Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Should Sansy Hire 1p.com, SEO Company
Posted 03 February 2005 - 09:18 AM
I asked the question of what proof or documentation or policy text is the basis for allegations that a client site would be banned by use of a promotional site to direct traffic? Based upon what they currently do, I do not see any risk.
Rather than throw insults, affronts and red herrings at the situation, if someone can explain why a client site would be banned under the current method of the new company. Enough with the sour grapes and smear attacks. That does not help me.
Posted 03 February 2005 - 09:21 AM
Traffic Power Victim of Forum Scams
Local Company victimized by Negative Forum, Blog and Post Scams
Edit - removed copyrighted material, delinked URL. Please read the [url=http://www.highrankings.com/forum/index.php?act=boardrules]Forum Rules[/url].
Posted 03 February 2005 - 09:30 AM
3400 S. Jones Blvd. #5
Las Vegas, NV 89146
Original Business Start Date: June 2003
Type of Entity: Corporation
Membership Status: No
Type-of-Business Classification: Internet Marketing
Based on a Bureau investigation of this company, we have been unable to ascertain that the firm has a valid business license. IF A CONSUMER DOES BUSINESS WITH AN UNLICENSED FIRM, THEY DO SO AT THEIR OWN RISK. The Bureau has processed one customer complaint on this company within the last three years or since its inception of business, whichever is less. The company has responded to the complaint.
Posted 03 February 2005 - 09:39 AM
It's not a matter of sour grapes to us. You asked our opinions, and we gave them to you.
Posted 03 February 2005 - 09:40 AM
Posted 03 February 2005 - 09:50 AM
You told me about TP, but that is old hat and totally useless to the current issues. I understand if people here had problems and gripes over the old TP and cannot get over their personal rage and dislike, but that is not useful to people like me currently considering offers.
The above business article and BBB reports do not seem to support all of the smearing done here, and seem in fact to document that forums like this are using unscrupulous tactics to dissuade potential customers like me.
I have been giving the company a hard time and told them I would go into these forums which I found by a search to see if the company was good or not, and I told them they were not a good company. They then gave me some background and I found more info on the net like the article above and this stuff with Mr. Lewis, and find indeed this is a cut throat business.
Again, don't keep telling me that TP and its methods will get me banned. I am not considering dealing with TP and the current company does not use the methods you deplore here.
If someone can just analyze this without emotion and slogans, it would help.
Again, only 1 BBB complaint in over 2 years.
Posted 03 February 2005 - 10:22 AM
Does, doesn't it.
Sansy, you're defiinitely beating a dead horse here. You're not going to change anyone's mind. No one's being irrational and emotional. We have our opinions. You have yours. No one's going to change ours, and it would appear, we're not going to change yours. I think we should simply argee to disagree.
You came here asking for advice. We gave you our opinion. Free advice is worth exactly what you paid for it - So just decide whether you want to take that advice or ignore it. It won't hurt our feelings any either way.
Posted 03 February 2005 - 10:25 AM
I stopped my credit card with 1p when I read this forum because I was afraid and needed more time for explanations.
I found conflicting info, but the last comment just affirms the bias of the forum. So now you want to attack me? Rather than respond with intelligent comments?
That speaks alot about your motives.
Mine are honest. I just want to pay money for something that works. I could care less about someone banned 2 years ago by a company that used other methods not currently in use.
So this board has beat a dead horse for 26 pages, and rather than be open to new ideas and people with valid questions, you would continue to beat that dead horse.
I question who you work for, another SEO company?
Posted 03 February 2005 - 10:28 AM
If you can read the Better Business Bureau complaints, the multiple stories of both businesses that have been taken by TP methods, and the SEO's in this forum that have helped clean up those messes, and still classify it as a "bias" . . . well, best of luck to you.
Well I published the BBB report on 1p, and I do not see but 1 complaint. You must be confused.
Posted 03 February 2005 - 10:28 AM
I know a couple of people, one of which used to be in management at TP and another who is related to a high power there. Everything you read in this forum and others is true. That comes from the horses mouth. I cannot disclose specific details out of privacy of those I know but if you want to do business with them after all you heard here, go ahead.
I would also like to share with you my recipe for cooking a Carp. For those of you who may not know what a Carp is, it is a fish that is a bottom feeder.
Delicious Carp Recipe:
Take 1 Carp that is at least 1-2 pounds. Clean the fish and then carefully place it on a cutting board. Slow cook this over an open fire for a minimum of 2-3 hours. Make sure you turn the fish at least once during the cooking process.
Once 2-3 hours have passed, remove the Carp from the cutting board and carefully place it in a trash receptacle. Then go ahead and eat the board.
Morale of the story: You can cook a Carp a hundred different ways but in the end, it will still be a Carp!
Posted 03 February 2005 - 10:30 AM
I was challenged by 1p person to try to get an honest reponse from these so-called SEO forums, so I am tryng to do just that.
It is odd that every single other person here is so enraged and irrational to the point of being hillarious. You are only giving credibility to their claims and the newspaper account I posted earlier that this is a smear campaign by competitors in a cut throat business.
So far, the amount of bias is tremendous. I have yet to have someone actually give me the facts as to how a simple promotional site and a mouseover technique would get my site banned.
Posted 03 February 2005 - 10:37 AM
Because the SEs say that's a no-no technique. They don't like body onmouseovers. Now we can debate all day as to whether that's right or wrong, but plain and simply, YOU (nor I) get to make that decision. The people at the Search Engines do. Those are their rules. You either play by them, or you don't. Your choice.
What you can't do is change them.
Posted 03 February 2005 - 10:46 AM
You obviously work for TP and your attempts to turn this into an emotional debate and get us all upset just aren't working. All you are getting is reasonable responses telling you to do what you want with your money.
I'm tempted to close this thread because it's getting silly in here, but I'm not going to do that because some people may have real questions about traffic power and their techniques.
Instead, I'm putting you on preview. You can still post but a moderator will have to approve your posts. If you have something to share with us other than your pro-TP propaganda and allegations about smear campaigns, I'll take you back off preview.
But until you can show that you really want to be a member of this community, your agenda here seems pretty clear.
Thanks for stopping by, go spread the word at some other fora now.
Posted 03 February 2005 - 10:52 AM
I am certainly not a 1p company employee, that is so ridiculous.
Googleguy which I found in another search confirms mouse overs are acceptable and would not cause a ban, so that comment is not factual that was made.
A closed forum is not very helpful to anyone and your not allowing me or someone like me to post is very offensive.
Here is the googleman link for anyone that finds this forum and wants more than just the 1p smears done here for 28 pages:
If this forum is fair and seeks truth, then the above comment on somebody else's board totally contradicts the earlier post that mouseover is against google rules.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users