Lower Price = Bad? or a Scam?

[ihelpyou]

http://searchengineforums.com/Forum30/HTML/000266.html

I would like some comments on the last post in that thread please.

Gee, I guess lil o'l seo'ers like me simply cannot compete with all the Big SEO's out there who charge "thousands" of dollars to do the keyword research only. Then there must be a second phase, according to that post, where the client pays "thousands" more? I guess My services are also a scam?

Could someone explain to me why all my clients are satisfied then? hmmmm.

Thinkin some more, I have to conclude he/she Must be talking about the SEO for Large business. I do small-medium, so this must be the case.

I strongly disagree with the posts notion that because my price might be lower than their's that I simply must be a scam.

[Advisor]

I was gonna say that you should post your reply over there...but oops...then I remembered that you were banned!

Personally, that second post seemed to be purposely posted to rile some people up. The tone and everything about it, just seems to sound fishy to me. Probably why others haven't (yet) answered it. They are smartly avoiding it because it's quite an iffy kinda post.

Most people know that price is gonna vary for SEO work. You can get great service for just a little bit of money, or a lot of money. Or you can even do it yourself. You can also get crappy service for a little bit of money and also for a lot of money.

Anyone purchasing any service or product has to do their homework first, or they get what they deserve!

Jill

[ihelpyou]

Well said Jill.

"or they get what they deserve"

I for one certainly would not be afraid to rebut that post and would in a heartbeat. :D Of course, you all know me and know I would.

[Advisor]

So if we see a post from "PainterGreg" over there we can figure it's you? :green:

Jill

[ihelpyou]

Ya know, what some people do not seem to realize is that some Large SEO companies out there have enormous overhead costs. Their employees have to be issured paychecks. That money has to come from someone, so hence, a very high SEO price to the client. That same company might farm out each phase to each employee. One does the keyword research, one does the code optimization, one does the link campaign, one does the directory submissions/paid and free, one does the spidered engines, etc, etc, on and on.

NONE of that means two hoots if the SEO co. is a bad one and have no clue, or that company gets the client penalized or banned from the engine. I hear this stuff all the time.

Exactly. High price does Not equal quality, good service. Buyer beware.

[ihelpyou]

NOPE. I would never ever, ever post there again. AND, have never since 14 months ago. Around the middle of October of 2000.

[ihelpyou]

But ya also know sompin? I do know of a few SEO's in this forum who are more expensive than I am, and also know they are very worth it.

There are many out there who are not. Not by any means.

[Advisor]

Well, I think what you pay for with some (good) expensive SEOs is their experience, their expertise, and yes, even their name. You might pay more because you can trust them. For the most part, those that are somewhat well known are going to be pretty trustworthy, or else you'd know it.

In my case, as my status in the SEO world grew and I became more well-known, I raised my prices according. Do I do any more work for that money? Nope, probably not. You're paying for peace of mind. I'm sure there are plenty of lower priced SEO companies that can do just as well as me, because unlike some SEO's out there, I don't believe that you can throw money at an SEO to make your ranks go higher. It irks me to no end when I read articles stating that the more you pay, the higher your ranks will be. GRRRRRR :1: that is just so untrue!

I happen to be able to charge a fairly high price, because I only want to work with a few clients at a time. This gives me the opportuntity to work only with clients that I want to work with and who want to work with me. This way I can also really focus on their work. (Plus it's much more fun that way!) If suddenly my jobs dried up because of my prices, I could just spend time posting here, writing articles, filing my nails, playing with my kids or perhaps rethinking my pricing strategy!

Jill

[ihelpyou]

I agree Jill.

BTW, have ya noticed what mine are now? Going up as well.

[MazY]

It's the age-old question rearing its head again, isn't it?

What is value for money for one man may seem painfully expensive to another.

I believe that most SEO work advertised on the web today is under-priced. But I guess I should qualify that statement a little.

(a.) Whether the information is freely available on the web or not is wholly immaterial in my opinion. Most of VBMedia's own clients, for example, come to us because they simply don't have the time, not the money.

(b.) It is, whichever way one looks at it, a rather unique service that we (SEOs) provide. Things change almost daily. Keeping on top of these changes and ensuring that your clients are provided with the most current information and techniques is a relatively large time investment. (As compared to reading an article about a new paint brush - for a home decorator, perhaps.)

(c.) The SEs/Directories themselves are slowly but surely introducing/increasing costs for submission/reindexing. Both of which are pretty mandatory to give clients the best chances of success.

(d.) It (SEO) lest we forget, is an advertising medium. Pound for pound (when successful) it produces more successful and longer lasting results than most (if not all) traditional forms of advertising.

(e.) Search engine dependancy is not getting weaker. On the contrary. It is becoming more paramount (and more difficult) to make a web site stand out from the competition. This will only grow as the Internet becomes more and more advanced.

Is there a right price? No. At least not one that will suit everyone. There can only be prices that suit some customers and some SEO companies.

However, that said, there is no denying or escaping that some SEOs are being driven down in price by the "I've submitted a web site so I am an SEO" merchants.

[MazY]

Sorry. Meant to say...

No, a low price does not always mean a poor, scam or otherwise detrimental service. Sometimes it just means that the company has been very good at keeping their internal costs low.

This, in turn, could mean that they care about the investment put in by their customers too.

[ihelpyou]

Very true Maz and I agree.

At the same time there are those who say "I am high priced and I am well worth it", and then proceed to get their client penalized or banned. It does work both ways. And some are high priced and so outdated, you really have to giggle at what they are pushing.

There are no set prices. Another reason is that all SEO's do not take on All different kinds of clients. We all cater to certain types and kinds and sizes of clients. Lots of variables are involved. Jill likes only a couple clients at a time while I like just a few more. :D

[Advisor]

Is 7 your lucky number or something, Doug? I find your choice of prices very interesting!

J

[ihelpyou]

LOL. From waaaaay, waaaay back Jill. I have very good reasons. I'll tell ya about them at the conference. You will find it interesting indeed!!

[WebSavvy]

Originally posted by webwhiz
Is 7 your lucky number or something, Doug?

He's a man, and 7 is a "dog year" thing..... ;)


LOL!

[Advisor]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
LOL. From waaaaay, waaaay back Jill. I have very good reasons. I'll tell ya about them at the conference. You will find it interesting indeed!! Okay, now don't forget! (And tell me when I'm sober so I will remember!) :rolleyes:

Just one more reason to look forward to the conference!

Jill

[Mel]

IMO:

There is no such thing as a cut and dried price for SEO - the costs of optimizing a ten page site selling a few items in a non-competitive area and the costs of optimizing a thousand page realty site are vastly different if you are dedicated to getting good results and traffic.

The second poster sounds like he might be trying to stir things up a bit, but so far no takers???

[ihelpyou]

Boy, my mouth would be watering at the chance to rebut. :) Go ahead Mel. :D

[Mel]

Sorry Doug - I have no interest in helping that lot to get their heads on straight.

Something like " casting pearls at the feet of swine"?

[emanuel_hoch]

Hi folks, I'm the culprit responsible for this fiery debate. No insults were intended.

ihelpyou - If good and cheap SEO work can be miraculously combined, it's not a scam but often the result of the eneven distribution of cost of living and wages across the globe. Possibly within the US as well. Easily detectable scams come in the form of "Guaranteed Top Locations!!!" pay-by-ranking schemes, in which the only guaranteed thing is that the SEO customer will pay - either because the key words and phrases are so obscure that few people ask for them and few sites display them (in which case the site owner will anyway have to advertise in other media), or because the so-called SEO expert chooses key phrases like [+yourname +yourtrade +yourtown] for which top locations are assured indeed but none in his senses asks them at SEs.

There is absolutely no difference in the difficulty of the SEO task between the site of a large company or the site of a small one (or even the site of someone publishing his own poetry). All sites are attributed a piece of text of similar size at the SEs, and here's where the potential visitor makes his first choice. The difficulty of the task is relative mainly to the frequency distribution of the key words and phrases in the use of language over the Web.

Ignoring factors such as R&D and training costs, rent and tools, the only cost of SEO work remains the wages of the professionals. Ignoring the uneven global distribution, we might debate how much time has to be devoted to each of its parts to produce the desirable results. Since the sites are very likely operating in an environment of stiff competition (all striving for top locations), I don't believe that cutting edges can produce results and, hence, all SEO experts must work approximately the same time on each stage.

Now imagine working for, say, a "web hosting" site, or an "American art" site, or a "travel America" site. How many hours (keyword research + task analysis) do you think that the customer deserves?

Does it matter whether you're a large or a small SEO firm? There must be an objective number of hours and anything less results in poor service.

MazY - Throughout some three and a half years of experience we have found that we can increase efficiency somewhat, but the increasing complexity of the SEO tasks has forced us to gradually work many more hours on each project.

[Alan Perkins]

Welcome to the forums emanuel_hoch :hi:

I think I'll stay out of this debate, but welcome. :)

[MazY]

Originally posted by Alan Perkins
Welcome to the forums emanuel_hoch :hi:

I think I'll stay out of this debate, but welcome. :)

And as rare as it may seem, I think I'm going to join Alan!

[Hope]

I guess I will jump in to this debate and probably insult a few along the way.

I find it so hard to believe that there are so few SEO out there with hearts. Doug is an acception. He caters to the small to medium size businesses. These are the guys with no recongnizable brand name. These are the guys that are trying to scrape a living selling a few items. These are the guys who cannot afford thousands of dollars. There are literally millions of these companies out there.

If there were more SEO like Doug, who are not trying to make as much as they can, then maybe there would be more companies who actually make it.

I have been doing SEO since 1998. I have focused on non-profit organizations and the mom & pop companies. Most of the work I have done for little to no cost. Why? Because they needed the help and couldn't afford it. I don't ever expect to become rich. I am happy to make a couple of bucks when I can, but understand that there are small fish who are trying to survive in a pond full of sharks.

Maybe we all need to step back and think. If a company comes to you asking for your help, maybe you should look at the company and adjust your pricing.


Heidi

[Mel]

Welcome to the forums Emaneul.

There is absolutely no difference in the difficulty of the SEO task between the site of a large company or the site of a small one (or even the site of someone publishing his own poetry).

Well I don't know how you do SEO but I optimize each page for a specific set of keywords, often different for each page, thus there is to me a great deal of difference in optimizing ten pages or a thousand.

There is also a great deal of difference in optimizing for ten keywords or a thousand.

There is also a great deal of difference in optimizing for the local florist and for Sears and Roebuck.

There is also a great deal of difference in optimizing for a site that has a worldwide target audience and one who only serves his local area.

There is also a great deal of difference in optimizing a site for some one with few competitors and one which has hundreds.

There is a great deal of difference in optimizing a site for say web hosting and one for a patented product that has almot no competitors and a copyrighted name.

.......................

It is not difficult to do good keyword and competitor research, and I have never spent the equivlent of more than $200 of my time in these tasks for a small site and thus there is really no need for me to charge " thousands of dollars" for doing such a task.

It sounds to me like you are from a large corporate enviornment where you need to make this kind of arguement every year at budget time.

There are literally thousands of smaller SEOs who are quite competent, but manage to get by without paying thier employees at a rate of $180 per hour. Even if you allow a 50% overhead and profit factor this works out to $15,000 per month for a 40 hour week, or $180,000 per annum. How many out there are paying that kind of salaries?

Yes there are some differences in the cost of employees and doing business in many parts of the world, but this is a market and to get the business you have to be able to quote competitive prices.

How many hours (keyword research + task analysis) do you think that the customer deserves?

Answer - enough to get the rankings you need and it will vary greatly depending on the factors above.

But the bottom line is - can you get the rankings?

I (with Dougs permission I hope) offer Freemoney services as an example. He charges nowhere near the kind of prices you seem to think are necessary andn yet I invite you to compare his rankings on top SEO related keywords with your own.

[MazY]

Originally posted by Hope
Maybe we all need to step back and think. If a company comes to you asking for your help, maybe you should look at the company and adjust your pricing.


Heidi

Actually, and slightly related, (still trying to keep out of the core of the debate) we (VBMedia) does one freebie per year.

How do we choose the freebie? It usually involves monitoring newsgroups and looking for the small company who is clearly and genuinely struggling. That way, we feel that the most genuine needy are the ones getting the lift-up when they need it most.

Historically, we have then contacted them and offered our help free. Last year's client e-mailed out of the blue, only on Sunday night to say that they are now receiving between 1500 and 2000 hits a week. A pretty remarakble figure for their business type.

Now, that feeling is worth more than any financial gain!

That client is now a member here and so I will leave him or her to add if they wish to.

[ihelpyou]

Welcome to the forums emanuel_hoch! :hi:

Very happy you somehow got informed and stopped by!

I do agree with some of what you said and disagree with other parts. I am in total agreement with what Mel said.

Yes. The obviously scams are out there. You posted the types that are floating around.

This particular statement is simply not true:
There is absolutely no difference in the difficulty of the SEO task between the site of a large company or the site of a small one (or even the site of someone publishing his own poetry).
I will take on the small to medium business. I do not do the "large" business. Tooooo much time involved for one. Time is money. A large client is something I will not deal with. Too many layers of chiefs. "all chiefs and no indians".

I do agree that prices are the same for me for small-medium business. They get the same service from me and the same time. I will not tell a hosting client that we will get him to the top on "web hosting". That is not possible. I will not waste my time. Although, I do have many good ranks on pretty competitive terms, no client expects top ranks for a term like that. When they do, they can go elsewhere.

You are right in the salaries a firm like yours has to pay out. That is where I have the Huge leg up on you. All those employees have to make their cut of the pie. I DO not have. I do as I please. I do the whole thing, not simply the page Opt. or the keywords,.. but the whole thing.

Another leg up? Personalized service. When they call, they get me on the phone, not some young person acting as a secretary who knows zero.

Many plusses to being a small SEO. Many. Hope made some VERY good points. My market is the little guy. Guess what? The little guy out there is the biggest market on the net needing SEO services. The little guy is what Built the net from the beginning. If there were not SEO's like me, how do you think us little guys would survive?

Well, I have not had my coffee yet, so have to make some. :)

[The Ney]

Guys,

Lets first check the relative terms around here, and after we have established what do we mean when we say "expensive", "cheap" etc.

I don't know how much each of you charge for your SEO services, but i happen to know, since he is my boss, that Emanuel is not one of those "big sharks". Hehe... i wish.. :). Far from that.

The whole "holy crusade" is against those "SEO Experts" that offer submission to 16000000 SE's for $0.25. If there is one of us that can offer quality service for such price, then he :

A) has 2000000 million customers who can provide him enough for all his/her expences at this price.

B) lives in a better world where workers dont need salaries, children dont need feeding, houses dont need renting, bills dont need paying and we can all work just for the sake of paying a ticket for a movie once every week.


NO one is talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars per keyword research, no one is talking about 180$ per hour (again, i wish :) ), not even half of that...

You are against a wrong guy.....

[Advisor]

If there were more SEO like Doug, who are not trying to make as much as they can, then maybe there would be more companies who actually make it. Heidi, there are tons of companies out there with relatively low prices that work for small businesses. Tons of them! I've personally ranked hundreds of small businesses since 1995 and charged very low fees for years.

Interestingly enough, while charging very low fees, I lost many bids from large companies along the way. They just assumed that if my fees were so low that I must s-uck. There were a few smart big companies that saw a good deal, but most were too dumb to "take advantage of me"! I found that I actually got MORE work when I raised my prices. Sometimes that can make you appear more credible. I personally am not in this for the money. I have to laugh at how I get to play all day at the computer and even make money at it! If companies want to pay me for it, it works for me. What I give the companies I work with, seems to be worth it to them, so it works well all around!

Jill

[ihelpyou]

hey the Ney, no one is against emmanual at all. I welcome his post and now I am getting a better picture of things. Thank you!

Oh yes. I am also against the "fly by night" who charges 100 bucks a year and promises top ranks. I think we all are.

[MazY]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
Well, I have not had my coffee yet, so have to make some. :)

An American without coffee? That can't be right....

[ihelpyou]

I just took a peak over there. I am shocked Emmanual that NO one has posted after you to rebut or anything. I guess they must be scared of you? :)

We like good debates over here and have them all the time.

[Mel]

Hey TheNey

I assume that if 20 hours of work costs "thousands of dollars" then each hour costs something like $3600 divided by twenty or $180.

I agree that there is a lower limit that defines the bottom of dependable SEO, but that limit is hard to define.

A San Francisco or Silicon Valley firm might have to charge two thousnd dollars to make a profit considering the rentals and salaries there, but one of the India based companies might well be able to do the same job for $400 and make a profit at it.

Yes there are a LOT of scam artists our there running all kinds of scams on the web, including SEO, and they need to be stopped before they give us all a black (er) eye.

I am sure for instance that your overheads in Israel are far greater than mine in Malaysia. I do know that if I were US bsed I would starve on the same money that is a good living here.

[MakeMeTop]

>I found that I actually got MORE work when I raised my prices.

Absolutely true! I raised my prices in order to reduce work-load and maintain turnover - but wound up increasing both :)

[Advisor]

Originally posted by MakeMeTop
>I found that I actually got MORE work when I raised my prices.

Absolutely true! I raised my prices in order to reduce work-load and maintain turnover - but wound up increasing both :) Yep...it's all about perception.

J

[ihelpyou]

You all are very correct. With almost 25 years under my belt in dealing with many clients across a wide range of industries, I certainly know this to be true.

If I wished to leave out the little/small business who cannot afford thousands of dollars to get ranks, I would do the exact same thing, and be VERY worth it.

I have chosen to target all the small businesses out there who just don't have a big budget set aside for marketing and for optimization. It is very true my prices have increased over the past year, but I still have not lost focus on who I want to reach in my efforts.

Let's say that I did not have a clue about the search engines and I was in a different business. Believe me, there is NO way I could afford some of the prices I see and hear about out there. What if My site was full of lots of great content and had lots of good information about my product or service, but could not get anywhere in the search engines? What if there were not SEO's out there who catered to someone like me?

The what if's are great. If there were no legitimate SEO's who were good at what they do, and who were interested in keeping prices low to help all of those small businesses, the only web sites out there who would be found would be the ones with the big budgets and monies to afford an SEO at all.

[emanuel_hoch]

Hi folks, you have caught me making some unprecise statements, and to correct them in detail I may have to write a book. So let's stick to a simple example:

The customer is, say, a web hosting company, whose target market is global and it offers only two plans. The whole content fits nicely on the start page, so there's no need to optimize other pages. Let's discuss only the question:

--- How many workhours are needed for the task analysis and keywords choice stage? ---

I've claimed it's twenty hours, more than that will bring only insignificant marginal returns, but less than that will surely harm the chances of this site to get the highest possible number of visitors from its target market. Please don't argue with this statement - offer your own estimates.

Most of you folks have evaded answering it. As if you cannot enter a garage and get a list of rather precise estimates of the workhours required for various tasks: dismantling the engine of a certain type of car, replacing its battery, etc. No garage owner will tell you that these figures depend on whether the mechanic drops dead or whether your car belongs to IBM or to your grandson.

And, by the way, $180/hour is indeed the price of an estimable US SEO firm.

[ihelpyou]

Well, for one thing, I simply would not waste my time or the client's time and money to get top ranks on this: web hosting

Not worth it. The only way to achieve that is to cloak or use some kind of "trick". I will not risk getting penalized or banned for that.

You have to understand where I am coming from. I am looking at all of this from the small business point of view who just cannot afford these thousands you speak of.

[emanuel_hoch]

Doug, how do you know it's a waste of money before performing any market research (which in our trade is done by task analysis + keyword choice)?

Suppose the web hosting company is owned by your desperate poor brother, unemployed since high school. And, on top, he has invested all of the $10,000 loan you've given him recently into this enterprise. I beg you - please save him, his wife and his ten kids! If it's a twenty hours task indeed I know that you won't postpone your weekend trip to Hawai. But what if it's less?

[ihelpyou]

hey emmanual, believe me, I do not wish to argue with this as you do not seem to see my point.

web hosting

is a very competitive term and I have No desire to even try for it with anyone.

Same with:

internet marketing
online gambling
etc,etc

[Advisor]

I have chosen to target all the small businesses out there who just don't have a big budget set aside for marketing and for optimization. Exactly, Doug, and it's great that you do that. Those companies are also who we target in Rank Write. A big part of the reason why I have no guilt over the prices I charge is because of all the free information I give out. Both in RW and in these forums. Anyone who has no budget can learn all they need to know and easily do it themselves if they have the time to invest.

Jill

[Advisor]

Originally posted by emanuel_hoch
Suppose the web hosting company is owned by your desperate poor brother, unemployed since high school. And, on top, he has invested all of the $10,000 loan you've given him recently into this enterprise. I beg you - please save him, his wife and his ten kids! If it's a twenty hours task indeed I know that you won't postpone your weekend trip to Hawai. But what if it's less? I'm with Doug. I would suggest other forms of marketing for this company that would actually bring in customers. SEO is not for every site (although it is for most). There are other ways you could do SEO for that hosting company, and that would be by searching out niche phrases and using them instead of simply "web hosting."

Jill

[emanuel_hoch]

OK Doug. So let's say the poor brother is an American painter (a good reason to be poor).

[ihelpyou]

As Jill said, when researching targeted keyword phrases any site might come up on, I will not and do not give any client the expectation that they will get good ranks on terms like that. I does not matter who they are.

The so-called big SEO's out there can fight over those phrases that are next to impossible to rank for. That is not what I am all about and will hopefully never be. I have no desire whatsoever to even have the possibility of a client getting penalized for what I do.

The very general, generic keywords out there that have a kazillion searches a day can be fought over by others.

[emanuel_hoch]

WebWhiz, searching out niche phrases is indeed what "performing any market research (which in our trade is done by task analysis + keyword choice)" is supposed to do.

So how many workhours?

Hurrah! I've been awarded three stars. Where can I trade them for food coupons?

[Advisor]

Well, let's see. WordTracker usually takes about a half hour or so to figure out the best niche phrases. Is that what you're looking for?

Jill

[ihelpyou]

I have spent anywhere from one hour up to 40 hours on the keyword phrases. Just the other day i had a 3-way conversation with a site trying to figure out the best terms to target. I don't keep track of how much time I spend on this. My only goal is to help the web site. By doing so, I give a bunch of training to my clients on most every aspect of SEO.

Let's face it, your clients are not going to stick with you forever. In my mind, if I can help a client get good ranks but also "train" the client in the basics of SEO, I have achieved my goals.

Believe me, I will stack up my clients being with me over the LONG term and know I have many more in the stack than most any other SEO out there. They keep paying me month after month for very good reasons. More than one very good reason.

[ihelpyou]

hey emanuel, yep, you have 3 stars now but the goal is to get up to 5 stars! keep on keeping on..... :)

[emanuel_hoch]

Thanks, Doug, so where can I trade my food coupons for two more stars?

[ihelpyou]

Since I cannot afford to eat because of my low prices, ;), you can give them to me and I will up you to 5 stars in my head and in yours. :)

Since the software does not allow me to artificially inflate "stars", I guess you have to keep posting to earn them. :D

[emanuel_hoch]

Webwhiz, Wordtracker is an extremely useful tool indeed. I wish its designers will soon take care of its only major drawback - it doesn't think.

It provides however a list of key words and phrases, related to the one you've chosen, all ranked by popularity.

The SEO expert's problem at this stage is that for the imaginary 'web hosting' site or 'American painter' site, one can optimize the site for two or three key phrases at most - those that will end up in the Title metatag. All others are almost useless. The most popular key phrase is often facing too much competition, as Doug rightly remarks. And if we look for niches by choosing less popular key phrases, as you have earlier remarked, we ask our customer to gamble on our choice. Some responsibility!.

This is indeed a crucial stage in SEO work and it demands intensive and careful thinking. We actually double-check Wordtracker's data by comparing it with two more sources of keyword frequency distribution data, one quite reliable the other much less.

Then we look for longer key phrases that include several shorter ones. This demands a lot of linguistic ingenuity and we do this part by brainstorming as a team, thus doubling the workhours. We won't give our customer what he deserves if we let only one person perform this task without simultaneous critique.

I see therefore no sense in performing this task by brainstorming with the site's owners - they have neither the hard data nor the experience and the ingenuity.

It might happen that the most popular search phrase are found to face too much competition to risk working further, and all less popular ones are really worthless. This is then a successful Web market research whose recommendation to the customer is "don't waste money on Web marketing". It might also happen that key phrase niches with very promising potential are found and the desperate poor brother is saved.

[ihelpyou]

I see therefore no sense in performing this task by brainstorming with the site's owners - they have neither the hard data nor the experience and the ingenuity.
I feel you are not giving a site owner enough credit to know what his market is.

I also feel you spend waaaay too much time and energy "researching".

This is not rocket science. Actually, I find things very, very simple.

[emanuel_hoch]

Doug, I apologize in advance for the apparent "patronizing" tone of this post, but I agree with none of your statements and I have no other truthful argument to object:

1. Site owners have no idea what their available WEB market is before the WEB market research stage (task analysis + key words & key phrase choice) is completed by an SEO expert.

2. SEO work resembles, among other things, military intelligence work - it requires thorough training and continuous research of the arena, as well as targeted thorough research throughout each particular task.

3. There's no such thing as "rocket science" - there's theoretical physics and its applications in rocket technology. SEO has its roots in complex systems theory and information theory, and its application in SEO technology, something for which "linguistic ingenuity" was found to be an odd but necessary part. There are, for instance, theoretical reasons why one cannot predict in advance the location a site might achieve at a certain search engine, before interacting with it. (The exception which proves the rule is easy but worthless or redundant SEO.)

SEO is far from simple because of the sheer complexity of the environment system - complex ranking algorithms operating on a huge number of web sites, many of them optimized as well.

However, there are still many sites that do not encounter problems aroused by this complexity, and they can still get good results from honest, short and unexpensive SEO work. Many SEO workers are right in sticking with them. We are harmed, after all, not so much by competing with each other but by all of us meeting customers who have unrealistic expectations after being promised miracles.

[ihelpyou]

Okay. I do think this needs to be said. I am NOT at all saying this is you or your firm because I have No clue as to who you are or who your firm is.

"There are some SEO companies out there who try to relay to the public that this SEO stuff is ohhhh soooo hard and complex that the web site owner simply has to hire someone to help them. Further, this web site simply has to hire our firm because of this, this, and that. It is waaaaay to hard for a site owner to do this stuff on their own. Hence, they should pay me to do it because it is just waaay too complicated for anyone else to try."

I simply disagree. This stuff is a learned process developed through experience, and an inherent instinct built-in that somehow guides you to the top. For me, it is extremely simple.

Sorry if this comes off like I am tooting my own horn. It's not meant to be that way. But, if I think about it, this is my forum and I can say just about anything I wish. :)

I would really love to show you some of my clients ranks. I would even put them up against yours and anyone's actually. Put them up for scrutiny on "keywords targeted", "competitiveness", "searches done daily". But, since my clients are a private matter, there is no way I could show anyone this information.

Believe me, I truly feel that this SEO stuff is very simple. With experience and knowledge learned anyone can do it if they have the time it would take. You become real good if you add in the "instincts" some SEO's have out there.

[ihelpyou]

I should add:

I know of Many other SEO's who feel that SEOing is very simple as well.

Some are right here and some are members in other forums.

[emanuel_hoch]

Doug, you contradict yourself: you say that SEO is so simple that good sense and experience are enough; on the other hand you let us understand that doing SEO for "web hosting" is so difficult that you won't do it even for your brother's starving kids. Not to mention the $10,000 loan you might want to get back.

[ihelpyou]

lol. I certainly do not wish to be a cloaker. That is necessary for a term such as that. Either cloaking or some other way of "tricks". No thanks.

And yes, it is simple.

[ihelpyou]

You know, it is very obvious the two of us have entirely different views and different business models. That is not a bad thing, just different.

I am all for the "training" of my clients, so after the experience of being with Doug, they will have the capability of at least having a fighting chance on their own. Others simply wish to "honor a contract" and then go on to the next client. That is not me and never will be. I have clients that along time ago decided to venture out by themself. Some of them keep in touch to let me know how things are going. Even more have came back months later to start up again.

Larger SEO's have an advantage in that they might have "brand" name awareness. They might have already received big endorsements from well-known, influencial people such as Danny Sullivan or Detlev, or someone else like that. That will give a big advantage to them. Does this make them better than me? Not necessarily. Does the fact that I do it all and have a smaller price and might be able to give better personalized service make me better than them? Not at all.

We all have different ways and means of doing this stuff and of handling clients. Some of the ways are only different because of the way our own businesses are run. There is no question that the small guy like me can have an edge over the bigger guys. An edge on price, an edge on service, an edge on the overhead involved, etc, etc.

I suppose if I had to pay 4 or 5 different employees for each aspect of the SEO process, my prices would be extremely high as well. I don't have to pay them. I only need to do a good job for me, myself, and I. That is it. My work pays me and me alone. My clients definitely know who to talk to when they need to. I and I alone answer to my clients and also I answer to myself.

Many differences and ways of doing this stuff. We all are different. We all have our own ways. It is strickly up to the web site owner to choose his/her SEO carefully. It is up to them to figure out what might work for them. We all can shoot off about what we can do and how we will do it, but the owner has to make up his/her own mind as to what business model they choose to help them.

[emanuel_hoch]

Well, it seems that I've used up all my arguments for today. In your opininion there are only simple tasks and tasks that are only possible by dubious means. Otherwise they're impossible. And there's nothing in between. Not even one slightly difficult task.

Which reminds me that I've forgotten the time dimension:

According to an ancient myth once there was no Internet at all. Then it was created, Sites started to grow in number and soon came the Search Engines. But the Internet was so sparsely populated that it was enough to Submit, and the more the better.

The Ranking Monsters came out of the woods and sorted the Sites into long columns, each into his place by use of a mysterious yardstick called Relevancy. And then came the SEOs out of the waters and by use of magical Optimization played havoc with Relevancy. The Ranking Monsters fought back trying to restore the ancient order.

Many years have passed and the battle is still going on with many casualties on each side. The costs are huge but sometimes less so. However, none knows now whether a Site is to be found in its particular place thanks to Relevancy or to Optimization.

Good night.

[Mel]

Hi Emanuel:

Regarding the number of hours spent researching keywords and phrases (I do no consciously do "task analysis" perhaps because I have a fair idea of what needs to be done) I must agree with Doug that it varies between customers. I do at least one site evaulation per day and on some sites I can fill the blanks in the template in an hour, but for others I may end up scratching my head for five or six, while I find a way out of the quaqmire.

I find Wordtracker to be an excellent tool, but just that a tool, and like all tools it is no better than the hand of its user. I too used to check all sites with a third source, but I soon found that in 90% of the cases the judicious use of the Wordtracker data provided the information I needed.

How many hours spent on Keyword analysis? Fom two to fifty, and on rare occasions when I felt it was in the clients best interest to change the focus of thier site slightly in order to target more effective keywords even more.

One of things I like about SEO is that it is simple once you understand it, yet each site presents different challenges.

Like Doug, I understand that there are very lucrative and very competitive areas where the competition is fierce and dirty tricks reign supreme and I do not choose to enter into that fray. There is plenty of business elsewhere.

[Mel]

Hi again Emanuel

And then came the SEOs out of the waters and by use of magical Optimization played havoc with Relevancy

This is another area of disagreement. IMO, it is the job of the SEO to help each site to be sorted into its rightful place in the relevancy scheme of things, but not to disrupt the order.

In a perfect world there would be no need for SEO as each site owner would craft great content and the search engines would assign each one to its righful place according to their perfect relevancy algos.


Well its not a perfect world, and the SEOs job is to help retore order to the relevancy rankings not play havoc with them.

[buckworks.com]

One problem I see in this thread is that some folks seem to be assuming that "simple" and "easy" are synonyms. They're not. On the other hand, neither is "complex" necessarily a synonym for "difficult." It depends on your gifts.

No matter what the field, I'm always suspicious of someone who has to make a big "oh-gawd-this-is-hard-work" production of things. Usually, the people who are *truly* good at something make it look easy.

Sometimes they make it look so easy that the rest of us don't realize how good they are! (Consider the Olympic figure skaters ... )


Elisabeth Archambault

[MazY]

Originally posted by buckworks.com
Usually, the people who are *truly* good at something make it look easy.

Elisabeth Archambault

Or as it states on my desk: -

"Of course I don't look busy. I did it right the first time." :)

[Advisor]

Originally posted by buckworks.com
One problem I see in this thread is that some folks seem to be assuming that "simple" and "easy" are synonyms. They're not. On the other hand, neither is "complex" necessarily a synonym for "difficult." It depends on your gifts.

No matter what the field, I'm always suspicious of someone who has to make a big "oh-gawd-this-is-hard-work" production of things. Usually, the people who are *truly* good at something make it look easy.

Sometimes they make it look so easy that the rest of us don't realize how good they are! (Consider the Olympic figure skaters ... )


Elisabeth Archambault Absolutely, Elisabeth...case closed!

Jill

[ihelpyou]

"Of course I don't look busy. I did it right the first time."
That's a great quote!
It depends on your gifts.
Very good buckworks!
Well its not a perfect world, and the SEOs job is to help retore order to the relevancy rankings not play havoc with them
I agree with Mel on this as well. Another job we have is to make a site more user friendly, which in turn makes it more SE friendly.

[Advisor]

I agree with Mel on this as well. Another job we have is to make a site more user friendly, which in turn makes it more SE friendly. Yes, indeedy folks. Like I always say, make your site the best it can be...that's what search engine optimization is really about. At least the way I do it, and obviously many of my moderator collegues here.

It's so nice to see the SEO world finally starting to get it...at least some of the SEO world!

Jill

[Kal]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
I should add:

I know of Many other SEO's who feel that SEOing is very simple as well.

Some are right here and some are members in other forums.

I'm with Doug. SEO is quite straightforward once you have educated yourself with what works, what doesn't , what is best practice, what isn't etc. The most time consuming task about SEO IMO is keeping up with changes to the engines and to the industry at large (which is why these forums are so valuable).

As for pricing models - of course this is going to differ depending on the SEO company's size, target market, geographical location, cost of living, experience etc. But SEO is a very unique market in that costs are not standardized from firm to firm or project to project. They may never be. You just need to look at the Buyer's Guide to SEO to see that the larger companies or those charging the most aren't necessarily achieving the best results. In fact a couple at the highest end achieved the poorest reviews of all while some at the lower price end achieved very high grades and so represent real value for money.

I used to service the larger clients and found (like Doug) too many "chiefs" and waaaaay too long a lead time. I even found myself attending endless "workshopping sessions" with the client, the client's designer, the client's ad agency, the marketing department, the programmers etc which turned each project into a stage show. God if I had $1 for the number signatures I had to chase to kick off a project!

Then I gained a lot of smaller clients via word of mouth and started concentrating on them. I guess my market is inbetween now, but I don't target any size or industry in particular, just alter my pricing according to what my clients want to pay and what I think is fair for my time and results. My packages change depending on search engine trends and SEO techniques (PPC has had a definite impact lately). That works for me. I take on the clients I want, spend the time I see fit and charge the $ I think I deserve.

But perhaps that's where the simplicity lies (for me and others): we don't look for complex SEO projects and keep the ones we get as straight-forward as possible. No big productions, just KISS.

[Advisor]

Very good points about the larger clients. Right now it is often a good 6 months from when I'm first contacted by a large client and from when I actually get any work done. With small businesses that never happened. They contact you, you tell 'em what you're gonna do and you do it! Actually, that's not true now that I think of it. I'm working on a dental site now which has been in the works for ages and ages, and actually, I have another not so big client with the same problem...so I guess it all just really depends.

Going through the layers of a big company can definitely be a huge pain, though!

Jill

[The Ney]

The problem with the large companies are also their expectations. They expect to gain #1 position in 15 minutes for the most popular searches , without regarding the fact that they don't understand a thing about SEO.

But when you are a company that is on the beggining of its way, when you have to establish yourself, you don't have the luxury of choosing which clients you can serve and which not. Of course, there should be limits to everything, but you can choose your clients only after you have established yourself financialy.

And Doug, i see that more than once you are trying to make an equation which says that optimizing for very competitive terms=cloacking / spamming / etc. I have encountered something similar to that also in a thread about the cloacking itself. I wouldnt agree with you. The equation can say :
optimizing for very competitive terms = hard work of quality linking, content and source optimization and resubmitting over a long period of time. Only companies with suicidal tendencies would promise something that they cannot achieve.

Wanted to give thumbs up for the discussion. The subject seems to be a bit touchy, but no one seems to be insulted, which says something about the quality of the forum. :thumb:

[glengara]

A quote from Emanuel in http://searchengineforums.com/Forum30/HTML/000260.html

*We have found that we cannot provide good results with less than forty hours per month.*

A change in career then?

[ihelpyou]

hey the Ney, I think I should have worded that differently. All I am saying is that I would not even try on a term like that because of all the "tricks" that are involved and because it would take up far too much of my time.

If I could not get the site to be more targeted on the phrase, I would tell them to go elsewhere. Normally, the bigger sites are the ones who feel they should be ranked on that phrase. This is why I have no problem because I target smaller business. You are right, big business expects big things and Right NOW. I choose to not screw with them. That is the point I was making.

We have two different business models. You are targeting big business and I target small business. There will be many differences in what we do and how we do it.

I agree. Great thread!

[emanuel_hoch]

Hi Glengara, I'm so glad you agree with me.

Indeed, people who don't understand why forty hours per month are needed to provide good results, and on top of that don't care enough about providing good results to be a little curious about this statement, to argue with it, to try and prove it wrong, it might once happen indeed that they will have to consider a career change.

But, Glengara, I wouldn't be as severe as you are. They might not need to consider it right now, there might still be some time left, till they quickly learn a new trade. Perhaps even as quickly as they have learned this one. And they can then smoothly move into the new career. In which they will also not need to argue what is required in order to provide good service.

[ihelpyou]

Well, personally, I find 40 hours per month for one site to be very far-fetched indeed. :) Big business or not.

I guess the last 4+ years for me has been a waste then, as I should be looking for another career. ;)

[Advisor]

Indeed, people who don't understand why forty hours per month are needed to provide good results, and on top of that don't care enough about providing good results to be a little curious about this statement, to argue with it, to try and prove it wrong, it might once happen indeed that they will have to consider a career change. You seem to be saying that what Doug and I have been doing for years can't be true. Yet it is and we have the results to prove it! I have sites that I optimized three or four years ago that are still ranking high today without ever spending another minute (or dime) on them. It is not only possible, but it's probable if you optimize a site "correctly" to begin with. If you're simply trying to figure out the algorithm du jour, however, you will need to spend at least 40 or more hours per month (maybe per week) per client.

Career change for me? I don't think so! :D

Jill

[emanuel_hoch]

Doug and Webwhiz...... Not at all! You both ignore the time dimension for which I took all the trouble to quote accurately the ancient myths book.

Several years ago all you needed is to submit. Then some bright webmasters invented those tricks (keyword inflation, invisible ink text) and the SEs retaliated with anti-tricks. It is now a global rocket war but your guerilla outfits still perform nicely. You have no reason indeed to get out of the jungle and face armored divisions in the open fields.

It is theoretically impossible to explain why a certain site stays at the top location for a very long time. Even if it's yours, you wouldn't dare playing with its relevancy parameters just to answer this question. But you can look for clues: little competition, credits for clicks at this SE which perpetuate top locations, the high number of links an old site had time to establish, and so on.

I do claim, however, that maintaining a recently built site (or an old site that has never been successfuly optimized) in a very competitive keywords environment (and it doesn't matter what's the size of the company that owns it), might require about 40 monthly workhours. If the site is at the top locations at all major SEs you have indeed no reason to spend even a monthly minute on it. That is, beyond generating visitor statistics reports which your customer will be very happy to get.

[ihelpyou]

I just think you are making things to complicated when the only things you really need on any site are good content and an understanding of how to place the words of that content.

I think you are making too much of this algo thing and of this so-called war out there of which I have not run into as of yet.

[emanuel_hoch]

Doug, this doesn't sound like an invitation to argue with you.

[ihelpyou]

Nope. Not argue. Simply debate. I love debates. :)

[emanuel_hoch]

Good night then.

[BuffettFan]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
Ya know, what some people do not seem to realize is that some Large SEO companies out there have enormous overhead costs.

I think that Doug hit the nail right on the head. Bigger is not always better and smaller is not always less. What's most important to me besides compentency is being able to work directly one on one with the person that is actually handling all phases of the optimization/promotion of my website. Working with a large company that just farms it out to small independent SEO's is something that I would definitely avoid. As a small business owner I have to be very careful about the decisions that I make as some can prove to be very costly.

Paul

[emanuel_hoch]

BuffettFan, how would you explain this logical riddle:
a. You agree with Doug
b. Doug and me disagree on everything
c. I agree with you

[Advisor]

Originally posted by emanuel_hoch
BuffettFan, how would you explain this logical riddle:
a. You agree with Doug
b. Doug and me disagree on everything
c. I agree with you For some reason, I find that extremely amusing!

Jill

[ihelpyou]

LOL. I think what emanuel is saying is that even a big SEO can give personalized service to a client. They just have to work harder to do it.

[bigDugan]

FYI. BuffettFan I checked out your site and noticed that you do not specify a background color. It may default to white for some, but for others who are using a "desktop theme", it will use the theme's default background color, which may NOT be white. Funny, because I've notice a few sites like that, but it wasnt until I looked at yours I figured out what it was. The same is to be remembered when using default font colors too.:up: