Search Engine Marketing Industry Issues

[Alan Perkins]

The topic of the panel that both Doug and I are involved in at next month's Search Engine Strategies in Boston is "Search Engine Marketing Industry Issues". My brief is to discuss

the issue of standards, that there are few widely-agreed definitions of "search engine spam" and whether the industry needs to adopt a code of practice.

I'd like gather some opinions before the conference to allow me to structure the talk better. Feel free to pitch in. I'll start off.

Looking at the brief, I find that phrase "the industry" interesting. At the moment I think the thrust of my presentation will be examining whether there actually is, or could be, an industry, and if so who or what it would include.

Could it, for example, include both SEOs and search engines?

For example, let's suppose there was an industry association that you would like to be a member of. Would you want the likes of Google or Inktomi to also be members? Could search engines be members of an organisation whose other members included, in their opinion, spammers? How would or could (or should?) the association arbitrate?

FWIW, I think a Search Engine Marketing Industry SHOULD include both search engines and search engine marketers. It's only if we know what the industry is that we can even look at what standards may be appropriate. And it's only be recognising that it is one industry that the industry can move forward.

What do you think?

[ihelpyou]

hey Alan, good topic. I'll give some thoughts later on tonight. :)

[highman]

Isnt this what WAIM is trying to achieve?

[Alan Perkins]

Possibly - but what do YOU think? Vote! :)

[markymark]

It seems clear to me that it is one industry. Without the search engines, there would be no search engine marketing or whatever it's called this week. It is a symbiotic relationship. That is one issue.

As for 'standards' and search engine optimization bodies and all that. You can count me out, for one. I must admit to taking the Groucho Marx line on this a little but bear with me.

I have been trying in my own little way to distance myself from all notions of SEO as a standalone profession. Some of the accepted wisdoms of search engine optimization I find quite distasteful and want no part of and I am doing my damndest not to associate with.

An example ? How about the idea that it is the SEO's job only to get rankings and whether the site increases sales, gets more clients or whatever is not their responsibility. I'm sorry, but for me this is a cop out and indicates a lack of understanding of what the object of the exercise is. Surely as people involved in marketing (and make no mistake, that is what this is) we have to take responsibility for the consequence of what we are doing.

You wouldn't find an advertising agency saying 'oh well, Mr Client, we are sorry you didn't get any more sales through this campaign, but we did get your advert in front of 10 million people'. But this is, in effect, what the search engine optimization industry does. For me, that is not good enough. If we are to talk realistically about ethical search engine optimization, then we should be talking about taking responsibility for the results of the campaign. Those results should be increased sales. If you are getting your client good ranks but not achieving sales, then you have failed your client and if you were an ethical SEO, you should feel ashamed and accept that your client will go to someone who can help deliver what they really want - more sales.

This has become my focus - I accept that I provide a specialist marketing service but am intent on providing a full value service that will achieve the primary objective, which is to get more sales or clients or newsletter sign-ups or whatever.

I do not want to be part of a ghetto industry that abrogates (is that spelt correctly ?) all responsibility from the consequences of its actions. I think we need to accept that we are specialists in one method of marketing a site and that there are other equally valid and valued ways of doing this. As 'ethical' SEOs , it is our DUTY to learn as much as we can about all aspects of marketing and promotion, about converting traffic into sales and so forth and stop saying 'I never promised you any traffic or sales, all I said was I would get you ranks'. That to me is unethical, irresponsible and needs to be addressed first.

I voted no, by the way :)

[nuzelonde]

markymark: good post. I've always thought that SEO minus traditional marketing values is inherently unethical.

Standards/spammers: Ridiculous. The only people that could seriously define industry standards are the search engines. The reason they won't do that is obvious.

There is no search engine spamming (that's their term). There is only marketing. You're either perform a service that provides good ROI or you don't.

Industry: We already have one. It's called the Marketing industry.

[ihelpyou]

hey nuzelonde:
There is no search engine spamming (that's their term). There is only marketing. You're either perform a service that provides good ROI or you don't.
Just want to be clear what you are saying. Providing good ROI and good marketing at all costs? It does not matter how one does this?

[nuzelonde]

I don't think there is anything in human experience that should be conducted "at all costs". It's not a term I use.

The method is part of ROI, isn't it? "Return" can be measured in many ways. A television advertisment that is in poor taste might damage a conservative banks reputation, yet it may enhance the reputation of a beer. You match methodology to clients.

Business exists within the boundaries of law, so as long as you are operating legally, fine.

What's your point?

[ihelpyou]

I have no point as I was simply trying to understand your point as my post suggested.

You said it was an either/or thing, so simply wanted to know your reasoning.

Thanks for clearing it up. ??

[Alan Perkins]

Excellent post Mark. I just don't understand why you voted "no" after it!

nuzelonde: thanks for your contribution!

I don't want to force any issues (yet) in this thread - I want to gather opinions. So I'll leave it there for now. :)

[ihelpyou]

Well, I personally do believe some kind of 'industry standards' are needed that is agreed upon by the search engines as well. I know Google is open to this so this should be pursued.

I also know that WAIM is busy trying to do something along this regard but are running into obstacles with things. I'm not sure what the solution could be but do think there should be a solution.

We all simply cannot say that there should not be any ethics or morals as to what we do or how we handle our client's web sites. Everything we do can have a direct, long-term impact on that client's site in a big way.

Right now, I have a client who was bamboozled by a prior SEO without knowing the damage that could possibly be done with their site. The client did not know any of this AND was not told by the SEO that certain things could/might happen. Instead, the client was told that the SEO had Never had any clients banned or penalized before.

That is a strong and brave statement to make to a client, especially if a SEO uses questionable techniques to achieve good ranks. Just because a SEO has never had a client banned does not mean that it could never happen, just that they have not been caught yet. Well, this client's site was caught, and now the client and myself are having a hard time rectifying the situation.

The client is also starting to get upset with me a little as when you are banned by AltaVista outright and penalized by Google outright, it is extremely tough to get back on the good side of things. This SEO did a few questionable things and it is hard figuring out exactly all that was done when the client is not very knowledgeable about what the correct ways are or in what the SEO was actually doing to begin with.

Yes. Industry standards need to be addressed or many more web site owners out there will be 'taken' by what I call, unethical SEO's.

[Alan Perkins]

To get you thinking some more, I just asked Google "What defines a professional?" This page came top:

http://www.npanet.org/public/position.cfm

It's about the network computing industry, but it could equally apply to our industry. What do you think?

[ihelpyou]

Very good link:
The following social and behavioral studies criteria define professional (E.H.
Schein):

Full time occupation
Specialized body of knowledge and skills acquired over a period of education and training
Decisions made on behalf of the client from universal principles or standards
Service orientation on behalf of clients
Professional service based on objective needs of the client independent of particular sentiments
Professional assumed to know what is good for the client better than the client
Professionals form organizations that define criteria for admission, educational standards, licensing, or other formal entry mechanisms
Particularly interesting is the number one thing listed; Full time occupation.

Do we realize how many firms out there are online and have a site and are doing this on a part-time basis? None of these sites will state this on their site at all. Many are now up because of a whim and thoughts of making some extra money. Many have little experience. They also do not state any of this on their sites. Of course, they would never tell a client this either.

[ihelpyou]

To further stimulate some thought and more posts;

What do you all think about a web site owner offering a service, having any type of prior interaction or repoire with the general public in a 'real life' prior job?

Do you feel this would be important? or should not be addressed when discussing any type of standards?

Just had that thought.

[Alan Perkins]

What do you mean?

[ihelpyou]

hmmm. Should any prior real life experience with 'people' in the brick and mortar world be considered with any standards that are discussed?

This is if the site offers a 'service' to a potential client.

[Alan Perkins]

LOL. No, IMO. No requirement to have any experience of "people" at all!

As time goes on, more and more people doing business online only have experience of doing business online. I don't see a problem with that. It's how you do business that is at issue, not where.

I think I know what you're getting at but don't think is the way to resolve it. :)

[ihelpyou]

lol. Not a requirement at all. I just wanted thoughts on the subject as with a service oriented site you deal with people/clients on the phone, thru email, even in person, so just was throwing that out for thought.

I actually would think that one who is experienced with the public would do much better online and offering services than one who has none.

Just a thought. :)

[MazY]

Hate to be a predictable bore but I'm with Mark on this one. Maybe it comes from spending too long on an island? :)

[kneelsit]

Trying to follow this - real world ?, virtual world?, online world?,

If we don't watch out we will all fly too high and finish up like the proverbial old crow, disappearing up our own fundamentals.:D

IMHO Marketing is the name of the game not just placement

[Alan Perkins]

Don't worry Greg, I'll try to get back on topic.

IMO there are three aspects to the Search Engine Marketing industry.

1) Marketers
2) Marketing Platforms
3) Marketing Tools Providers

Most readers of these forums are "marketers". From that perspective, Search Engine Marketing broadly incorporates the following activities

[list=1]
Keyword research Determining search words and phrases to associate with Web site content.
Web Site Optimisation i.e. what is commonly known as SEO. Modifying Web pages and sites to be more responsive to search engines and keywords people enter into those engines. A subset of this activity is Paid Inclusion.
Pay Per Action e.g. PPC, CPM, etc. This is advertising based around keywords.
Directory/Search Engine Submission/RegistrationA slightly different skill to SEO, IMO, but often perfomed by SEOs after the site has been optimised.
[/list=1]

This list shows specialist activities. Anybody who performed all of them would IMO be a search engine marketer. Anybody who performed just one or two would be a specialist, e.g. an SEO specialist or a PPC specialist. IMO anything not on the above list (e.g. Web design, link building, stats analysis, ROI) isn't a core search engine marketing skill, but that's not to say it isn't a desirable skill for a search engine marketer to have. It's just to say that if you possess that skill, you are not necessarily in the search engine marketing industry. And that leads me on to this question:

Is the term "Search Engine Marketing Industry" too narrow or too wide?

[Advisor]

Yes. Industry standards need to be addressed or many more web site owners out there will be 'taken' by what I call, unethical SEO's. I don't believe that industry standards would stop the unethical SEO's. Those clients that don't do their research will always get taken in no matter how many organizations or governing bodys are out there.

There's a $ucker born every day! (And an unethical SEO out there who will be happy to take their $$$)

Jill

[Alan Perkins]

I don't believe that industry standards would stop the unethical SEOs.No it wouldn't. But it might make it harder for them. :)

Anyway, for this talk I'm more interested in the "industry" than the "association".

[ihelpyou]

Another problem you have is that many SEO's truly believe there should not be any ethics involved with the industry standards. They say it is up to the SEO what is and is not ethical according to them.

What I deem to be unethical is another's way of doing business.

[Alan Perkins]

OK Doug, that is a clear difference between those SEOs and you. How would you differentiate yourself from such competitors to a potential client?

[ihelpyou]

lol. That is precisely what I will be talking about at the conference. How SEO's communicate with potential clients and current clients.

Not how I do, but how we all do as a whole. What do you reveal to them at the start? What do you 'teach' them, if anything? How do you actually differentiate yourself and your techniques from others? How do you communicate with the designer, if different from the owner? If your techniques could/may be frowned upon by a search engine, do you reveal this to the client or potential client? or do you simply tell the client that no clients have ever been banned? etc, etc, etc.

Just simply what is your relationship as a whole with a potential client or the client? and why is it that way?

[Advisor]

I'm looking forward to seeing your presentation, Doug (and yours too, Alan!). What time are you guys on? (I hope it's not early in the morning!)

J

[ihelpyou]

hmm. I'm thinkin late afternoon.

[Advisor]

Oh no, hope you guys aren't on against me...let me check...Oh good...you're after me. Maybe you'll even be in the same room and I won't have to move my lazy butt!

J

[kneelsit]

Alan and Doug, O.K. I can see now what your are hoping to achieve. [Sorry about that gentle crack Alan :) it just seemed to me the conversation was becoming a little esoteric.

I certainly agree that a clarification of the roles and skills of people in the SEO industry would certainly be a help to potential
clients. However, it still comes down to a case of caveat emptor.
Your forum, here, Doug provides an excellent service for just this
purpose. Buyers such as myself have a chance to read the posts
and get "a feel" for the character of the various experts and others who participate.

It might help to give you a little background. I was looking for
a Search Engine Optimiser - not a marketing person as such.
Two disasters had occurred - Setember11th and then being penalised by Google in October so that my sales dropped to almost zero. I went to another forum looking for help and chose
someone who had put up a lot of posts and was also local. My experience with that person was not good, I should have been more patient. I was given the smooth con job. My coding was mess - see for yourself at this url.. ! Your site is old fashioned
and needs a complete makeover. Here is a sample of what I can do - with a big COPYRIGHT label pasted over the front of it. (in case I had the temerity to want to copy her pathetic attempt at
vamping up my site). And it will take many hours of work to give you a keyword analysis -( a day later a very helpful member had
sent me an analysis for my site free gratis). All up probably several months all told to fix up your site a substantial sum up front and several thousand dollars with "no guarantee" that she could get me back into Google - hardly surprising I suppose since she herself had also been dropped by Google.

By contrast a few days later I found this wonderful forum and a very helpful SEO who corresponded with me and told me what my site would need and HOW WE COULD WORK TOGETHER to get my rankings up and very likely get me back in Google. A quite moderate rate was quoted for the clean up and optimisation with
a further sum payable ONLY if he got me back into Google. I was
given a copy of how his own site appeared in Agent Web Ranking
- excellent positions for all the major SEs.
I was directed to areas where I could brush up my skills in HTML and learn about css. In short an excellent co-operative working partnership was formed.

Recognising that the owner/producer knows their own product
best, pages were went to me after important keywords were
inserted so that we could give the final polish to the wording to ensure that it flowed and "read well" - skills both my wife and I
believe we both have competence in.

When he gets me back into Google I will shout his praises here to the skies.!!


In conclusion I would prefer that the original SEO classification remains - marketing is another skill altogether IMO. However my current SEO friend does know his skills well in this area and knows how to sell himself in an ethical, friendly manner.

[ihelpyou]

That is great Greg! That certainly sounds like one of the many SEO's that are members in here! Actually, that desciption I believe, matches ALL of our SEO's in here. So, by flipping a coin, we could figure out who it is. :)

Seriously, I am happy you found a good one and I do hope he/she is from here. :)

[kneelsit]

Most definitely from these forums Doug.
MMMost definitely - got a clue yet.?

The other person who tried the con job also posted briefly here
for a time but mainly whingeing and having a go at you, did not even have the sense to use a different login name. You can probably guess who.:)

[Advisor]

LOL...I thought for sure it was Doug! I guess not. But I can't figure out who the one who was whining was...

Jill

[ihelpyou]

hey, you have a good one helping you!

I don't know but please don't post any name for the other one if they are a member in here.

[nicebloke]

Alan, I think the idea of an industry association in the SEO/Internet marketing area is a nice idea.

What would concern me, though, is how are the members of this association policed? What's to stop me qualifying, meeting all your conditions, and then going and indulging in a load of 'unsavoury' techniques? How could you possibly stop this happening?

[markymark]

What's to stop me qualifying, meeting all your conditions, and then going and indulging in a load of 'unsavoury' techniques

Er, your boss ? Sorry to be flippant, but the real question should be - what would be the incentive for someone like that to join in the first place ? To make such an organisation worthwhile, it would need to be :

a) Recognised by webmasters as being a quality mark (quality mark, that's got a ring to it, don't ya think ?) at the very least. Preferrably, it needs to be recognised by the web population at large.

b) If this latter is to be achieved, it needs to be some kind of external regulatory body with a certain amount of influence and sizeable brand recognition.

Back to Alan's question about whether the term search engine marketing is too narrow. Again, not to be flippant, but it's not too narrow for someone involved in search engine marketing.

I still feel that we have to recognise ourselves for what we are - which is an obscure part of the online marketing field. What we need to be discussing is bringing awareness of what we do to the average business website owner. That should be our starting point, not an industry association or anything similar. An industry association of the type I mention above will only be worthwhile once this is achieved.

I have spent most of today talking with a friend of mine who works in IT recruitment and who is well aware of what I do. He has been pitching my skills to his employers as they are currently redeveloping their website. They (and remember this is an IT recruitment firm who deal with web developers and so on every day) had no idea that services like mine even existed let alone how it works.

This is the reality of our field (though I am sure there is a slightly greater awareness in the US) and this is where we should be pooling resources and concentrating our efforts.

[kneelsit]

Doug, Sorry to interrupt the thread but I have posted off a private email to Jill giving her the name - as I knew she was bursting with curiosity, 2nd clue to the great SEO - M from M.

No further clues sorry.

[ihelpyou]

hey Greg, I just re-read your prior post and noticed this;
My experience with that person was not good, I should have been more patient.
Sometimes sites do not understand the importance of that little statement in this industry. Before I even tell a potential client that I will help them, that little statement better be fully understood, otherwise that potential client can go elsewhere.

Expectations the client have are extremely important and it is of the utmost priority that a client knows this is a long-term thing with zero quick fixes. You said that Google penalized you and the prior SEO was put into that position from the get-go. Sometimes it can take Months before that penalty is lifted. Not the SEO's fault at all.

Indexing is very easy to do. It's getting good ranks that takes a lot of time. Every site is different in this regard as some take only a few months while others take much longer. Patience is a HUGE key.

If you did not give the prior SEO enough time to get things turned around I do hope you give the current SEO plenty of time. Plenty of time meaning many months and not just a couple.

Hope this helps you. :)

[ihelpyou]

oh Alan, to answer that question;

I do think the term 'search engine marketing' encompasses all to do with marketing and think it is too broad a term. IMO

For example;

I am a web site owner who knows little about the search engine industry as a whole. I do know about advertising and have found out that Overture does sell ads through many search engines. I also know this is not what I am searching for but know I can do that if I chose to in the future. What I am looking for right now, since my site is new, is to have some decent ranks in the major search engines on my targeted keyword phrases. I want to be in the regular search engine results for the long-term.

My question is, how would I go about finding someone to help me with this? First, from friends and associates I was told that Google gives the best and most relevant results, so I went there to start my search. Thinking about it a moment, I decide to try a search. My thoughts are 'what do I type in to find a firm that will do what I wish to do?

Does the word 'marketing' enter my train of thought at all? Naw, too general for what I am looking for.

Let's say I do type in the term 'search engine marketing'. Is it not possible that the first ten results could be nothing but sites that do a full service in regards to PPC marketing? Of course that is possible. Is this what I am looking for right now? No it is not.

So what do I type in? I think I would be more apt to type in specifically what I am looking for. Maybe something like 'web site optimization' or search engine optimization or 'search engine submissions' or anything like that. I would avoid the word 'marketing' as it is just too general a word for what I am looking for.

Hope this helps.

[ihelpyou]

Oh, and Greg, I also noticed that you did not start with that prior SEO as they might have been too high.

It all depends on what they were offering. If they were offering to give your site a new design, well that can cost some bucks.

If I were a designer(i'm not) and were to redo your site, I would charge a few thousand to just do the redesign and not the SEO. SEO would be added on top of the re-design. You just have to weigh what is being offered and decide for yourself.

If you would have wanted me to help you, I can guarantee I am not as expensive as some SEO's in here. Some of them re-do and re-design sites for thousands and others simply work with the current site and optimize it. I might suggest a re-design of your site to better help with sales conversions but I would not be able to do that for you unless I hired out to do so.

Re-design is not cheap.

[excell]

Me, myself, I - come from the angle of marketing a business on "whatever" medium. In our context it is the internet marketing over search engine positioning that is of interest to me.

I am some what surprised to see Kneelsit's contributions to this thread and would like to answer to him.

I do not mind in the least identifying myself here. I am Excell (that is my nick/screen name) [editing out link - point being I don't sneak around or feel the need to hide my identity by having a different screen name, in order to post here :) ]

Hehe Doug, that is about all the self promotion you will ever see from me!

I am indeed the company that Kneelsit is complaining of and if anyone at all would like to question us, our arrangements and dealings with Kneelsit, please feel totally free to do so.

If anyone would like some insight as to why my client websites do not currently appear in google, then see this other forum thread (http://searchengineforums.com/Forum28/HTML/001981.html)

All sites are however, doing well across the board, and doing business as usual.

If any one would like to see if Kneelsit, as a client, was dealt with fairly please see the report prepared (link to follow) after spending many, many hours in trying to help him in free forums (yes the over there type) and on the phone at my expense, I am somewhat disappointed at Kneelsit's posts here when he could have come directly to us as the source of his aggrevation.

Greg I hope you can see this post in the light that it is sent.

Yes, I think you are wrong to post in public what you will not say in private.

But much more importantly, I think that the SEO vs Marketing question needs far greater analysis.. or better interpretation. Or something..

Geez heck and all, what IS THE POINT OF having a great lookin well positioned website if it don't sell! LOL. New term for that idea coming shortly!

I ask all to forgive spell and etc mistakes! If anyone at all is in doubt at all as to our services in relation to kneelsit's web sites and our dealings with same, please do contact us for a full exposure of all! No problems.

A question you could all ask in boston is what to do with a person who will not pay?? LOL Take the chair from underneath him is my guess :)

[kneelsit]

Wonderful post excel :D

- exactly the vein and tenor of your previous posts to Doug. and others. DO lighten up a bit and ENJOY life. There is more to it than just making money.

BTW Have you checked your mail box ??
You were sent your extortionate balance last week.

I objected to your methods and manners as much as anything and the hypocrisy of your statement about not wanting to self/promote on this forum.

There are well known "tricks" in any trade. the bogie mechanic who listens to the noise that is worrying you and, believing you know nothing at all about motors,says
"Ah gee you are going to need a complete new engine there!! But I won't give you any guarantee that it will work."

and you wonder why I declined to proceed.!! Sheesh.

Enough said!! To Repeat "DO lighten up a bit and ENJOY life. There is more to it than just making money".


8) Can we finish this now Doug please:)

[MazY]

Originally posted by excell
I am indeed the company that Kneelsit is complaining of and if anyone at all would like to question us, our arrangements and dealings with Kneelsit, please feel totally free to do so.

I'm sorry. Why would anyone want to do that? I would hope that your own business ethics would stop you from discussing any particular client (realised or not) case.

If you don't mind me saying, offering to tell all puts you in a very bad light.

[ihelpyou]

Yes. I do hope both parties involved can take it into private. I never wanted any names to be mentioned in here.

The thing is, it is a very big fact of life that certain clients and certain SEO's simply will not get along together. Whether it is a communication problem or something else, no two people are the same.

I am very sure ALL SEO's have had their similar circumstances with a client and I am very sure all clients have had their similar cirmumstances with a SEO. Not a big surprise here. In many of those cases neither the SEO or the client is right or wrong, simply did not work well together.

In any case, this stuff needs to be kept private. I want you both as members because you both are very sharp. You guys can do this. :)

[excell]

Alan, sorry to muck up your thread there, you indeed have a challenge with the topic of standards in this "industry". I had originally intended to post some sort of contribution to you but got totally side tracked on my way :)

(I should have ignored the defamatory comments posted. Maz is right, I have no need to justify myself etc.)

What is really relevent to your topic here is consumer expectations in regards to SEO, SEM and marketing in general on the Internet.

I totally agree with this:

"IMHO Marketing is the name of the game not just placement".

As high placement on Search Engines and directories is only one area of marketing a business as a whole I feel that the "industry" is about to do a double take and become a lot more encompassing of other areas. Hopefully it will get a lot cleaner in the process.

Doug, thank ya for your tolerance and support, I have edited my post as I really don't wish to have a link etc.
:hi:

[MakeMeTop]

As this medium is developing - I see us all becoming more involved in a more 'rounded' approach to search engine marketing. This includes all the things that Alan listed (ppc, paid placement, website optimisation, directory listings etc.) but all of these do little if the client web site is not going to sell anything.

2 years ago I had little chance of persuading a client to change their sites - now I spend 50% of our time developing brand new, attractive (both to SEs and surfers) web sites which are designed to lead to a better ROI for the client. Let's face it, if a client does not make money from their site - they are not going to continue to pay my subscription. It is therefore in my interest to look at as many aspects of developing their revenue as possible.

I view my relationship with my clients as a long-term partnership designed to benefit both of us.

But sometimes it doesn't work! I've just had an order from a large financial institution and I will probably send them their money back :(

Their home page does a check for flash and redirects. It is impossible to break out of their site via the back-button at all! Their designer won't change this as 'we don't want people to be able to leave our site..'!

As such, even if I did find a method of getting surfers to their site, I know that complaints would pour in to the SEs. Not even Overture will accept this site. So unless the main site is changed, I have no alternative but to refund their money. No matter how hard I explain that what they are doing is going to cause them grief - if I continued with the contract - I would get the blame for them not being listed - not their designer.

But such is life :)

[glengara]

I think we're getting to the kernel of the problem, the position SEO has in the website development pecking order.

MMTs example may be extreme, but until some influence over design and content is possible, taking responsibility for the site's overall ROI is not part of the SEOs job description.

When a client gives me a free hand to make whatever changes I think necessary, is when I'll be responsible for a sites ROI.

[markymark]

until some influence over design and content is possible, taking responsibility for the site's overall ROI is not part of the SEOs job description.

But that is exactly the point, we do have influence over design and content. Like MMT, if a potential client isn't willing to let me do my job the way it needs to be done, then they don't become a client. If I take on a site that is badly designed or doesn't encourage the visitor to do what the client wants him to do, I will say so, I will suggest changes and in some cases write them into the copy regardless.

We are NOT being hired to get good ranks, that is merely the mechanism by which we achieve what we ARE being hired to do - which is increase business.

[glengara]

If we could all turn down clients who won't give us overall control, it would certainly make things easier.

In reality, some less fortunate SEO would end up with the gig you turned down, doing their best with limited options.

In my view limiting options limits responsibilities.

[markymark]

Okay, I agree with your last comment, that limiting options limits responsibilities. However, it remains true that the client is hiring you to get more business. It is your responsibility to make them aware of the consequence of any limitations placed on you, at the very least. A good SEO should be able to work within the confines of the project and still produce the results. Make no mistake, we are being hired to increase business. That is the sole goal of SEO from the perspective of the client.

It is almost always true that clients have different ideas from marketing people, no matter what field of marketing you are in. This is just life. Try pitching to a new prospect with an attitude of 'no, I'm sorry, it's not my job to bring you new business; that's your problem' and see how far it gets you.

[excell]

Therein lies our problem. What is SEO without marketing? What is marketing? I say, it is a whole lot more than SEO "as we know it". Where does advertising come in? What is possible?

Defining business needs and estabilishing plans to meet them is important.

What is SEO? it's a question in itself, isn't it? What is your definiation? To me SEO "as we know it" is merely positioning a web site where people can find it on the search engines. That is simple, either the site is optimised to be "liked" by the search engines and directories or it isn't.

What I see more and more is the need for success on the net, so we swing right back around to Internet Marketing. Was there any difference in the first place? Yes to a degree I can see there is and that brings us back to standards...

It has always been my believe that traditional ethics of the old "bricks and motar" type business will win if carried through on the Internet. (of course new applications of conducting it need to be applied)

People KNOW, the more tricks you have the worse off you are for long term results.

Not having a go at any one here.. just shooting the breeze in the hope that Alan & Doug & whoever are considered leaders in this "industry" can here my opinion etc. :)

[MazY]

Their designer won't change this as 'we don't want people to be able to leave our site!


You have to love that style of thinking. That by somehow trapping the user they won't (a) really associate your name with something they really hated and (b) make them even more determined to get rid of it.

P.S. I'm still with Mark, through and through...

[Alan Perkins]

Some great posts everybody, thanks!

I just want to keep the pot boiling by looking at "What is SEO".

The only things I can think of that are purely SEO are:

1) writing meta tags
2) suggestions to make content more "search engine friendly"
3) submission to search engines
4) ranking reports
5) cloaking

Everything else that an SEO practitioner may or may not do could be classified under some other umbrella. Doing so might help to move us towards looking objectively at the role of site owners, SEOs, site designers, site architects and marketers in achieving a site's objectives and getting some ROI.

Some posts here and in a number of other threads are suggesting looking at the SEO's role in achieving conversion. Using the above definitions, the SEO has a very small role in achieving conversion. EVERYBODY involved in the specification, design, development and maintenance of a site has a role in its ROI. The earlier a party is introduced to a Web site and the more influence a party has in the development and maintenance of the Web site, the bigger their role in achieving conversion.

From a purist POV, I'm even a bit unhappy with item 2 above but don't want to start a massive row so I'll leave it there for now! It's just that there are probably some hybrid roles, such as SEO/designer and SEO/copywriter.

Opinions?

[excell]

Hmm, put in that light, SEO is probably a term I would wish to totally disassociate myself from ASAP :)

IMO every single thing that goes into a website has one aim and that is to acheive visibility, positioning and ROI.

Too true Alan about all "departments" working together for the ultimate success!

To pick up on your post though, how about these for the "Pure SEO"

analysis of keywords/phrases
analysis of target market
analysis of competitors
analysis of current position
appropriate domain names
inbound and reciprocal link management
alt tags
file naming convensions
informational content pages
navigational structure of site

[ihelpyou]

Yes excell, very good list and points. I think Alan is coming from the perspective of the SEO being introduced to a site already built. At that point, some owners do not want many changes done to the navigation, etc, although the SEO has to make those suggestions anyway. Sometimes this could cost the owner some more bucks and they are reluctant to part with this.

We all know that site owners still view SEO as an afterthought and only when the site is completely built and the owner has no clue about how to get visitors do they decide they need to achieve good ranks in the engines.

Aside from that, I agree with your list completely. Let's face it, most of all sites that come to us already built need a complete redesign and layout that would improve ROI and navigation, etc. We also know most owners are very reluctant to do anything about it as they just spent lots of money on that pretty flash and those pretty graphics the designer 'sold' them on with no thought about the search engines. This is a fact none of us can overlook and the reason, I believe that Alan put those in his list.

[Alan Perkins]

Yep, Doug hit the nail on the head. I think my list shows things that nobody but an SEO would do. To take your list, excell:

marketing generally (not SEO specifically):
analysis of keywords/phrases
analysis of target market
analysis of competitors
appropriate domain names
inbound and reciprocal link management

designer/copywriter:
alt tags
informational content pages

architect:
file naming convensions
navigational structure of site

Finally, analysis of current position is something I had within "ranking reports" :)

[excell]

well it just gets curiouser and curiouser don't it..

so Al what you are say is a SEO is defined as one who writes meta tags, makes suggestions, cloaks pages, submits to SE & directories and reports results?

Well could I maybe try for PPC management as well? or is that a splinter off as well do you think?

[ihelpyou]

In a perfect world everyone who has anything to do with 'marketing' would have an inhouse SEO, web designer, programmer, architect, copywriter, ppc management team, etc.

In a perfect world, all new web site owners could be able to type in 'search engine marketing' and be served up all the relevant web sites that are nothing but firms who do all the above.

In a perfect world, an owner would not have any choice but to hire a firm that has departments that would fill every aspect of marketing the site there is on the net.

We all know this is simply not the case. Now, when a business decides they want to 'get online' with their business, the first thing they think about is 'how or who do I get to build my site'. They hire a firm who, in the least, does web design, whether a good one or a not so good one. That firm either has some clue about the engines or they don't. Right now, it's probably the latter.

If an owner is lucky, he will find a firm who knows about all aspects of marketing and knows the importance of each. This, we know, is simply not the case right now.

Until the general public out there is 'educated' in what all is involved with 'marketing' on the web, the norm will continue to be

"build a site and they will come"

After the owner sees this is NOT the case, they research further to see how to bring targeted visitors to the site.

Education is the huge key here. How many of us came online knowing all of this stuff upfront? How many of us came online and simply built our site thinking that the visitors will start flocking? How many of us thought we would get online and immediately start making money?

ALL of us did.

[Alan Perkins]

Originally posted by excell
well it just gets curiouser and curiouser don't it.. The opposite is my intention - transparency. Danny (among others) has suggested Search Engine Optimisation is dead and Search Engine Marketing is the better term. I'm just trying to explore that, whether it's true, what SEOs and SEMs make of it.

Originally posted by excell
so Al what you are say is a SEO is defined as one who writes meta tags, makes suggestions, cloaks pages, submits to SE & directories and reports results? Sort of, but no. More the other way round. If you do any of those things, you are perfoming an SEO activity. If you ONLY do those things (or a subset of them) you are an SEO. If you do things beyond that, e.g.

PPC management as well

you do more than SEO. PPC management is advertising. IMO it is part of Search Engine Marketing, not SEO.

[excell]

This is all extremely interesting to me and I can see in a way it comes back down to responsibility. With such a new medium, businesses tend to trust the "professionals", they get burnt or disappointed and etc.

In general they do not do a lot of research into the medium, what is required and what their needs are and how to make it work before jumping in.

Nobody's fault! They don't have time.

The next wave is a little wiser, very suspicious and beginning to learn.. but sometimes it is a case of "a little knowledge can be dangerous". Our "industry" has a responsibility to adapt to the needs of these people IMO and yes education is hard work, but I would rather do that than turn a buck, just for the sake of it.

Does that make sense? :p

[excell]

OK cool Al I get your drift now, (I think) hey and I am all for it.. let's kill SEO, spam and the wham bam and get real. Is that where you are coming from?

[Alan Perkins]

Yes, but I don't want to kill SEO. Just work out its place in the wider picture. :)

[ihelpyou]

Makes all the sense in the world excell!

In a perfect world, when an owner decides he/she wants a domain name, they go to a registrar to get one. That registrar may have words on the site that say 'register to 1000 search engines' or something like that. That registrar might say something like 'get indexed into Hotbot, AOL, MSN, etc'. Of course, this is thru Netsol right now.

NO where at any registrar online do they say 'you must be optimized to get ranks in the search engines'. NO WHERE does a registrar say 'find a firm who will specialize in ALL aspects of marketing'.

When an owner buys a domain name, a registrar is the very first thing they do. Either that, or the first thing they do is build the site, in which case, my post above will pertain.

The next thing they do is find a web host for the site. NO WHERE on any host I know of does the site say 'find a firm that specializes in all aspects of marketing'. You might find words on that host's site that says 'register to 1000 search engines'. Has anyone ever found a host that says 'you must find a firm that does it all?' And then also tells you which firms will do this?

No, that host simply will tell you to 'register' your site. I am talking about the big hosts out there that people are familiar with.

The biggest problem out there is that all site owners are subjected first to a regular web designer, a web host, a registrar for domain names. In each case, those sites NEVER mention anything about how the web site will possibly get found by visitors.

This is why an owner is in the position they are in when confronted with the fact they have this 'pretty' site with lots of graphics, but have NO visitors. This after they have just spent hoards of money on site design, on a web host, and on a domain name.

[excell]

Are yes, but then that is where we can succeed if we look at it from their point of view, understand the journey and then make it happen for them as we have others.

It's a happy ending, disheartening and hurtful (for those businesses) on the way but you gotta love it when they get there! :)

[Mel]

I just want to keep the pot boiling by looking at "What is SEO".

It seems that everyone is so busy looking at the technical aspects that the poor customers have been left out in the cold yet again.

Surely there is one thing paramount in a customers mind when he shells out that check for "SEO" - He wants more sales from more customers, and if he could get that without paying the SEO he probably would (and should if he is my employee).

Since the customer is the guy who is paying the bills, should we not be more concerned about what he wants and expects and gets?

He wants more sales and so he hires us, not because we know about Googles algo du Jour, and how to format noframes tags, but because he thinks it will be profitable to do so. Do any of you have any customers with a different basic motive?

If that is the case then we had best define SEO as the art of improving the customers bottom line through the use of search engines. This may or may not encompass any or all of the things discussed, but if his site design is getting in the way of either his rankings or his customers we had best mention that and have a fix for it. The same is true of the message being sent out by his text, we have to have a bit of expertise in that also if we are to call ourselves SEOs.

There are times when all the site needs is a bit of gas and an oil change, and most of us can handle that with ease, but when it calls for a complete overhaul best to call in the experts. There are those (like Mazy perhaps) who can handle cutting edge design, while writing original code for your shopping cart, and then put a polish on the text such that neither the search engines nor the customers recognize just how skillfully the text was crafted, but they are few and far between..

I consider myself a bit of a wordsmith, but would really not like to cross swords in that arena with the likes of Jills partner, Heather. So there is room for all of us, and just like in the real world, the shade tree mechanics will get paid less than the BMW specialists, and there will be the $39.95 paint job shop who advertise "in by nine out by five".

You get what you pay for, and the buyer will always have to beware. hmmmm.. not so much different than the real world after all.

[excell]

Great post Mel!

Coupled with Doug's it just about puts it full spin back around the the name of the game.

I think it was about having the names all wrong?

SEO = Search Engine Optimisation = Search Engineers Optimising Search Engines

SEM = Search Engine Marketing = Search Engines marketing their services

Neither are right for a Web Site positioning and marketing service

[ihelpyou]

Very true Mel!

I get at least one phone call per day stating this:

"I put my site online about 6 months ago and now cannot figure out how to get more visitors and more sales".

I say this:

"When you site was built did the designer optimize for the engines or explain to you all involved with marketing a web site?"

They say this:

Oh no, he/she simply built me this pretty site.

I say this:

Well, in order for you to start getting visitors and start making sales you really do need a complete overhaul of your site. Yes, you need a new layout, less graphics, get rid of the flash, etc. YES, it will cost you more money.

They say this:

"I just spent $10,000 on the site for the design. I could not do this over again." "Besides, the company would never go for it".

Okay. Now what do you say? Do you tell that person to hit the road? Or do you give the person some "realistic" expectations of what you can do with his/her current site? At the same time, do you explain to that person that with a Whole new site the expectations of MUCH more sales and visitors would be there, but since they do not wish to spend all the money again for this, the expectations will not and cannot be as great?

You have to be completely upfront and honest with the person in what you are doing. If this person simply cannot spend the same amount of money again on their site, what do you do?

[Alan Perkins]

Nice post Mel. IMO the focus of this is the customer. Partly

education
protection
setting expectation

The objective is to improve ROI. But I suggest that is everyone's role, not just the SEO's.

You get what you pay for, and the buyer will always have to beware. hmmmm.. not so much different than the real world after all.Yes, this is the real world. :) You might get more than you pay for, if you are lucky, or less, if you are not. Buyer beware, true, but I think a professional industry owes it to the buyer to tell them how to beware. That's what other industries do.

[ihelpyou]

Yes Alan, and the 'education' must be done at the very first level or the first contact that a soon to be web site owner has on the net. The biggest problem is that this owner is confronted with either a web host first or a registrar first, of which neither does anything to market the full package in most cases.

A host my other site has been with for almost 4 years now to this day only offers an automatic submission to 1000 search engines. NO WHERE on the entire site is a mention of the whole marketing package. This host is very typical of the Large web hosts out there. This is the very first thing that an owner is confronted with.

A huge problem when it comes to education.

You can go even further:

How about the dial-up provider? What big provider out there explains to anyone on their site about marketing on the web? AOL? MSN? Earthlink? ......... Who??

Don't these big providers simply try to make a buck anyway they can?

This is the biggest problem as I see it. If all of this was about 'education' from the get go, we would not need an SEO at all. What we all would need would be a 'marketing specialist' where all aspects of marketing online would be addressed.

Since this type of 'education' in the early stages is certainly not addressed by the sites where it should be, all the specialists out there that do only SEO, only PPC management, only site design, etc, etc, will continue to be out there.

[excell]

What do you do? OK, if I have a one coming in with a background of paying $45,000 for a web presence they have had for years, that does nothing for them and has done nothing and has no visibility. (this is a real example case)

I get to the bottom line of what they want to acheive, what they expect the internet to do for them etc. Tell em the bad news (if any) and why it is and what can happen to improve and then if they still want to stick with an Internet plan for their business they pay the cost to fix it...OR what, what is the alternative? Pure SEO, Cloaking, when their biggest problems are foundational?

Is it my fault they didn't do their homework? is it my fault that web designers and developers don't know about marketing? NO it is not and it is not the web designer OR developers that are at fault here either.

If we are going to lift industry standards, it is in education!

It is as Alan says in transperancy and it is in developing win/win situations. Where client and provider are on the same side.

[ihelpyou]

That is right excell, so what do you do if they simply do not have the bucks to do it over again? Do you give a standard proposal that includes a whole new site anyway? Or do you explain to the client what you can do with the current site as is?

If a client can possibly dish out the bucks again, I will outsource the design, and if need be, the copywriting. This is the best case scenario.

If a client cannot and will not spend the money for that again, I will explain the 'expectations' the client should have to work with his/her current site.

In this "un-perfect" world, what choice do we have?

Until the peoples involved with that soon to be site owner at the Very start offer up complete education to that owner about what it takes to 'market' online, I don't see an immediate fix to the problem we all confront daily.

[excell]

If they do not have the $s for my full services, I outsource or refer to some trusted firms that I feel may help them as a partial bandaid that will help them or whatever. That is no problem.
In this "un-perfect" world, what choice do we have? Until the peoples involved with that soon to be site owner at the Very start offer up complete education to that owner about what it takes to 'market' online, I don't see an immediate fix to the problem we all confront daily.
The thing is Doug, we help those that are leaders in the field to direct the ebb and flow and we work together and I believe we all can do it!

Why the heck is it that marketing on the Internet does not carry the same weight as marketing on other mediums? Is it because it is new? How much does TV advert cost? How much the glossary magazine?? Things that are here today and gone tomorrow, whereas a successful website, will bring it in 24/7

[ihelpyou]

The thing is Doug, we help those that are leaders in the field to direct the ebb and flow and we work together and I believe we all can do it!
VERY true excell. I completely agree with you!

The question is, how do we do it? When we all gather together at these SES conferences etc, who attends them?

The SE's, the SEO's, the marketing peoples attend them.

How many of these 'marketing' conferences include the big name providers and web hosts and registrars? NONE of them do. That is the problem.

If we can somehow get to the root of the 'education' problem, that would go along way to solving the problem. Since we are NOT the first peoples to confront the new site owner, how do we solve this?

[ihelpyou]

hmmm. Actually, another vote category should be:

Who should be in this 'industry' we are talking about?

Search engines, SEO's and marketing, AND web hosts and registrars.

I would vote for all of them.

[Alan Perkins]

LOL Doug.

First "search engine marketing" is too wide, now we have web hosts and registrars in the "industry"!

I agree with you, hosting and domain names are important to online marketing. But to expect those companies to be involved is a bit far fetched.

I think it comes down to this: if somebody wants to set up a Web site that will eventually be marketed, ideally they need to call in an online marketing specialist at the outset. Failure to do so could have expensive repercussions or limit the effectiveness of the marketing that can eventually be done.

[ihelpyou]

if somebody wants to set up a Web site that will eventually be marketed, ideally they need to call in an online marketing specialist at the outset.
Yep. And therein lies the problem. How many know to do this? And how do we educate them to do this?

"ideally" equals "perfect"

Since 'ideally' is 'perfect', we can safely say that this world is very 'un-perfect' so this fact that they should consult with an online marketing specialist at the get-go simply is not going to happen anytime soon.

[excell]

In my small corner of the woods I feel I have had a great impact on local isps and hosting companies, but I see your point and to be quite frank I don't think they give a rip.

Too many people are chasing $$s and yet it is trully my firm belief that ethics will trump it in in the long run. No need to be too concerned as individuals for the totality of the internet.

Just gotta remember to join together on the larger issues, many voices speaking as one speak loudly :)

Mutiny they cried, and we cried back yes!

[Advisor]

I think educating Webmasters is even more important than educating hosts and ISPs. Amazingly enough, I bet that 75% or more of all Webmasters still think all they have to do is add Meta tags to sites for the search engines, and this is what they confidently tell their design clients who ask them.

We all know of tons of prospects who are the actual owners of the sites that come to us after having believed what their designers tell them. If more designers were aware of their own limitations and had partnerships with search engine marketers, it would make things better and easier all around. They could tell the client, yes, I can do some rudimentary things to your site, like add meta tags, but it's not my specialty. If you really want to rank high in the engines, talk to this SEO firm. When this happens, it saves everyone a whole lot of extra work (but of course, costs extra money because they can't just pay a designers).

And as to Alan's list of the fundamental tasks of an SEO, I agree completely. Possibly I would add create directory descriptions, and directory submissions, however.

Jill

[markymark]

Look, I've got work to do, I can't keep reading this thread :)

But, for my money, Excell's description of the role of an SEO is pretty much spot on. There's been some interesting points raised here, but what Doug is saying makes a lot of sense.

Yeah, we often come into a project after the design is finished and have to deal with clients who are reluctant to part with more money. And , yeah, there is a lot of time spent educating and re-educating prospects in what we do. So I think we are not using our time effectively - the people we should be talking to are the ISPs, the designers, hosts and domain registrars and, if we really must and as a last resort, the so-called new media companies.

Once we can educate these, then the awareness of what we do increases, the value of what we do increases and we can just bloody well get on with it without having to explain everything from basic principles over and over. I have spent a lot of the last two months talking to designers, hosts and - much to my chagrin - new media companies, not really pitching for work, but just kinda educating them in what I do. I've had a mixed reception, even had one guy tell me that I was just a con artist tricking people and that what I said wasn't possible (this despite showing him client rankings, references, and all that) but overall, I feel I am getting somewhere. There are a few more designers and mid-level hosts in SE England who understand what we are doing now.

However, this is the most interesting thing I learnt. And this came from talking to a some clients of a large design agency in London. They said that when they had decided to go online about 2 years ago, there was an expectation of great things from the web (dot com boom and all that). They did the site themselves and didn't get the results, so their first thought was - OK, our site isn't professional enough, let's get a pro design team in to re-do it and that will bring the results we want. So they did that, fabulous site and all, but still not much new business. This was about the time all those dot coms were failing.

Their conclusion: the web wasn't really a worthwhile medium, it had had it's day, there wasn't the business to be had - total disillusionment, basically. Because they had no experience of the upside of a successful SE friendly site, they found it hard to believe that it could be any different. After all, the internet is dead, right ? Consequently, they weren't going to throw good money after bad on some obscure form of marketing like search engine optimisation.

After this, I have been more aware of a certain amount of suspicion of the effectiveness of the web in general as a means to generate business. Once bitten and all that....

[Advisor]

...even had one guy tell me that I was just a con artist tricking people and that what I said wasn't possible (this despite showing him client rankings, references, and all that) Yes! I get that a lot too. I've spent a lot of time explaining to people the difference between submitting a site to the search engines and actually optimizing a site for high rankings in the search engines. Two very, very different things. Because I found this to be such a prevalent feeling (mostly among Webmasters who tried and failed to rank high), I discuss this heavily on the main page of my HighRankings.com site. It's really the "missing link" that more designers need to be aware of.

I believe that an SEO's biggest obstacle right now is design firms who tell their clients that high rankings are impossible, and or that all you have to do is put in Meta tags. Education is definitely needed in this area!

Jill

[Mel]

Is it my fault they didn't do their homework? is it my fault that web designers and developers don't know about marketing? NO it is not and it is not the web designer OR developers that are at fault here either.

I agree with you Excell, but at the same time it is because of this that we are in business and making money. IF the web designers and developers did their work right in the first place we would be left chasing scraps for DIY owners only.

[Mel]

What do you do with those misinformed and malformed sites that come to you looking for salvation on the web? They usually are disillusioned and not ready to part with large chunks of cash to throw after that they spent on flash intros etc and so you do the best you can with what you have to work with.

Heres a real world example
HTML intro page mostly devoted to Flash
Framed index page with the nav menu in graphics
All but one of the remaining pages are shopping cart pages done in frames with the interior frames generated by internal to each page javascript, in such cool fashion that the url of everypage in the site is xxxxxx/home.html. Some strange visual effects such as a string of seven bouncing purple balls attached to the cursor. That said the visual design of the pages is not too bad.

One solution is to:
Optimize the index page with a noframes tag, add a discrete amount of text to the intro page, together with a text link to site map in straight html, which has each site page described with two full paragraphs of keyword rich text, and optimize the remaining page with a no frames tag. Removing the bouding balls eliminates the tendancy to duck when one comes your way and allows the viewers to concentrate on the site and its message..

You end up with only four pages that the SEs can index but these are fairly well optimized and the site is at least visible on the SE horizon, and if fact turns out to get a fair bit of business for its owner.

[Alan Perkins]

LOL Mel I've seen that site!

Seriously, you have done the right thing IMO. Made the site usable by people whose browsers don't support Flash and frames.

Oh, and it happened to help with search engines, whose "spiders" are "browsers" that don't support Flash and frames. :D

[glengara]

At a time when SEO is finally achieving some recognition in the wider world it should be changed to SEM?

I seem to remember the same arguments a couple of years ago with SEP.

I'm going to stick with SEO for a while, even if SEM may be a more accurate description.

[Alan Perkins]

IMO it's like this:

SEO is a subset of SEM. There's room for both terms and has been for some time (at least since you could buy keywords on DoubleClick, maybe earlier), although SEO came first. In time SEO as a standalone activity may die out (by becoming totally integrated into other activities such as Web design or information architecture), but SEM is less likely to.

Already though, SEM is only a part of online marketing, which itself is only a part of marketing.

Just my opinions...

[ihelpyou]

I do agree though with glengara, more and more regular people are starting to know what this seo stuff is. Just over the weekend a new client found my site on Google for the term:
search engine optimization company

I find this happening more and more. Whether right or wrong, this is what is happening. I also asked if they had any inclination to try to find something using the word 'marketing' at all. They said 'no' as they thought the word 'marketing' to be used to find an advertising agency and that was not what they were looking for.

I still say the word 'marketing' is too broad a word if someone is looking for a 'part' of marketing.

[excell]

ok, this may not be a cool thing to do or even helpful BUT if we look very, very closely at this company, their techniques and their clients and we might be able to define what SEO is a bit better.

I stumbled across this one in a round about way, trying to help someone with the PR=0 syndrome, I found that their domain name was being "used" to draw traffic on back door pages etc. IE multiple backdoors for an online office supply shopping site, using backdoors on every topic under the sun, using top ranking domains to and off topic key phrases to draw people in.

I kept going and found every manor of yucky and frowned on SEO technique available being employed in their tactics. Cloaking, multiple cross linked empty domains (link farms) spam, spam and yet more spam. Labyrinths upon labyrinth of spider traps around and around.

Nothing at all was natural about what I saw and that is a problem as far as I can see. The difference between SEO and Internet Marketing in a balanced, ethical and healthy way in my opinion is HUGE!

signaturegroupinternetmarketing.com check it out it is some of the worst I have seen, I understand that they are "pushing the envelope" but I can also see on searching them coming up on black lists, penalties and bans...

so I guess that brings up another question... as the SE algos tighten and the scene changes where is the place for this type of carry on? How do the down home, play it by gut feeling, ethics and sweat of the brow marketers and positioners get separated in peoples thinking?

Just some thoughts, I am still recoiling in horror.. LOL
signaturegroupinternetmarketing.com

[ihelpyou]

so I guess that brings up another question... as the SE algos tighten and the scene changes where is the place for this type of carry on?
That answer is slowly taking hold with people anyway. Many times people will ask upfront if I do anything that 'could' get their site penalized or banned. They say that if I do then they will NOT use me. They are learning out there, slowly but surely.

Sheesh. That site is very ugly to boot. Not sure what the big purpose of that page is at all other than to link to clients, etc. Very ugly.

[excell]

It's hard to work out the nav, took me ten minutes to find the links at the top left "about", very interesting stuff when you see the global picture of that. Note, nothing, no information about "marketing" etc.. just incredible!

It's all done with mirrors, by dad would say!

[added:] Just how much an hour do you think those young men and women might be getting paid to create this?

[Alan Perkins]

Hi excell

I haven't looked at the specific example you have quoted but I know that companies like that do exist!

I guess it's horses for courses. A professional educates themselves and their clients on what is a professional way to behave.

Some clients don't want to deal with professionals and that's fine. The problem is with clients who DO want to deal with professionals yet can't differentiate a professional from a scam artist.

Going all the way back to page one of this thread, my Google search for "What defines a professional?" put this page on top:

http://www.npanet.org/public/position.cfm

I prefer looking at that to yet more examples of spam :)

[excell]

Thanks Al, so many tangents, but yes a "Paradigm Shift" is what is needed, however, to shift a world view one must first create a world to view :) That gives it meaning and substance so it can be understood and grasped.

We are working with a medium that does not quite translate our traditional knowledge base of marketing that works in the bricks and mortar world, successfully. The fundamental principles remain, but it is a relatively new playing field.

I put forward the point, that in my view based on that article a professional is also a master of change management, that is alert to pitfalls with good research skills and has leadership qualities.

[Alan Perkins]

Sounds about right excell. :)

You may like to read the White Paper on Spam Classification (http://www.ebrandmanagement.com/whitepapers/spam-classification/) I wrote.

It lays out my "fundamental principles" regarding spam ... and is what I will be discussing in Boston. My mission (which I have chosen to accept) is to discuss the issue of standards, that there are few widely-agreed definitions of "search engine spam" and whether the industry needs to adopt a code of practice.Big topic!

[excell]

Al, please give me date of writing?

I can only see down the bottom: 27th September 2000

[Alan Perkins]

Interesting question! Hmm. Are you checking my credentials?

I published it in early October 2001. It's based on other ideas formulated over the years. Here is a related document I published in about April 2001:

Relevancy, Spam, Cloaking and Ranking : The Ethical Guide (http://www.ebrandmanagement.com/whitepapers/spam1.htm)

and here is a "debate" I was involved in on WmW in late 2000:

http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum24/35.htm

I've also spoken about spam at Danny's conferences:

http://seminars.internet.com/sew/sf01/agenda.html (see "Cloaking and Doorways" session)

and frequently in I-Search (you can search for my name in the archives). Last but not least, I moderate the Spam & Ethics Forum here. :) It was seeing early hits on the White Paper that lead me to these forums. My first thread:

http://www.ihelpyouservices.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=842

[ihelpyou]

Yes, and excell will be attending the conference in Boston as well, won't you excell?

You best get those plane tickets asap.

[Advisor]

One thing I do is have right in my contract that I won't use any techniques that are considered spam by the search engines.

It only seems fair of me to put that in. I have all sorts of things in there that the client has to agree to, so that's one of the "guarantees" I give them!

Jill

[excell]

Hey Hey you don't gang up on me, like that!

Or else I will be FORCED to attend.

Truth is Al, I started to read and couldn't get my bearings, so started to take rough notes. I have read you before etc.
but realise you are trying to culminate it (I think)

I got side tracked totally, so here is my rough first notes:
sorry, I didn't complete anything at all. As a quick background I have a little experience ( not ME, me is no tech, I am a technophobic!) of setting algos on very very small directories hence my comments etc.

Typing in notes as I read,
1) Difference between setting algos for "search engines" that read "only" data inputted (directories) and those that spider (search engines). Need to separate them out again and then fan it out for variaton. To capture that all, due to the dependancies and relationships etc. it gets hard to map. i.e. a site submitted to a directory getting picked up by a spidering engine will do different things with the data first entered and later found.

And THAT is far as I can go with it tonight, will continue at next break point. Hope it helps.

Just as an added point - human editored directories. data is inputted and edited, so that is quality control of their choosing etc,.

[Alan Perkins]

OK. It's talking about search engine spam (i.e. spam delivered to spiders), not directory spam. I figured directories employed editors to stop spam. The primary aim is to define what spam actually is, to help SEOs avoid falling foul of current or future spam "rules" and build successful pages for the long term. The principles laid out in the White Paper are those upon which the "rules" published by various SEs are based.

A secondary aim is to try to get search engines to recognise that no technique is in and of itself spam (apart from cloaking, because it's defined to be). IMO search engines should not dictate what may or may not be done in Web architecture or design. They have a right to expect that their spiders won't be spammed, because to do that would be stealing their traffic, but beyond that no right to say how someone may or may not behave.

So if you as a Web architect or designer have a good reason to do something a particular way that has nothing to do with search engines, then that something cannot be search engine spam. I am trying to persuade SEs that this is the case. Hence the last paragraph of the document.

It's about mutual respect.