Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Posted 04 November 2003 - 11:34 PM
We charge per website. We have a fixed charge but compromise on the size of the website.
There are few companies in my area offering SEO as a value added service. We are professioanly into this. SEO is the main service and rest are additional services eventhough they are important.
SEO is a catalyst for getting more work. I am telling from my experience.
Posted 05 November 2003 - 09:29 AM
I repeat myself, but SEO is about a great deal more than simply keywords.
You got that right, Compar!
Mainly because in my opinion nowadays no one is interested in "Web Presence"
I find this also to be true among small to medium size business owners. Its amazing how narrowed focused they are.
My business is fairly new also. I have yet to decide on how to fix my pricing, so for now I just quote whatever I pull out of the air. Based on the average hour fee posted on this forum, it is very conservative which means I am short selling myself! :slap:
Posted 05 November 2003 - 10:13 AM
The reason I ask is that one can go to nearly any website that has a decent ranking and find *something* they rank in the top 10, or even top 1 for. Even if it's a horribly dumb phrase somewhere.
If you optimise for "Tim Hortons chocolate donuts" and have as a matter of course also optimised for "Tim Hortons" "Hortons chocolate" "chocolate donuts" "Tim donuts" "Hortons donuts" and so forth. (I have NO idea why I have donuts on the brain this month...)
It seems a little sleezy to charge for keyword phrases that you accidently optimised for. But often doing keyword research usually comes in after they pay, so sometimes you will only have a basic idea of what keywords you will be optimising for until after you start, and therefore can't really quote by keyword or anything related to a specific keyword.
And of course if someone would look for a keyword that is part of a phrase, then you are doing a legitimate service for your client and have accomplished it through sweat of brow, even if you wern't thinking about it until later.
You may also discover a much better phrase once you get started, and begin competition checks and backlink strategies.
I'm wondering how others handle this issue.
Do you make a specific list ahead of time, just say "5 keywords" or something else?
Posted 05 November 2003 - 05:43 PM
I find that charging per keyword is open to too much misunderstanding. I'll certainly take into account the number of keywords I'm going to have to research for each site, but I still charge a flat fee based roughly on the number of hours I reckon I'll spend on the project, plus a bit more for 'the buggeration factor'!
On another matter you mentioned in your post...
If you optimise for "Tim Hortons chocolate donuts" and have as a matter of course also optimised for "Tim Hortons" "Hortons chocolate" "chocolate donuts" "Tim donuts" "Hortons donuts" and so forth.
Are you sure about that? I agree with "Tim Hortons", "Hortons chocolate" and "chocolate donuts" as exact match searches. But, IMO, 'Tim donuts' and 'Hortons donuts' are not exact matches because they have other words separating them.
So, if the searcher keyed in the two words: Hortons donuts (no quotation marks) as their search query, then this keyword phrase would be returned with the two words separately highlighted; but if they keyed in the exact match phrase: "Hortons donuts" (with quotation marks), then this keyword phrase would not be returned.
So this is just an awfully long-winded way of saying that, IMO, the keyword phrase 'Tim Hortons chocolate donuts' does NOT fully optimise you for 'Tim donuts' and 'Hortons donuts'.
Posted 05 November 2003 - 07:10 PM
As an example, do a search on "Tim donut Hortons" and look at the results, particularly which words Google has highlighted.
"Tim Horton" would always be more relevant than Tim...blah...blah Horton" (all other things being equal) but optimising for one will often get you the other - especially if they are in the same paragraph or sentence, in G anyway.
A more productive example, would be any site you have recently got good rankings in. Try mixing and matching the keywords, or putting other words in between. You will usually see a drop in rankings, but often not too far (unless it's really competitive).
This is a good thing. An exact match is wieghted more highly, but if the client types in something strange or reversed, you would often still show up, which is good for the searcher and the site.
Umm, just so no one gets confused, I have no relationship with Tim Hortons donuts (or coffee) other than that of being the sugar and caffine addicted person that I am....
Posted 05 November 2003 - 07:17 PM
In my case, I usually define optimisation as making changes that cause the site to rank highly for stuff typed into the search engine, as opposed to a more mathematically precise measure, simply because my logs show that it's pretty darn impossible to "fully optimise" for all possible searches without creating a gazillion "landing pages", which I hate. And I very rarely see searches with quotes on them unless it's for company names or other proper nouns.
Agreed that what works for me doesn't always work for others. And just because I don't run into quote searches very often doesn't mean others don't.
My apologies for the confusion...
Posted 06 November 2003 - 06:32 AM
My experience, this is exactly why I would never charge per keyword. For instance, my own directory which is still under construction, my keyword for the homepage is "internet directory" however, I am actually found for lots of words ranking in the top ten that have nothing to do with "internet directory".
I personally think that charging for keywords is improper for this exact reason. One client that sells disposable cameras, is now found for many terms that I did not even optimise for just as default of the work performed.
This is only my opinion though. This is exactly why I charge per page, per several pages, etc.
Posted 06 November 2003 - 09:14 AM
I currently charge on a per site basis, and adjust the amount mentally based on how much work (ie keywords, pages, etc) it would take.
But I've been considering getting a little more scientific about pricing and have been wondering about good strategies for that.
I think I'll stick with per site for now. Maybe if we were talking about an AdWords campaign it would be a different story, since it's more keyword-centric.
Posted 06 November 2003 - 03:46 PM
Definately agree with that. Adwords or PPC is obvious for it. I actually try and keep people clear of PPC campaigns nowadays unless they have the funds to burn just in case they do not recover their investment. Always tax deductable though.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users