google gives its human quality raters. An eyebrow raising read for sure! But IMO, much more thorough and meaningful than what's being published on those types of SEO and webmaster sites.

 

I figure, if I'm going to appease to humans, I'd better learn what humans (and not algorithms) look for.



#6 cre8pc

cre8pc

    Dream Catcher Forums Founder

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 14673 posts

Posted 20 May 2015 - 10:01 AM

I figure, if I'm going to appease to humans, I'd better learn what humans (and not algorithms) look for.

 

I've been doing this since the light went on for me in 2000.   :infinite-banana:



#7 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 6320 posts

Posted 20 May 2015 - 10:35 AM

If you go look at the "factors" that SEOs talk about in these surveys, you see very little mention of how visitors behave on the site.  Things like pageviews, amount of time spent, scroll depth, bookmarking, bounce rate are almost absent in the things that SEOs say are important.  

 

They must be nuts.

 

Google has every ability to measure these things, especially with the Chrome Browser.  This is data beyond the reach of SEOs that Google can use to determine the rankings of pages.  I am confident that Google uses it.   I upload pages that initially rank ten to twenty pages deep in the SERPs, but they have what I believe are nice images and good text content.  I do nothing to promote them.  The can sit deep in the SERPs for months, slowly they climb and in a year or two they rank at or near the top of the SERPs.  I believe that the rise in the rankings because of how visitors behave.

 

SEOs don't buy into this and it stays off of their radar because very few of them are in the content business or work in the real business of building better websites. 



#8 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 6320 posts

Posted 21 May 2015 - 11:55 AM

Today, Bill Slawski published an article titled

The Long Click and the Quality of Search Success

It describes a Google patent to use the behavior of visitors on a website to help determine rankings.  It is quite relevant to this discussion.



#9 cre8pc

cre8pc

    Dream Catcher Forums Founder

  • Admin - Top Level
  • 14673 posts

Posted 21 May 2015 - 01:16 PM

I left a comment on the MOZ thread there.  Now waiting to be boo'd off-stage.  :morningcoffee:



#10 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3313 posts

Posted 21 May 2015 - 01:22 PM

This is more like it.

Things that come to mind and how (or could) they skew results:

People click results 1 to 3 not realising they are ads. G knows this or the ads would be on the right side.
This almost presumes the site uses GA otherwise how do they know.
Or adsense somehow.
People like me that may open two or more articles into a new tab (in quick succession) then read.
People that otherwise leave a tab or window open.

What she said in MOZ.

 

Maybe it will only skew a bit (few %) and it makes no difference overall.

I'm sure they have other methods of following you.

In another thought this does demonstrate how Google knows everything or too much about you.


Edited by bobbb, 21 May 2015 - 01:47 PM.


#11 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2410 posts

Posted 25 May 2015 - 10:16 AM

This is a fun question.

 

You know how every year some of the popular SEO websites post their big SEO ranking factors reports?   They get the data presented in these reports by sending a checkbox questionnaire out to a bunch of people who post in SEO forums and then post aggregate results.

 

A lot of time and effort goes into these reports but really, they are pure rubbish.

 

If those same reports included people's names and revealed their individual inputs then I would call them awesome!

 

Why is one of these rubbish and the other awesome! ?

 

Because there are enough drunks singing in that choir to drown out the people who know what they are takin' about.

 

However, if I could read the input from people like iamlost, Donna and MarieHaynes, then I would think those reports are worth reading.  But you take the input from those brilliant minds and average or mingle it with a bunch of other people and it isn't anything you can bet on.

I like what EGOL posted.  There is accuracy to his description.  LOL.  I bet he has been one of the respondents over time.  I have.

 

Since its been published I've been one of the respondents on the Local Search Rankings Factors article by David Mihm except for the most recent from last year here  Mihm joined Moz, so now they publish it.   Last year I didn't fill out that interminably long questionnaire in time.  It is just what EGOL described.  I'm sure others on Cre8 over time have been part of the bigger SEO search factors report.  The local one is modeled on the MOZ methodology which EGOL described above.

 

Lets face it, these reports are not the word of God.  Nor is the above referenced article on On Page Factors.   They are all opinions;  in the case referenced by the Opening Thread its one person's opinion;   In the big surveys its the composite of a lot of people's opinions.

 

Now who has the "Word of God" on these topics??   Google.  Hm  Go--d  Go--oogle.  I believe there is a good reason they chose that name with the first two letters.  They think of themselves in that manner.   ;)

 

I value those reports as an insight but I don't think they are the word of God.  They are the aggregate of a lot of people's opinions.   I do like the comments by writers as they can point to better insights.  

 

I happen to know a fair number of the respondents on the local survey.  I know a fair amount of what they are doing.  That actually gives it some bias and should be factored in.  On the local side a lot of the respondents might do virtually little or virtually nothing in terms of trying to get links, and/or get strong links.   

 

Still I like reading the aggregate scores and especially the comments.   

 

The survey questions HAVE NOT put huge emphasis on user activity on a site, as EGOL mentioned.  Well here is the summary of a type of study done in local to try and assess some of that.

 

Suppose you have a couple of hundred SEO's at a conference.  One of them speaks up at the podium and suggests an experiment.   Everyone in the room takes out their mobiles and searches for something like Cleveland Bookstores.   Suppose the business ranked 7th in the local PAC is a store with the name EGOL's Bookstore:  It made the PAC but its the lowest ranked of the 7.  It might also show up in the organic serps at say 15th to 20 for that search phrase.  (lets face it: this EGOL guy has spent more time inside the bookstore and less time focusing on seo or local seo   ;)  )

 

Everyone in the room searches on that phrase and all of them clickon EGOL's BookStore in the PAC.    

 

Within a relatively short time span EGOL's bookstore within the PAC might jump to 1st, 2nd or 3rd.....and its organic ranking will jump significantly from its ranking of 15 to 20 to something on the first page...maybe at the top or close to it.

 

The organic ranking will stick for a relatively short time.  The PAC result will stick far far longer.   At least that was the impact last year.  Of course Google could have filtered against this.  Heck they read about these experiments.   

 

Regardless of the question and the methodology I think a lot of these "answers" by someone or by a group are subject to a lot of questioning and they are really subject to the level of competition for search phrases, at least in my opinion.
 


Edited by earlpearl, 26 May 2015 - 12:58 PM.


#12 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2410 posts

Posted 26 May 2015 - 01:04 PM

Something else, while not related to on-page factors, it is related to general SEO.

 

In the last couple of days one of our smb sites landed a link from a new url.  Each of our local sites has "some" level of conversation and interaction into a community wherein link are given out.  I recall Rand once described "linkers" within these communities as the "linkerati".  

 

In our case we tied some conversation and some content into a variety of different web active communities.  Its enabled the sites and the different businesses to have a voice in some communities.  In each case the "communities" are very different, but we found some way to create a "voice".

 

As a result the different smb sites have been able to gain links from unexpected sources and get a wider variety of links from a wider variety of urls.  We had always found that to be beneficial.  I suppose that still works.  At least I hope so.  Its been a part of our core SEO efforts for about a decade.



#13 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2410 posts

Posted 12 August 2015 - 09:36 AM

This is a fun question.

 

You know how every year some of the popular SEO websites post their big SEO ranking factors reports?   They get the data presented in these reports by sending a checkbox questionnaire out to a bunch of people who post in SEO forums and then post aggregate results.

 

A lot of time and effort goes into these reports but really, they are pure rubbish.

 

If those same reports included people's names and revealed their individual inputs then I would call them awesome!

 

Why is one of these rubbish and the other awesome! ?

 

Because there are enough drunks singing in that choir to drown out the people who know what they are takin' about.

 

However, if I could read the input from people like iamlost, Donna and MarieHaynes, then I would think those reports are worth reading.  But you take the input from those brilliant minds and average or mingle it with a bunch of other people and it isn't anything you can bet on.

 

I wanted to go back to this.  I recalled this conversation and EGOL's comments.  It would not have surprised me if EGOL at some point was asked o participate in one or more of these surveys done by Moz.  As I've stated, I've participated in the similarly structured surveys prepared by David Mihm for the first 7 years.   Its good to get a link from the survey provider.  David now works for Moz, so he publishes this under the Moz banner.   Now if you participate in one of these things you can put a banner on your website referencing your participation.  Clearly if you are marketing SEO services or in the Mihm case Local SEO services its the type of advertisement/testimonial you would like on your site.

 

The above is all pretty clear...and a quid pro quo...isn't it?

 

Anyway, I referenced with regard to the local version I know a lot of the participants and maybe more importantly I tend to know what they are doing.  More critically I know what they are studying, some of the types of clients they work with and how they are pursuing those efforts.  Over the years I've emailed and spoken with a fair number of these people.

 

So when they give opinions its based on what they see, what they work on, the successes and failures that they have experienced.   Its also based on the level of competitiveness their clients face.  Now the aggregate opinions are based on exactly what EGOL described above, a questionnaire with checkboxes and rankings among suggested items that might impact rankings.  The entire results are poured into a calculator and they produce the numerical results;  Exactly as EGOL described.   But after all they are not ultimate truths.  They are opinions based on one's experience and the final results are aggregations of the opinions.  It is NOT GOOGLE.  Of that we are sure.

 

Anyway I still find value in these things.  To me the real value comes from independent opinions.  I'll read the notes.  At times I've followed up with questions to the commentators if they wrote something that is somewhat broad and unclear.  "What did you mean by that?  Can you give me an example?  Where did you see that?  How often?"   etc.

 

I did that yesterday. I followed up with a commentator.  In this case I was wondering about the effects of the very recent ALL BUSINESSES ALL OVER THE WORLD visibility of just 3 Packs.  I call them the Crap Packs.  Here is a recent and ongoing discussion on the topic.  53 comments and growing; 5 days old.

 

This google change "screws" local businesses.  If you are in an urban area, be it Erie, Pa (population 90,000 or so,) or in Tokyo or NYC...there are a lot more than 3 local dentists, doctors, pizza places, hardware stores, moving companies, etc.  Lots and Lots more.  If you aren't in the 3 pack your visibility is driven way down on page and all you can do is advertise on adwords.  

 

In any case the person I contacted has a business that has been serving clients having faced this problem for a year or 6 months earlier.  Google pulled this 3 pack on the restaurant, hotel, and local venue and entertainment industries last year.  Google has up to one year's of aggregate data on click tendencies of users.  Google knows what is going to occur.

 

The person I contacted serves one of the verticals that got hit a year or so earlier and at certain levels that vertical is like the mass of local businesses that aren't brand names or chains.   We had a great conversation.

 

The head of this business had and has some great insights; insights that I didn't have.  That is because this group has been challenged by this change for 6 months to a year for over 500 clients.  Therein are a lot of observations.    Forget the aggregate ranking reports.....these are very interesting very specific observations and one's that are in ways that I perceive appropriate across the board.   So I learned a lot.

 

So I think with these aggregate ranking reports one wants to pick and choose data and sources to find nuggets of value.  That is how I'd use them going forward and how I've used them in the past.



#14 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3313 posts

Posted 12 August 2015 - 11:46 AM

A little bit off topic. I built a site for a shop and in the title I put the telephone number so when the listing shows up there it is. Google strips it. Bing doesn't.



#15 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 6320 posts

Posted 12 August 2015 - 12:15 PM

When something is discovered, usually one person figures it out.  It can take other people weeks, months, years, decades or more to figure it out.  Some people never figure it out.

 

Google could suddenly start ranking webpages with fonts larger than 10 higher than pages with fonts of 10 or smaller.  And, if I am the only person who figures it out and I don't tell anybody then I have a secret weapon. 

 

Even if I tell EVERYBODY EVERYWHERE about it, I still might have a secret weapon because nobody believes me, nobody gots the balls to agree, or just one influential person says... EGOL is full of crap.  :-)

 

What's my point here?  

 

The way that these surveys are published, secret weapons could be revealed but nobody will know it until everybody knows it because the only thing that gets attention is what a large number of people believe.   For that reason, these surveys are really the route to mediocre performance  because they don't reveal anything that everybody everywhere already knows and is using.   And, by the time that it surfaces it isn't a real advantage anymore and might even be on the way out of the algo. 

 

Now, if they published each person's answers and allowed me to divine the people who are worth listening to (and I am confident that I know who some of them are), then I would be able to get useful information out of these "ranking factors" surveys.

 

So, this morning, I looked at the ranking factors post and scanned it down rapidly and, yep, it was same old, same old, not worth reading because the only thing revealed was yada yada yada stuff that everybody knows, or maybe even stuff that everybody thinks that they knows but none of them has the balls enough to say anything different.

 

I am still betting on myself.  I read these surveys and grin.


Edited by EGOL, 12 August 2015 - 12:18 PM.


#16 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2410 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 09:31 AM

A little bit off topic. I built a site for a shop and in the title I put the telephone number so when the listing shows up there it is. Google strips it. Bing doesn't.

 

So I guess you created a title something like this:   "Bobbbs bud's Toronto Laundromat 345 202 1766"   Is it something like that?   

 

Hmmm.   I followed all the changing rules on google local for a loooooooooooooooong time.  I don't follow them that closely anymore.  So the issue could be general seo or local seo.  I don't have my fingertip on the problem without a little research...and you could do it also.  On the local side they have had these everchanging sets of rules on what is considered spammy and what isn't.  here are their "guidelines:  https://support.goog...340883875197654

 

Now on the title side....I'd look into it more.  And when you find that answer get back to us and educate us!!!!   ;)



#17 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2410 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 09:46 AM

When something is discovered, usually one person figures it out.  It can take other people weeks, months, years, decades or more to figure it out.  Some people never figure it out.

 

Google could suddenly start ranking webpages with fonts larger than 10 higher than pages with fonts of 10 or smaller.  And, if I am the only person who figures it out and I don't tell anybody then I have a secret weapon. 

 

Even if I tell EVERYBODY EVERYWHERE about it, I still might have a secret weapon because nobody believes me, nobody gots the balls to agree, or just one influential person says... EGOL is full of crap.  :-)

 

What's my point here?  

 

The way that these surveys are published, secret weapons could be revealed but nobody will know it until everybody knows it because the only thing that gets attention is what a large number of people believe.   For that reason, these surveys are really the route to mediocre performance  because they don't reveal anything that everybody everywhere already knows and is using.   And, by the time that it surfaces it isn't a real advantage anymore and might even be on the way out of the algo. 

 

Now, if they published each person's answers and allowed me to divine the people who are worth listening to (and I am confident that I know who some of them are), then I would be able to get useful information out of these "ranking factors" surveys.

 

So, this morning, I looked at the ranking factors post and scanned it down rapidly and, yep, it was same old, same old, not worth reading because the only thing revealed was yada yada yada stuff that everybody knows, or maybe even stuff that everybody thinks that they knows but none of them has the balls enough to say anything different.

 

I am still betting on myself.  I read these surveys and grin.

 

 

I was going through the latest moz analysis.  I got tired.  Quit.   I basically agree with you EGOL;   the overall presentation isn't insightful.  its the individual insights wherein there could be gems.  

 

One does have to dig for that.  I feel pretty confident doing that in the local (now Moz) ranking article.  But it could be because I know a lot of the responders and I've been one.  So that is how I dig.  

 

Ya know I used to call on big shot business people (in the DC area) (when I was a commercial real estate dude) and try and get their attention.  Most of the time it didn't work.  It tended to work more when I could give them some frame of reference, wherein I could present myself (and/or team) with some reference that we too were big shots!!!!  (At the start, I was a young un and an unknown) 

 

Anyways I tended to get more meetings, more insights, better relationships when I presented myself with some authority.  

 

So if you take the time to read the insights on something one of the commentators stated...contact him/her and ask them about it.  Tell em about yourself and how you too are a big shot!!!!!   If they think you are a big shot they'll get back to you.

 

Now when I was reading the first few sentences of what you stated, it took me back about 10 years or more and I was in forums learning stuff, and it seemed to me you were already an expert.  The one thing I picked up from you back then was to go anonymous.  Basically to do so, so that if you learned things in educational helpful places in forums and other places that your competitors didn't know....you could beat them in the serps.

 

And it worked.   So I agree with those statements.    But I also know my limitations.  Others are picking up things I'm not.   So in those cases I try and pick their brains.



#18 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3313 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 10:13 AM

So I guess you created a title something like this:   "Bobbbs bud's Toronto Laundromat 345 202 1766"   Is it something like that?   

 

Now on the title side....I'd look into it more.  And when you find that answer get back to us and educate us!!!!   ;)

That was about it. I figure if someone is searching for the shop they want the number so I made the title for what is best for the user. (their guidelines)

 

Their guidelines link say a phone number is a no-no but a number with words like JUNK is OK. I will not pursue it further. But they have no problem taking it and publishing it as "their data". It was on the right side in a map. Their is no local stuff like you do it so where does that info come from? ME. It's petty. It was also in the title of the contact page. Stripped. Now isn't that where you want it?

 

Editing really screws up the quote thing


Edited by bobbb, 13 August 2015 - 10:16 AM.


#19 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3211 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 10:49 AM

Page speed optimization. Duplication removal and a few really good links.

 

That is all it takes.

 

All the rest is complete and utter bullsh** or people trying to get a piece of your busines and do the usual smoke and mirrors cr**



#20 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2410 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 11:23 AM

That was about it. I figure if someone is searching for the shop they want the number so I made the title for what is best for the user. (their guidelines)

 

Their guidelines link say a phone number is a no-no but a number with words like JUNK is OK. I will not pursue it further. But they have no problem taking it and publishing it as "their data". It was on the right side in a map. Their is no local stuff like you do it so where does that info come from? ME. It's petty. It was also in the title of the contact page. Stripped. Now isn't that where you want it?

 

Editing really screws up the quote thing

 

 

Yeah, you are right.  They take your info.  (Then they create a knowledge Panel)  That big old box on the side.  Then they regurgitate all that basic info in the box.  Its the info you gave them

 

Then visitors are less likely to visit the site.

 

They just stole your site traffic!!!!!!   or at least a reasonable percentage of it.    that is if somebody searches for the business by name.

 

If in the case that they searched on "laundromats Toronto" (my suggested topic) you either show or don't show in the pack of just 3 businesses that they now highlight.  If you show they don't give address info.  Ooooohhhh that is great.  They took your information and hid it.  

 

If you don't show in the top group of 3 maybe people will click through to get and find more laundromats.   maybe they won't.  Anyways you look at it your site is getting less traffic.

 

BUT...if you gave them all the info...they can contact you and suggest....ADWORDS.     Aren't they nice????    ;)



#21 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3313 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 12:21 PM

Your examples, and in your SMB line, are appropriate.

 

For my purpose my job was done. The number and address is there and so is the map but I was searching on a direct match of the business name. I will try variations and see now that you piqued my interest. And there will never be adwords. 

 

It's an ATV vendor in a small town and their info would show up anyway (on the Honda site) if you typed Honda SmallTown.

 

The rationale was "where can I buy/find a BrandNameItem in SmallTown" or some variation. It has to show and/or the BrandName manufacturer site will show. Same thing.

 

And G even shows hours open today. Guess where that is from? Yep, the contact page and in French. Quoi?


Edited by bobbb, 13 August 2015 - 12:23 PM.


#22 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3313 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 07:02 PM

I did some variations, without the proper shop name, and the only page where they strip it is the main page. There was no map or right panel this time. They left it in on the contact and about pages. Can't figure the logic. So just to be sure, I checked the source code. It is there on the main page.

Well to be a bit tricky, I added it  in the meta description of the main page which they show as is.



#23 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2410 posts

Posted 30 August 2015 - 07:15 PM

This is a fun question.

 

You know how every year some of the popular SEO websites post their big SEO ranking factors reports?   They get the data presented in these reports by sending a checkbox questionnaire out to a bunch of people who post in SEO forums and then post aggregate results.

 

A lot of time and effort goes into these reports but really, they are pure rubbish.

 

If those same reports included people's names and revealed their individual inputs then I would call them awesome!

 

Why is one of these rubbish and the other awesome! ?

 

Because there are enough drunks singing in that choir to drown out the people who know what they are takin' about.

 

However, if I could read the input from people like iamlost, Donna and MarieHaynes, then I would think those reports are worth reading.  But you take the input from those brilliant minds and average or mingle it with a bunch of other people and it isn't anything you can bet on.

I just finished filling out the local version of this.  I've been a part of it every year since it started, save one when I forgot to respond.   It is exactly like what EGOL described above.  All those checkboxes.  EGOL HAD to have received one or more of them in the past.  ;)

 

I'm following up with comments.  I'll put my name to them.   Heck in the past I've emailed and phoned people on their comments.  Admittedly I've only done it on the local thingy....so some of those folks know me a bit.  But I'd continue to do that.  I still believe that is where the excellent insights come from.



#24 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 6320 posts

Posted 30 August 2015 - 08:05 PM

Ten years ago I told everyone everywhere where to place their bets and how to interpret difficult SERPs.  I even told them how I figured out what google was doing.  People thought I was crazy.  Now, a decade later, google patents the stuff that I was talking about.

 

Using aggregated results will tell you exactly how to get mediocre performance.  How are you going to get superior results when you do what everybody else is doing?   You win by being different and betting on yourself instead of following the crowd.   You gotta use your brain instead of behaving like an ape.  

 

All of the people who got penguined were following the aggragated results. 

 

Earl, if I was working in the local results, I would be asking you all of my questions.  I wouldn't be reading aggregated results. 


Edited by EGOL, 30 August 2015 - 08:06 PM.


#25 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3211 posts

Posted 31 August 2015 - 02:40 AM

These aggregated results make me laugh.



#26 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 6320 posts

Posted 31 August 2015 - 04:46 AM

This stuff is a decoy away from what is really important.

 

https://moz.com/blog...google-rankings



#27 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Site Administrators
  • 5380 posts

Posted 31 August 2015 - 07:33 AM

Umm, just what is upsetting with competitors deliberately determined to be merely average?

Oh, right; it means more kool-aid addicted snake oil slathered lemmings on the webdev fora.



#28 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2410 posts

Posted 31 August 2015 - 09:34 AM

Ten years ago I told everyone everywhere where to place their bets and how to interpret difficult SERPs.  I even told them how I figured out what google was doing.  People thought I was crazy.  Now, a decade later, google patents the stuff that I was talking about.

 

Using aggregated results will tell you exactly how to get mediocre performance.  How are you going to get superior results when you do what everybody else is doing?   You win by being different and betting on yourself instead of following the crowd.   You gotta use your brain instead of behaving like an ape.  

 

All of the people who got penguined were following the aggragated results. 

 

Earl, if I was working in the local results, I would be asking you all of my questions.  I wouldn't be reading aggregated results. 

 

Hey EGOL.  I read your two pieces, from 2005 and 2006.  My how time flies.   I recall following your sage comments before there was a Moz.com.  One little point I learned was anonymity...and so cripes it has to have been 11 years or longer.   BTW:  I still practice that for a bunch of smb's (but not all).  It makes sense.

 

Now as to the comments.  So yesterday when you published this response, I did some work w/ one of our smb's, I took a sale though we were nominally closed.  The smb did a big presentation of sorts, I met with one of that smb's partners....and at the end of the day I was rushing through filling out the danged questionnaire for the local ranking thingy, that is based on the moz ranking thingy for all sites.

 

YEAH.  Its a big old questionnaire with a lot of checkboxes and rankings per your perspective on what is most important or least important or most important for highly competitive sites...yada yada yada.   

 

Hey it has holes.  Just as you have pointed out.    Are my rankings the "word of God" or even more powerfully the word of Google???    Heck NO!!!!   I know that.

 

So I'll SCAN the aggregate rankings.  I don't consider them the word of Google either.   One reason is that I know there is AMAZING diversity in competitive environments for ranking locally.  I've been following about 8 different types of local search phrases for a bunch of years.  That is my "window".   Over that time google has definitely changed things.    

 

Over those many years I have discovered a couple of things that have worked miraculously well.  I put out for public knowledge some of them, and others I hid from the rest of the "world".  BTW:  Of the things I discovered a while back....NONE of them work now...or at least they don't work like they once did.  

 

That danged google found them and eliminated them.  B*stards.  When I don't know stuff I contact others who are working on this.  Sometimes I've known them for a while.  Sometimes I have to introduce myself.  They may give me insights.  They might not.  heck.  They might outright lie to me over the phone.  

 

Anyways, if I were you and you wanted insights....don't just depend on me.  Thanks for mentioning me above....but I don't have all the answers.  So I do look for help.



#29 TheAlex

TheAlex

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 294 posts

Posted 31 August 2015 - 09:37 AM

Ten years ago I told everyone everywhere where to place their bets and how to interpret difficult SERPs.  I even told them how I figured out what google was doing.  People thought I was crazy.  Now, a decade later, google patents the stuff that I was talking about.

 

Using aggregated results will tell you exactly how to get mediocre performance.  How are you going to get superior results when you do what everybody else is doing?   You win by being different and betting on yourself instead of following the crowd.   You gotta use your brain instead of behaving like an ape.  

 

All of the people who got penguined were following the aggragated results. 

 

Earl, if I was working in the local results, I would be asking you all of my questions.  I wouldn't be reading aggregated results. 

 

You mean you've been sounding like a broken record for over 10 years?! ;) That's great though. I don't think I'd even heard of SEO, but I always wanted to make useful websites, which helped when I did begin to learn about SEO. I always ignored everything that seemed like manipulation and I'm glad I did.



#30 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3313 posts

Posted 19 September 2015 - 09:30 AM

Well to be a bit tricky, I added it  in the meta description of the main page which they show as is

 

Just as a follow-up: In the example above the number has not been stripped out (sept 19, 2015)

On another, Google actually shows, the wrong number. Yes.

Searched for a printer in a small town by actual name and of course it is on top but on the right hand side, where I presumed they would put their "knowledge box", they show another printer in the same small town. OK fine. But the number and location map pin of the "knowledge box" is stuffed in the SERPS of the printer I searched for. So the "trick" I did above with the meta description sticks in the SERPS snippets. They do not strip those but the SERP listing now shows 2 different numbers. Confusing.





RSS Feed


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users