Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!


Sponsored Content

 

 
 

Photo
- - - - -

Good Content Vs Good Seo


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 Tholzel

Tholzel

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Location:Boston, MA

Posted 15 June 2005 - 10:57 AM

I am astonished at how much effort is spent--the entire SEO industry it seems--on trying to fool Google spiders. What would happen if the same effort went in to writing really excellent website copy--copy designed to be read by humans, and fascinate them, persuade them, speak to them?

#2 SearchRank

SearchRank

    HR 7

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,333 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted 15 June 2005 - 11:01 AM

Welcome Tholzel! bye1.gif

Stick around and read through some threads and you will discover that having good SEO combined with good well written copy is a common theme around here. It is true that good copy and a great site in general is going to be needed to convert visitors into customers and that without this, SEO alone is not going to that beneficial. It is therefore a combination of both, not just one or the other.

#3 Trilitech

Trilitech

    HR 4

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 111 posts

Posted 15 June 2005 - 11:01 AM

I think if you truely have unique well written content that people want, the SEO will happen automatically. The #1 factor by far with Google is inbound links. With great content you won't have to find links, the links will find you.

#4 Shane

Shane

    HR 6

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 850 posts
  • Location:Atlanta, GA

Posted 15 June 2005 - 11:02 AM

You'd end up with a great site with fantastic rankings ... in a year or two. I'd wager that most are too impatient to wait that long. They want results now.

#5 Hyperformance

Hyperformance

    HR 6

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 634 posts
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 15 June 2005 - 11:16 AM

"I think if you truely have unique well written content that people want, the SEO will happen automatically"

I have to mildly disagree with this statement - sorry... unsure.gif

We have found many websites with great looks and excellent content, unfortunately the SEO does not happen automatically. Without some assistance, like Shane said, it could be years... and that is without an aging delay. It has gotten better, but these sites are not just found and made popular by content alone - getting good links is important too, but again - it is just one piece of a more complex puzzle. How was the site built? Can the spiders get beyond the homepage? etc. - and we have also seen the best content with the ugliest websites, or the worst for navigation and ease of use, there are many issues here...

I just didn't want people to get the wrong idea and build a site with the greatest content out there and think it will be hot and successful for that reason alone.

- my 50 cents worth

#6 SearchRank

SearchRank

    HR 7

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,333 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted 15 June 2005 - 12:20 PM

QUOTE(Trilitech @ Jun 15 2005, 08:01 AM)
I think if you truely have unique well written content that people want, the SEO will happen automatically.  The #1 factor by far with Google is inbound links.  With great content you won't have to find links, the links will find you.

Sorry but you are wrong on both aspects. SEO never happens "automatically".

Definition of "optimize" -

optimize v., mized, mizing. -v.t. 1. to make as effective, perfect, or useful as possible. 2. to make the best of. 3. to write or rewrite (the instructions in a computer program) for maximum efficiency and speed in retrieval, storage, or execution. 4. Math. to determine the maximum or minimum values of (a specified function that is subject to a set of constraints). -v.i. 5. to be optimistic. optimization, n. optimizer, n.

Seems to me that those all require action of some sort so it is not automatic.

Secondly on links finding you, that may happen from time to time but most people have to put some effort into building links. Unless you build a great informational site such as Search Engine Watch or offer some tool like Adobe Reader, the link building process will most likely consist of directory submissions, reciprocal linking or requesting/buying links.

#7 Haystack

Haystack

    HR 7

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,980 posts
  • Location:Minneapolis, MN

Posted 15 June 2005 - 12:23 PM

QUOTE
Secondly on links finding you, that may happen from time to time but most people have to put some effort into building links.

Even if a site COULD eventually rank high without proactively building inbound links, why would someone choose to wait to be discovered when they could easily accelerate the process by letting people know they exist?

#8 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 5,882 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 15 June 2005 - 12:24 PM

welcome to HR Tholzel hi.gif

QUOTE(Tholzel)
I am astonished at how much effort is spent--the entire SEO industry it seems--on trying to fool Google spiders.


Here you won't find a lot of effort put into trying to "fool" the SEs, Here you will find that we do recommend putting in a lot of effort to help the SEs find and index the well written excellent content on your site

#9 Scottie

Scottie

    Psycho Mom

  • Admin
  • 6,293 posts
  • Location:Columbia, SC

Posted 15 June 2005 - 01:01 PM

Welcome Tholzel! hi.gif Great to have you here- you seem to "get it"!

You've discovered what we've been saying for years... it all starts with a great site. The great site makes it a lot easier to get great rankings but you do need to get those links too as well as making sure the site is built in a search-friendly manner.

#10 digitalplatypus

digitalplatypus

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 20 posts
  • Location:Minneapolis

Posted 15 June 2005 - 06:15 PM

I'll admit it, unlike Jill and some of the other superstars notworthy.gif in this forum, I don't naturally write brilliant copy that I can let it stand as it is and expect it to rank well with the search engines. I go back and check keyword density and other ratios of the page with ranking software.

But I find a funny thing when I check all the suggested ratios. When the software tells me something is ineffectively optimized and I go back and fix it, invariably, the copy reads better as well.

I'm convinced that copywriting that accurately and effectively communicates what that page is about is also effective from an seo standpoint.

The search engine algorithms have been developed over the years by people who are looking for good content and they've found patterns that pretty accurately identify how a good writer, writing naturally and informatively, will present their information.

There are a lot of seos who get a rush out of "beating" the system. They don't really care about their clients or their clients visitors; they just want the adrenaline rush of the "win." And playing it that way, they're assured of always having the game to play as today's "win" becomes what gets their clients' sites blacklisted tomorrow. Then they get to go back and find a new way to "win."

Don't confuse those people with seo. They're compulsive gamblers who use seo as their game. But they're staking themselves in their game with their clients' money.

#11 Alarr

Alarr

    HR 4

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 108 posts
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 15 June 2005 - 07:52 PM

QUOTE(Tholzel @ Jun 15 2005, 11:57 AM)
I am astonished at how much effort is spent--the entire SEO industry it seems--on trying to fool Google spiders. What would happen if the same effort went in to writing really excellent website copy--copy designed to be read by humans, and fascinate them, persuade them, speak to them?
View Post


I would agree with the other posts.

A good SEO/ SEM never tries to fool a search engine. SE's will catch on fast, potentially getting URL's banned from the search engine (which is a very bad thing).

>SEO is a practice much like a Doctor or a lawyer
>You can never guarantee "specific" results. Meaning, no ne can guarantee the #x position for keyword Y. Rather, we improve the overall exposure of a company's Web site. an example: we might increase the chances of obtaining a ranking in the top 10 by 50 percent. If so, if we optimize 100 pages then (according to teh numbers) at least half will make it in the top 10.

IMHO

#12 Trilitech

Trilitech

    HR 4

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 111 posts

Posted 15 June 2005 - 08:23 PM

You're right.. I should have said with relatively minimal work, instead of implying no work at all. I was really referring to the link building aspect of it, on site SEO obviously won't happen automatically.

#13 dawndelcastillo

dawndelcastillo

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Location:Portland, Oregon

Posted 16 June 2005 - 10:42 PM

Why choose to fool anyone, PPC offers quick results while remaining ethical. I just don't understand why anyone would choose to play that game, all the major search engines make it easy to get top rankings while your site ages and you develop great link partners.

Oh well I guess that is why I wear the white hate wink.gif

Dawn

#14 Shane

Shane

    HR 6

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 850 posts
  • Location:Atlanta, GA

Posted 17 June 2005 - 11:01 AM

It's because of the "P" in PPC (...well, the first "P" in PPC). PPC does offer immediately results, but you have to pay to play.

#15 dawndelcastillo

dawndelcastillo

    HR 3

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Location:Portland, Oregon

Posted 17 June 2005 - 11:52 AM

shane:

Understood but nothing in life is free anymore..




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users