- Joined
- Sep 15, 2014
- Messages
- 4,343
- Likes
- 8,855
- Degree
- 8
Things are getting out of control in the "SEO realm". There is a lot of SEO Stupidity going on in the Eco-system and it's leading to just plain SEO failure. The problem is the people getting results don't usually have time to write blog posts - they are getting results. The people that have too much time on their hands are usually regurgitating other White Hat SEO nonsense published by others who source always seems to be some rumor or gossip from one of the "SEO News outlets". It's pretty bad on Twitter too. I've been waiting for someone to "call out" this nonsense but it's been going on for several years and Serpian Derpo is dead - now it's at a point where I realize it's never going to get answered.
Failure #1: Over Optimization
The biggest failure I baffled at seeing it "over-optimization" - This one is soul crushing for me to have conversations about this, cause I can assure you 5, 10, or 50 anchors for an exact term will not flagged you for "over-optimization", unless you literally have zero backlinks.
That wouldn't be over-optimization that would be an anchor text dilution problem - I forgot the term that's used. That's a simple fix by increasing your anchor text with generic terms and other related anchors terms - problem solved.
If you want a good gauge on your keyword's threshold use AHREFS.com and look up each of the Top 10 URLs ranking for the keyword you are going after. Look at their top anchor texts get the average, maximum, and minimum amounts for that keyword. Example:
Max = 50, Min = 5, and Average = 20.
Now do that for Positions #11-100 for each URL ranking. You'll get some wild anchor ratios in there, if you can group them like so: #11-20, #21-30, #31-50, #50-100 - get the Max, Min, and Average for each group. You should be able to quickly determine how many exact terms you can get away with and whether the threshold is - because most likely there are going to be URL in the #31-100+ ranges that have above page #1 averages of anchors AND above your page #1 MAXIMUM. There are multiple factors on why pages after page #1 are not ranking, but assume all things are equal you can quickly eyeball what a good ratio is for your "MY KEYWORD" should be for your own page.
While you are at it make sure to get the Position #1-3's "also rank for" keywords each page is ranking for, you can use those additional terms as anchors for your own page. The reason I like #1-10 is because Google has determined through their algorithm that these 3 pages are most relevant, I guarantee you there are are related keywords they all share in common.
This philosophy is literally what SERPWoo's Keyword Finder is based off of. You input a keyword and then it outputs not only related keywords but then finds the URLs ranking for #1-3 positions and pulls all their keywords they are ranking for. It mashes it up and then using the "Source" column you can see all the keywords that Google has determined are related to your original keyword - use those keywords within your text and as anchors and voila you are printing money.
Here is a visual:
^^ Above you see that I inputted "boat sailing lessons" - first thought that came to me, pretty weak but whatever. It shows me that I should also have "yacht sailing lessons" since 2 of the Top 3 URLs ranking for "boat sailing lessons" ALSO rank for "yacht sailing lessons". I should also have "live and learn sailing" - don't know what that is, but 2 of the Top 3 URLs also rank for that term. Another one is "boat sailing near me" - Perhaps I should have a location section on my page that shows places - hint. Going down there are some 256 other terms, but the ones I really should look into are the ones that have 2, 3 or even 4 commonalities. I should use those within the text of the page I want to rank AND as EXACT anchor text when linking internally or from an external source for those terms.
If you input a good competitive term you'll get A LOT more related keywords - but that doesn't help when you need to get quick answered when creating a piece of content and know drinking from a fire hydrant will only lead to paralysis by over analysis.
Failure #2: Expired Domains
This one is odd, first you have to view the Twitter thread:
--
^^ What these people are talking about seems almost innocent until you step back and think about the macro of the discussion. This guy wants to buy a domain that was previously registered and got John to admit that expired domains' links will always matter.
Then someone cheekily comes in and says to disavow everything, but then two others take that idea and one suggests to "reconsider any existing link profiles" when a "change of IP address" or "change of nameserver" or "change of registrar" or "change of domain owner" happens.
Anyone with a brain can tell you that in the course of a website you'll eventually change hosting - which will trigger a nameserver and IP address change.
Even upgrading on some hosts triggers a new IP Address. Godaddy just increased their pricing by 20% this year after doing the same last year, so a .com now costs $17.99 - yikes I saw that on some auto-bill so I've been moving domains to another registrar NameCheap in this instance - should that trigger a complete "link profile" removal?
If I see the company and there is a new domain owner - should that trigger a complete "link profile" removal?
Jebus.
Then another guy comes in with the bright idea having an easy "this is a new site" button option - wouldn't that make spammers like really happy???
WTF is going on out here? The crazy part is the macro of it all - dude is asking John if he can "reset the link profile" with an easy button. I clicked through the guy's Bio that asked and he is the "Head of SEO".
I'll give it to John - he actually takes the time to write back to this nonsense.
The whole purpose of buying an expired domain is to gain the link profile UNLESS it's for the brand name, then I could understand.
I don't understand though how the "Head of SEO" has "never done active link building" - how do you make money than?
The real problem is tweets like this are getting indexed into the SEO Eco-system, someone is going to pick it up at one of these SEO News Outlets, then someone is going to blog about it, then 10 other bloggers are going to regurgitate the original blogpost and the SEO News Outlet's article and next thing you know regular SEOs start believing these ideas.
This tweet seems innocent but I'm starting to think people are working behind the scenes to create misinformation on purpose, I've seen it on viral content type sites like Imgur and Instagram and Facebook, but when it starts happening within "SEO" a niche that literally 99% of the world has no clue exists or what it's all about, something is just way off.
But then again real Blackhat and Grayhats stopped talking about SEO on twitter and blogging about it because it's easier to make money and let the lemmings think - and I kid you not I saw this written "You do not need to have links to rank in Google". Literally there are White Hats running around thinking you do not need to create links - this is where we are at folks.
This was @Grind's whole plan - Everyone has stopped outting techniques and the latest, and now "You don't need backlinks for SEO" is a real conversation people are having. Grindstone used to be mad when people were outting blackhat and grayhat techniques - now no one says anything and lemmings run the show.
--
As I find more failures I'm going to post them in here - I've got thousands of them over the last couple of weeks but I got work to do at the moment. Feel free to add your own or ask questions.
We have to stop this madness, there is so much mis-information out there I can understand why people need more and more help. SEO isn't difficult, there is just too much overthinking or over-analysis cause it's a waiting game.
Failure #1: Over Optimization
The biggest failure I baffled at seeing it "over-optimization" - This one is soul crushing for me to have conversations about this, cause I can assure you 5, 10, or 50 anchors for an exact term will not flagged you for "over-optimization", unless you literally have zero backlinks.
That wouldn't be over-optimization that would be an anchor text dilution problem - I forgot the term that's used. That's a simple fix by increasing your anchor text with generic terms and other related anchors terms - problem solved.
If you want a good gauge on your keyword's threshold use AHREFS.com and look up each of the Top 10 URLs ranking for the keyword you are going after. Look at their top anchor texts get the average, maximum, and minimum amounts for that keyword. Example:
1. URL#1 has 30 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
2. URL#2 has 10 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
3. URL#3 has 20 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
4. URL#4 has 10 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
5. URL#5 has 5 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
6. URL#6 has 50 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
7. URL#7 has 40 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
8. URL#8 has 20 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
9. URL#9 has 10 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
10. URL#10 has 5 instances using "MY KEYWORD" as an exact anchor.
Max = 50, Min = 5, and Average = 20.
Now do that for Positions #11-100 for each URL ranking. You'll get some wild anchor ratios in there, if you can group them like so: #11-20, #21-30, #31-50, #50-100 - get the Max, Min, and Average for each group. You should be able to quickly determine how many exact terms you can get away with and whether the threshold is - because most likely there are going to be URL in the #31-100+ ranges that have above page #1 averages of anchors AND above your page #1 MAXIMUM. There are multiple factors on why pages after page #1 are not ranking, but assume all things are equal you can quickly eyeball what a good ratio is for your "MY KEYWORD" should be for your own page.
While you are at it make sure to get the Position #1-3's "also rank for" keywords each page is ranking for, you can use those additional terms as anchors for your own page. The reason I like #1-10 is because Google has determined through their algorithm that these 3 pages are most relevant, I guarantee you there are are related keywords they all share in common.
This philosophy is literally what SERPWoo's Keyword Finder is based off of. You input a keyword and then it outputs not only related keywords but then finds the URLs ranking for #1-3 positions and pulls all their keywords they are ranking for. It mashes it up and then using the "Source" column you can see all the keywords that Google has determined are related to your original keyword - use those keywords within your text and as anchors and voila you are printing money.
Here is a visual:
^^ Above you see that I inputted "boat sailing lessons" - first thought that came to me, pretty weak but whatever. It shows me that I should also have "yacht sailing lessons" since 2 of the Top 3 URLs ranking for "boat sailing lessons" ALSO rank for "yacht sailing lessons". I should also have "live and learn sailing" - don't know what that is, but 2 of the Top 3 URLs also rank for that term. Another one is "boat sailing near me" - Perhaps I should have a location section on my page that shows places - hint. Going down there are some 256 other terms, but the ones I really should look into are the ones that have 2, 3 or even 4 commonalities. I should use those within the text of the page I want to rank AND as EXACT anchor text when linking internally or from an external source for those terms.
If you input a good competitive term you'll get A LOT more related keywords - but that doesn't help when you need to get quick answered when creating a piece of content and know drinking from a fire hydrant will only lead to paralysis by over analysis.
Failure #2: Expired Domains
This one is odd, first you have to view the Twitter thread:
--
^^ What these people are talking about seems almost innocent until you step back and think about the macro of the discussion. This guy wants to buy a domain that was previously registered and got John to admit that expired domains' links will always matter.
Then someone cheekily comes in and says to disavow everything, but then two others take that idea and one suggests to "reconsider any existing link profiles" when a "change of IP address" or "change of nameserver" or "change of registrar" or "change of domain owner" happens.
Anyone with a brain can tell you that in the course of a website you'll eventually change hosting - which will trigger a nameserver and IP address change.
Even upgrading on some hosts triggers a new IP Address. Godaddy just increased their pricing by 20% this year after doing the same last year, so a .com now costs $17.99 - yikes I saw that on some auto-bill so I've been moving domains to another registrar NameCheap in this instance - should that trigger a complete "link profile" removal?
If I see the company and there is a new domain owner - should that trigger a complete "link profile" removal?
Jebus.
Then another guy comes in with the bright idea having an easy "this is a new site" button option - wouldn't that make spammers like really happy???
WTF is going on out here? The crazy part is the macro of it all - dude is asking John if he can "reset the link profile" with an easy button. I clicked through the guy's Bio that asked and he is the "Head of SEO".
I'll give it to John - he actually takes the time to write back to this nonsense.
The whole purpose of buying an expired domain is to gain the link profile UNLESS it's for the brand name, then I could understand.
I don't understand though how the "Head of SEO" has "never done active link building" - how do you make money than?
The real problem is tweets like this are getting indexed into the SEO Eco-system, someone is going to pick it up at one of these SEO News Outlets, then someone is going to blog about it, then 10 other bloggers are going to regurgitate the original blogpost and the SEO News Outlet's article and next thing you know regular SEOs start believing these ideas.
This tweet seems innocent but I'm starting to think people are working behind the scenes to create misinformation on purpose, I've seen it on viral content type sites like Imgur and Instagram and Facebook, but when it starts happening within "SEO" a niche that literally 99% of the world has no clue exists or what it's all about, something is just way off.
But then again real Blackhat and Grayhats stopped talking about SEO on twitter and blogging about it because it's easier to make money and let the lemmings think - and I kid you not I saw this written "You do not need to have links to rank in Google". Literally there are White Hats running around thinking you do not need to create links - this is where we are at folks.
This was @Grind's whole plan - Everyone has stopped outting techniques and the latest, and now "You don't need backlinks for SEO" is a real conversation people are having. Grindstone used to be mad when people were outting blackhat and grayhat techniques - now no one says anything and lemmings run the show.
--
As I find more failures I'm going to post them in here - I've got thousands of them over the last couple of weeks but I got work to do at the moment. Feel free to add your own or ask questions.
We have to stop this madness, there is so much mis-information out there I can understand why people need more and more help. SEO isn't difficult, there is just too much overthinking or over-analysis cause it's a waiting game.
