| LED Digest 2541: Finding Information Gaps |
|
|
|
==================================================
The LED Digest Moderated Discussion List "Effective Online Advertising, Since 1997" Data > Information > Knowledge > Wisdom www.GetWebContent.com/LED : the LED's Key Sponsor The Web's Most Experienced SEO Content Providers. www.SEOToolSet.com/training/ : the LED's Premier Sponsor Bruce Clay's Search Engine Optimization Training & Certification ================================================== List Moderator: Published by: Adam Audette LED Digest adam, led-digest.com http://www.led-digest.com .............................................. November 26, 2007 Issue no. 2541 .............................................. .....IN THIS DIGEST..... ====== NEW ===================== <Moderator Comment> ~ New Topics ==== CONTINUING ================= --== Keyword Research Tools ==-- ~ Nathan Holley "In my opinion [pay-for keyword tools] give no strong advantage beyond the freebies." --== Reciprocal Linking ==-- ~ Donald Nelson "I believe that the era of reciprocal liinking is over." ~ Dirk Johnson "I have tried very hard to avoid off-topic reciprocation." ========== NEW =================================== <Moderator Comment> Greetings LEDer, I hope you had a great weekend. I spent most of it in a turkey-induced stupor, away from my computer, and playing with my little girl Lilly. What a blast. But how exhausting! I don't know how full-time mom's do it... it takes a lot of energy to keep up with a 2 year old. Work almost feels like a break now. On with the show... and some new topics because things are definitely slow. It's that time of year. I upgraded our mailing software, so if anything looks funny or out of whack, please let me know. I'm also considering overhauling the template to make it easier to read (it'll remain plain text of course). If you have any tips or wishes there, please don't hesitate to let me know. It's not easy improving text emails, but I think we can do more to differentiate sections and make it easier to read. Have a great week! Best wishes, Adam PS - I'll be at Pubcon next week in Las Vegas. If you're going, please drop me a line. I want to hook up with you! ------------------- 1) FULFILLING NEEDS, NOT JUST CREATING CONTENT This is such a great post by Barry Mills: http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1898/172/ It was in response to a thread we had in September about creating content for websites (and the challenges therein). We all have heard the saying, "content is king." Of course we have, it's become trite and overused, its lost meaning. But we also know the truth in that statement. Most websites can benefit greatly by adding unique, quality, relevant content to their sites. We know that much... but the problem is we don't put it into a wider perspective often enough. Barry does that very well when he says, ---------------- "Stop thinking about adding content, and start thinking about identifying and fulfilling customer needs, seeking out gaps in the market and capitalising on them. Because really, it's the same thing. Web marketers want to add content, because it boosts link traffic, search rankings and stickability. But not all content does this -- only content which fulfils a need. Adding well written material to a web site will never do any harm as such, and because we all know that it's easy to be lax about targeting it properly. "Next time you want to pitch content development, instead of asking the entrepreneur to develop more content, talk to him about gaps between supply and demand for information, ask him what information & resources his customers & prospects want or need (to make them buy, or just to make them happy), and if he doesn't know, ask him to ask them, or let you ask them on his behalf. Then investigate how readily available it is, consider whether that which is not readily available fits with the brand of your client, and look at how the need could be fulfilled. You may sometimes identify content which is so valuable if can be a revenue stream in its own right. More often, you will identify stuff which realistically needs to be given away, but instead of explaining this in SEO terms talk about loss leading, brandbuilding, attracting customers to frequent your establishment, and cross-selling. These are concepts entrepreneurs understand, and they are the real reasons why adding compelling content is good business." ---------------- That's wicked good stuff! I don't have a thing to add... I just wanted to share that post with you again, because it's really valuable advice. By the way, Barry leads the team at http://www.netstep.co.uk. 2) HIRING PPC HELP Paid search campaigns are big business, no doubt about it. There isn't a week that goes by that I don't get a bunch of emails asking for a consultant to help out with a site's campaign. Mostly these are from businesses that are subscribed to the LED and need a trusted lead. I'll either offer my company's services or refer them to a small selection of consultants I know can deliver results. If you're looking for PPC help, definitely read this article: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/hiring-search-marketers-five-interview-que... It's more geared for agencies and established consultants needing additional account management help, but it's equally useful for small businesses who may not know the right questions to ask. Being armed with solid questions like these will definitely help you filter out the shaky candidates. Any other tips out there? ======== CONTINUING =============================== From: Nathan Holley Subject: Keyword Research Tools > There have been several mentions of [keyword research tools] > I managed to conjure WordTracker.com & KeywordDiscovery.com. > Are there any others? Any best buys? - Nancy Cardinali, LED Digest 2540 - http://www.led-digest.com/content/view/1955/190/ Good topic. In addition to Adam's reply last issue, take a peek at the discussion on SEM 2.0 about this: http://groups.google.com/group/SEM2/browse_thread/thread/1289f63... The talk is pretty advanced, but some good points are made. Especially about site search lists (Adam) and the subtle feature Google provides on the site-specific tab (Goodman). Nice stuff there. The takeaway is that there's no one tool. It's really a combination of clickstream data with the tools provided by Google and Yahoo (MSN as well, although their tools get mixed reviews). Paying for KD or WT is really just a question of personal preference. In my opinion they give no strong advantage beyond the freebies. Best of luck, Nathan Holley ========= Begin Sponsor Message ========= When The Going Gets Busy, The Busy Get Gone! Ever since we launched www.GetWebContent.com/LED we've been advertising here with great results! So great, we can't accept new clients for awhile. Fact is, we simply underestimated the demand for professionally written custom copy. See you again as soon as we get caught up. Thanks to those of you who are now repeat clients! www.GetWebContent.com/LED ========== End Sponsor Message ========== -------- new post - new topic --------- From: Donald Nelson Subject: Recip linking Dear All, It is good that reciprocal linking has come under scrutiny on the LED. I believe that the era of reciprocal liinking is over. In 1996 it was a lot of fun to go to a site's link page and find some new and exciting places to visit. In 2007 this is not how we find things on the web. The novelty of just clicking on any old link is over, and most Internet users go to the search engines (notably Google) to find exactly what they need. In addition, the overuse of this technique, fuelled by the desire to build pagerank, has made it a nuisance for webmasters who are deluged with scores of link requests each day. I used to offer reciprocal linking as a service to websites (in conjunction with other optimization and web promotion services) but no longer do so as I just do not think that it will help my clients, and I do not want to add to the flood of unwanted link requests that web owners have to deal with. Also, as Steve Pronger said, many of the link requests offer a link placed on a page that human eyes will never see and that search engines will never index, so what is the point of it? Best Wishes, Donald Nelson www.a1-optimization.com -------- new post - same topic -------- From: Dirk Johnson Subject: Recip linking > I'm sure Dirk knows the ins and outs of > reciprocal linking better than I do. - Nate Holley, LED Digest 2540 Nate, I appreciate that tidbit. I suppose that I do, since I have managed hundreds of directory-to-directory reciprocation campaigns over the course of 10 years. With the exception of Joel Lesser, who is a principal at LinksManager and a regular contributor to LED Digest, I doubt that there are many other people on the planet with my experience at this. Not bragging, just a fact. And clients continue to being new domains to us to work with. Please let me address your points, since facts and fiction tend to get muddled here. The real estate reciprocation situation that everyone cites were very specifically pointed toward "link circles", where everyone links to just about *everyone else* in the circle. I have avoided these kinds of things for years. Google has attacked them for a long time now, not just recently. It is outright gaming. Matt Cutts uses the word "excessive" quite consistently when he describes reciprocal linking. I wholeheartedly agree. Real estate agents have no business linking to and from Viagra sites, or gambling sites, or ringtones, or even automotive sites. They certainly have a good reason to link to other home and real estate-related sites. I have tried very hard to avoid off-topic reciprocation. Not because of Google, but because it is just not right. Other site owners who openly offer reciprocal partnerships do not want link requests from off-topic sites, and they don't want to put off topic sites in their own directories, even if that site links to them. It is spam, and more importantly, a waste of time, plain and simple. Always has been. I do take guidance from Matt Cutts. I also take guidance from Adam Lasnik, (another Google executive) who came out emphatically that reciprocation itself is not the issue: http://www.webmasterworld.com/link_development/3190790-2-30.htm. Please, read what he says there, very carefully. Nate, you said, > But there has to be a thought in his mind > that it's becoming much less useful. Actually, no. My real world evidence here suggests exactly the opposite. It still works just as it did years ago on new domains and old domains. Again, take another read of the Lasnik comments. That single post explains everything. Am I concerned that it will change? Of course. Everyone involved in the SEO business should be concerned about everything that they do. But at some point you have to act, and you should do it with respect to what works consistently, and not imagine what might fall out of the sky. Sites that use reciprocation properly tend to rank very very well, and have done so for years. This is not just a few sites. It is sites in nearly every realm of interest. Tens of thousands of them. We have the data at our fingertips that proves it. How that is overlooked by the anti-reciprocation crowd is just further proof that there is no requirement to be factual in SEO circles. Nate, I appreciate your efforts to raise the bar on reciprocation, by using articles as the basis for reciprocation. I am sure it works, but most site owners on both sides of the exchange do not have the time to do that. Instead, categorized directories evolved as the place to put links to other sites. They serve several distinct purposes. One, as a means to provide site visitors with useful directories of other relevant sites. Two, to allow the site owner an efficient means to graciously participate in their community or realm of interest, via reciprocation. And three, search engine visibility. The first two pre-date every search engine. The third has taken on a life of it's own since 1998 and the emergence of Google. I did not create this situation. I was doing this before Googel existed. I am just trying to live with it using legitimate, established pre-Google methods. I admit to doing it with some determination. It's a competitive world, and reciprocation still represents a significant and ongoing branding opportunity to those who are willing to do this the right way. But then again, as someone who does a lot of this, I get to see the outcome of that branding effort, and it reaches far beyond the search engine effect. In some cases, the direct traffic that is generated by directory-to-directory reciprocation is astounding. Contrary to another huge SEO myth, real people do still use links pages. I make no apologies. I am grateful that what we do here has worked quite well for large numbers of our clients. We do respect that condition, an we try not to gloat over it. I did not ask for this debate. It came to me. I was here first, just trying to make a living, doing what works for me and my clients. At some point, you begin to fight back against the endless bullsh*t. Sometimes, I've been as equally bombastic, but I am learning to moderate that. Again, as someone in the trenches, a lot of what is said about this subject fails miserably to hold up to even the most cursory of review and analysis. I am just trying to bring that fact to the table, against an industry that, from my desk, appears to be very confused. Best regards, Dirk Johnson DomainDrivers LLC www.domaindrivers.com (c) Copyright 1995-2007 Orange Wheel, LLC. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------------------------------------------------- "Every Night and every Morn Some to Misery are born. Every Morn and every Night Some are born to Sweet Delight, Some are born to Endless Night." - William Blake |
