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!



Photo
- - - - -

Do Lots Of Hits Improve Ranking


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 bobmeetin

bobmeetin

    HR 6

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 549 posts
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 24 September 2008 - 11:24 AM

Please point me to a relevant thread here.

I talked to some potential clients last night. They are fixated on hits improving ranking with search engines.

First of all I suggested that they should be measuring success in terms of findability ( on page 1 and preferably near the top) of their key phrases and then associated with that, the results of folks selecting to connect to their site via those types of hits on their up there key phrases.

In the discussion I talked about developing strong, relevant copy and link building (and of course search engine friendly design) as the steps needed to get from invisibility to getting relevant hits.

So of course hits, relevant hits, are important, but hits are the cart before the horse. Assuming this is accurate, is there a better way I should word this in my explanations?

-Bob

#2 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 33,244 posts

Posted 24 September 2008 - 11:47 AM

If by "hits" your client means "relevant traffic" or "relevant unique visitors" then your client is exactly right.

That's what you should be measuring, not rankings.

#3 Randy

Randy

    Convert Me!

  • Moderator
  • 17,540 posts

Posted 24 September 2008 - 12:04 PM

On the other side of the coin if their belief is that the number of hits a site receives --either as a total or from XYZ search engine-- is somehow tied to the ranking of the site, my answer would be a 99% No.

If that were the case where clicks from a given search engine is concerned a #5 site could never move up to #1 or #2 or #3. And a #20 site could never move into the top 10 because the higher ranked site (all other things being equal and in theory) would always get more traffic/clicks than the lower ranked site. Basically, if this idea were a part of the search engines algorithms and anything close to a major factor in ranking nobody's rankings would ever move up or move down. Which is obviously not the case.

Overall clicks is an easier answer, since no search engine has the ability to track all traffic to any web site that is outside of their direct control.

I suspect the client may have read or heard something about CTR for Adwords and how this can affect placement for the paid ads. This does happen, and for good reason since the search engine gets paid every time someone clicks on one of those paid ads. Trying to extrapolate the concept to natural, organic rankings however is fraught with problems and contradictions.

#4 bobmeetin

bobmeetin

    HR 6

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 549 posts
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 24 September 2008 - 01:12 PM

I do this often, might have confused the issue. Clicks sounds like an easy answer, so to them this may be the goal to increased rankings, etc.

However, what I am trying to say to them is, "in order to get clicks, you need to do these other SEO type things (or have someone manage this for us) first in order to make your site attractive to search engines and humans".

At that point clicks (whether relevant ones or not) will be a natural result of good work. Along the way I also discussed PPC, but did not link that to the organic part of the discussion. I feel that I just need to cut to the bone and word the talks better.

Edited by bobmeetin, 24 September 2008 - 02:03 PM.


#5 bobmeetin

bobmeetin

    HR 6

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 549 posts
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 15 December 2009 - 11:17 PM

In talking with another client today over the phone this thread came to mind. I have been routinely talking about inbound links, developing good relevant content, then out of the blue I hear the likes of,

"but someone told me that if I take an hour a day and keep clicking on links on my website that this will help to improve its findability."

Sometimes I simply can't put into words a proper response. If everyone knows this same secret formula then we'll need to hire cheap fast labor to outrun the competition....

#6 rolf

rolf

    HR 6

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 675 posts
  • Location:Suffolk UK

Posted 16 December 2009 - 07:43 AM

It can be frustrating fighting against misinformation, especially as people tend to believe the person telling them what they want to hear over the person telling them the uncomfortable truth.

I've had clients (or potential clients) come to me and say "XYZ company said they could do [insert SEO fallacy or wishful thinking here] for [insert huge price tag here] - does that sound like a good deal and can you do the same thing cheaper?". I refuse to take their money for this kind of work, and I tell them exactly why but many of them still take XYZ company up on the deal because what XYZ are offering sounds like a quick fix and a good alternative to the effort of creating a solid long term strategy.

I even had one of these people come back a year later and ask me to assess (for free) the value of XYZ company's work because they were not sure if the 150 per month they had been paying was doing much good - the nerve of some people!

These days I take a philosophical stance - that's not the type of work I do and it's not my problem if people don't follow my advice.

#7 bobmeetin

bobmeetin

    HR 6

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 549 posts
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 16 December 2009 - 10:23 AM

This got me to thinking that this technique and similar might belong on a list of [url=http://www.highrankings.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=15499]Seo Myths[/url]. I looked through some of Jill's articles on myths or top 10 myths. Perhaps Jill could add an article of [url=http://www.highrankings.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=15499]Seo Myths[/url] 11-20. What else would make that list?

#8 Randy

Randy

    Convert Me!

  • Moderator
  • 17,540 posts

Posted 16 December 2009 - 12:18 PM

In case you hadn't caught it yet, there's something brilliant Jill sometimes does that works really well for situations like this. (It's a subtle psychological trick she may not even realize she does quite effectively.)

Sometimes it's better to ask a question than it is to try to provide an answer. giggle.gif People just don't fight the truth nearly as much when they come up with the answer themselves.

Such as:

Really? How does that clicking thing work? I've heard that one before but have never been able to figure out how the search engines would know when someone visited my site since they do not have access to my server's log files. And if it were really something they did for traffic coming through their won search engine wouldn't it be incredibly easy for someone to fool them by setting up a zombie computer that sits there on the search engines site to find my site and click through hundreds of thousands of times per day, every day, 365 days per year?

Then shut up and let them debunk their own theory. wink1.gif




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

We are now a read-only forum.
 
No new posts or registrations allowed.