Googlies Keyword Density

[MazY]

Now I concede that it may be my imagination but the more I look, the more I am convinced that Google have lowered their keyword density threshold level over the last month.

Many of the higher ranking sites have an incredibly low density factor. Anyone else finding this or do I just need more sleep?

[ihelpyou]

Not sure. With the sites I track, I have not found any changes like that.

What I have noticed is that it truly does not matter what file size the page is as all sites have the same chance. No matter if they are 4k in size or 90K... they are all in the top ten.

[MazY]

I seem to be finding quite a few top ten entries with around 2% (and less in many cases) density. This seems incredibly low to me.

[ihelpyou]

Yes, that is real low. What it might say is that Google has put more emphasis on themes now. Might not make much difference how many times the term appears on the page but the algo looks at the whole site now and ranks accordingly.

[usbnuts]

I think it depends on the level of optimization your rivals have done to their pages.

However, from my experience, Google usually puts link popularity above anything else. One of my USB page has climbed considerably after DMOZ listed it.

[usbnuts]

Doug, I am not so sure about the theme. Of course, Google and others will account this into the ranking formula, but there's no doubt that link popularity (directories and expert sites) is the winning card.

[MazY]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
What it might say is that Google has put more emphasis on themes now. Might not make much difference how many times the term appears on the page but the algo looks at the whole site now and ranks accordingly.

You may well be right. I'm of course particularly concerned as I generally aim for around 6% to 8%. Though this month was a semi-disaster for me as I made some radical changes to my site and just missed the reindexing boat! Bugger!

[MazY]

Originally posted by usbnuts
there's no doubt that link popularity (directories and expert sites) is the winning card.

Hmm. Not sure about it being the "winning card". Whilst it features heavily, I think one has to look a tad further afield than just link popularity.

Try checking the link popularity of some top ranking sites. Some are quite negligible. I think, as Doug said, it's more a lean towards the whole "theme thing".

[usbnuts]

Mazy,

Could you give me an example? I would like to learn more about this theme thing.

If you search USB on Google, you see that all the sites ranked in the top 10 have super link popularity.

Maybe I am with the USB thing for too long. :p

[ihelpyou]

I really do not watch the density thing all that much. As usbnuts said, link pop always is a factor, after that, themes play some kind of role. I always hated numbers in school so don't look at them very often. :)

[usbnuts]

Theme is thing that specialty sites excel general site, I think.

However, the general site may get better link popularity than specialty sites and the popularity effect is offset by low theme score. Am I totally wrong here?

[MazY]

lol. I have yet to meet anyone in life that is "totally wrong".

In fact, I would say there is some accuracy in what you suggest. I score remarkably highly with incredibly low link popularity and my site is quite focused around two subjects and two subjects only.

On the other hand, I have seen sites that score incredibly highly with no real theme but with great link popularity. So, I would say that your theory is good. Quick, patent it and sell it!

[usbnuts]

Heheh patent it. oh yea.

Anyway, I don't understand why there's nothing about the method Google uses to rank sites.

[MazY]

Hmm... I wonder if we pen a really, really nice letter if they will give us a detailed description of just how they rank a web site?

I'm sure if we mention to them that we have a bet on between us then they would surely not see any one of us lose a few quid but rather reveal their algos?

OK OK. I can dream can't I?

[MazY]

Dear Google...

Perhaps you may help us on a debate that we are having at the ihelpyou Services, Expert Website Promotion forum, where, incidentally, we all swear that Google is our favourite search engine of them all.

The problem that we are having is that we are a little uncertain regarding your algorithms and how you rank sites.

Doug, the major domo of the ihelpyou Services, Expert Website Promotion has bet that you use the moon cycles and the wind speed of the closest Tuesday to the day of renindexing.

UsbNut has said that he already knows cos his mate, Dave, told him in the pub one Saturday night. He knows it because he saw it on a really clever documentary on cable TV.

I have said it is bound to be, knowing you are all really intelligent people, not unlike ourselves at ihelpyou Services, Expert Website Promotion, based upon something far more scientific such as the weekly lottery numbers and the weight of your office staff combined. (Which I am sure falls just into the "ideal" range as it does here at ihelpyou Services, Expert Website Promotion.)

Anyway, Doug from ihelpyou Services, Expert Website Promotion has placed a considerable wager that he is right and we are wrong. So, if you could just sort this out for once and for all by sending me a full copy of your algorithm, we would be eternally overjoyed and the harmony that we usually enjoy at ihelpyou Services, Expert Website Promotion will be restored.

Keep on Googling...

The ihelpyou Services, Expert Website Promotion team.

PS: Can you spot the key-phrase here?

[usbnuts]

Dear Mazy,

You keep on sending, we keep on dumping.

Heh

Best regards,

Mr. Google, Google CEO
"Global Googlization"

(Sorry for this dumb post, I need to get 100 posts to upload my own avatar)

[ihelpyou]

hehe, .... you can bet Mr. Googly will read that. Nice letter. :cool:

Perhaps he will even reply in some way??


...........hmmmmm, Perhaps.
(Dell Commercial)... I love that kid. Dell must make a fortune on it.

[Mel]

HI All:

Seems there is more than a little change with the new Google Algo.

Look at our favorite search term (search engine optimization) and the #1 ranked site has only one or two sentences on the entire page and then redirects to another site altoghther!

Talk about low keyword densities, the search term does not even appear once in the page content!

That site has only 111 backwards links, and most of them are totally off content.

Anybody care to guess how they got that #1 ranking on a very competitive search term?

[ihelpyou]

Well, that totally obvious case of deceiving sure will not last very long....

The gall of some people. They should be shot for that. Then banned from the entire net, actually. :cool:

[MazY]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
The gall of some people. They should be shot for that. Then banned from the entire net, actually. :cool:

And be sent to bed early without supper I reckon!

[Mel]

Hi Doug:
Totally agree with your sentiments, BUT
with that page and those links how did they come up #1 for such a competitive search term???

[ihelpyou]

All I can figure is that they are cloaking in some way. Not sure why they wish the surfer to go to that page first though....

I know why. They need to track the visitors, so the first domain is set up on the tracking server and when the link is clicked, it leads to the client or real domain.

[MazY]

I have to sort of stand with Mel here and look all confused and stuff because it has me baffled.

This is the worst shuffle from Google that I have seen in ages.

I have been reading about people reporting seeing the GoogleBot crawling their sites again already as if to indicate that maybe something did go slightly belly up with the recent one?

I haven't seen the bot though I have to say...

[Mel]

Don't think its cloaking Doug, Googles cached page matches what they are serving up to us surfers.

[MazY]

And have you seen those rankings on all the other major engines? Puh!

[ihelpyou]

oh, didn't check that. Then Googlies algo is all screwed up.

[JuniorHarris]

Yes, Googlebot has indeed been indexing our site the past two days...it requested a few pages on the 26th and 27th, but really took off on the 28th and 29th indexing hundreds of pages.~ :)

[MazY]

Originally posted by JuniorHarris
Yes, Googlebot has indeed been indexing our site the past two days...it requested a few pages on the 26th and 27th, but really took off on the 28th and 29th indexing hundreds of pages.~ :)

<Jumps up and down> And so why not mine. I swear it's a Google conspiracy against me! All because I wrote that I prefer Lycos. They can be so childish.... :D

[JuniorHarris]

It's a shame search engines have no sense of humour...but it is amazing what a little spider candy will do!~ :thebomb:

[MazY]

Puh! Spider candy indeedio! The moment it shows its face on my server, I'll give it what for. You mark my words. It'll head back to GoogleVille with its tail between its legs, so to speak. :mad:

[ihelpyou]

hey MazY, you keep changing identities. So what is the true one/avatar?? :) or do you change them according to your mood? :D

[JuniorHarris]

I thought it changed per post!~ ;)

[MazY]

lol. Actually, don't tell Juniorharris but I thought his was better than mine so I changed it. Sssshhhh. He need never know. :cool:

[JuniorHarris]

Huh? Did I hear something...sounded like laughter. :circle:

[MazY]

Shriek! :shocked: <Looks at time> 05:02! Whoops. Another night gone by. <Starts writing> "I must learn to go to bed at nights...."

You know yer looking at search engines too long when you start questioning whether the position of yer bed has moved!

Off for a couple of hours sleep methinks.

[JuniorHarris]

Mazy I was wondering how you were doing it...off the land of nod for me as well.

[Sharon & Roy]

Hello Forum-Mates,

This is our first post here and we wish to thank Doug Heil and JuniorHarris for their personal invitations.

They both saw that we were having a bit of a "struggle" in explaining a concept we had for an eBook all about SEO for Google that would involve input from the Forum Members on another Search Engine Forum.

Anyway, we'd like to offer the following for further perusal on why this "Splash Page" or "Doorway Page" ranks as high as it does.

It's just when you think you have a pretty good "handle" on Google's algorithm, then up comes a page like Mel just discovered to baffle us.

Look at our favorite search term (search engine optimization) and the #1 ranked site has only one or two sentences on the entire page and then redirects to another site altoghther!

Talk about low keyword densities, the search term does not even appear once in the page content!

That site has only 111 backwards links, and most of them are totally off content.

Anybody care to guess how they got that #1 ranking on a very competitive search term?

Our first thoughts were the same as Doug's ...

All I can figure is that they are cloaking in some way.

But then Mel replied with ...

Don't think its cloaking Doug, Googles cached page matches what they are serving up to us surfers.

So Mel, where did you learn that Google's cached page is actually the page that Googlebot spidered and recorded?

I mean is there a URL we can reference? Or is it that it's a fairly obvious observation on your part?

Mel, please don't take any offense by our question, and we have no reason to doubt you, but all we are attempting to do is to be sure of our facts before we go and repeat them to our clients, readers or visitors, thank you.

Okay, so if we completely rule out the fact that the page was cloaked, then we offer for further perusal the weight Google may place on the domain name and file names.

For the search allinurl: search engine optimization (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&imgsafe=off&safe=off&q=allinurl%3A+search+engine+optimization) the Site ranks #10

For the search allinurl: "search engine optimization" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&imgsafe=off&safe=off&q=allinurl%3A+%22search+engine+optimization%22) the Site ranks #6

Now by no means are we saying this is the reason why this Site ranks so high for search engine optimization (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=search+engine+optimization) but we are saying it is another "avenue" to ponder.

---

Here is what our current research reveals ...

A search for ... search engine optimization
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=search+engine+optimization

Returns the following ...

---

The #1 Page Listed Is ...
http://www.search-engine-optimization.com/
http://www.google.com/search?num=30&hl=en&imgsafe=off&safe=off&q=link%3Awww.search-engine-optimization.com
111 Inbound Links

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&sa=G&q=%22%2Bwww.search-engine-optimization.%2Bcom%22
1 Domain Page Indexed

---

The #2 Page Listed Is ...
http://www.clickz.com/column/seo.html
http://www3.google.com/search?hl=en&imgsafe=off&safe=off&q=link%3Awww.clickz.com%2Fcolumn%2Fseo.html
2,570 Inbound Links

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&sa=G&q=%22%2Bwww.search-engine-optimization.%2Bcom%22
14,500 Domain Pages Indexed

---

Now do a search for ... optimization search engine
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=optimization+search+engine

Returns the following ...

The #1 Site drops down to #4
The #2 Site moves up to #1
The #3 Site remains at #3
The #4 Site moves up to #2
The #5 Site moves down to #6 ... <--- Doug Heil's Site
The #6 Site drops out of the top 10
The #7 Site drops down to #8
The #8 Site drops down to #9
The #9 Site drops out of the top 10
The #10 Site remains at #10

---

Now do a search for ... search optimization
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=search+optimization

Returns the following ... (Comparison based on Initial Results (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=search+engine+optimization))

The #1 Site drops down to #7
The #2 Site remains at #2
The #3 Site remains at #3
The #4 Site moves up to #1
The #5 Site moves down to #6 ... <--- Doug Heil's Site

---

Now do a search for ... search optimization engine
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=search+optimization+engine

Returns the following ... (Comparison based on Initial Results (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=search+engine+optimization))

The #1 Site drops down to #2
The #5 Site remains at #5 ... <--- Doug Heil's Site

---

Now do a search for ... engine optimization
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=engine+optimization

Returns the following ... (Comparison based on Initial Results (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=search+engine+optimization))

The #1 Site drops down to #4
The #5 Site drops down to #9 ... <--- Doug Heil's Site

---

Now do a search for ... search engine
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=search+engine

Returns the following ... (Comparison based on Initial Results (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=search+engine+optimization))

The #1 Site drops out of the top 200
The #2 Site drops down to #68 (http://www.google.com/search?q=search+engine&hl=en&safe=off&start=60&sa=N) ... <--- http://www.clickz.com/column/seo.html
The #3 Site drops down to #58 (http://www.google.com/search?q=search+engine&hl=en&safe=off&start=50&sa=N) ... <--- http://www.bruceclay.com/web_rank.htm
The #4 Site drops down to #31 (http://www.google.com/search?q=search+engine&hl=en&safe=off&start=30&sa=N) ... <--- http://www.spider-food.net/
The #5 Site drops out of the top 200 ... <--- Doug Heil's Site

---


This is an unrelated question for Doug Heil (or anyone who knows the answer).

We are just curious, but why is Google the first Search Engine listed on your Forum Home Page (http://www.ihelpyouservices.com/forums/)? Any significance or special reason you'd care to share with us?

Thank You!

[MazY]

Welcome to the forum, Sharon & Roy.

I shall give a more in-depth answer in a mo. I just wanted to be the first to get a "welcome message" in for a change! lol

[MazY]

Sharon & Roy...

I understand the concept that you are attempting to explore. However, logically it doesn't really tell the full story.

Let us take the "search engine optimization" phrase. Whilst the page name may well play a part, we cannot ignore the multiple instances that each page may or may not have for this particular phrase either.

Then we need to look at word staggering throughout each page too. One site may have the word optimization 3 out of 10 times (example) but only have the word "engine" 1 out of ten times. The next site may be the exact opposite and so forth. For your test to be fully valid, you would need to also include the body text density, link text density and so forth.

This becomes even more diluted when you take the "theme" ranking into consideration too.

That is not to say that your theory is not without interest. I believe that it is worth further exploration. I'm just not convinced that, as is, it tells the full picture.

By the way, I read your post in the "other forum" and I cringed as I read it. Not because I thought it a bad post but rather I could have predicted the sometimes closed and knee-jerk reaction that it would receive. Hence I have chosen this place as my preferred home. Much more open to ideas, etc.

[ihelpyou]

Welcome to the forums Sharon and Roy! :hi: Yep. MazY, ya beat me to it this time. :)



As to the question to me; I simply feel Google is better than the rest. Period. ;) and my favorite.

I also just simply believe that Google has an algo cliche right now and will straighten it out soon.

The only page that does NOT seem to belong in the top 5 on:
search engine optimization

is the first listing. It has to be a mistake. NOdoubtaboutit. No other explanation is available as we know the page is not cloaked.

[ihelpyou]

How about this.

They are doing a redirect from their robots.txt file that is telling Googlebot (Google's robot) to cache the first page it comes to and index the second page, BUT list the first page Url.


How's that? :eek:

[MazY]

LOL Run that by me again slowly...

[ihelpyou]

hey, with tech these days, and with the knowledge many of you all have, this could be very possible.

[Mel]

Hi Sharon and Roy:

Welcome to the forum, hope you enjoy your stay and that we can all learn from one onother.

to answer some of your questions:

We know the Cached page is the same page the spider saw because Google does a full page index and stores the pages in its database. You have the option in any search result (or the Google toolbar) to view the actual cached page which it then fetches from its database or index. I see no way that some clever fellow could get in between you and the search engine index to manipulate the results.

This is a very nice feature of Google and makes it much easier to verify which version of a page is the one Google is currently ranking you on. Since this is the page Google is using to rank you on you can easily determine that no cloaking is involved by comparing the Surfed page with the cached page.

Regarding you analysis of the keywords, This is very difficult to analyze since Google is supposed to use Page Rank and Themes in determining the SERP. Page rank is supposed to play a large part in Googles algorithm, and since the 111 links are from unrelated and not highly important sites the PageRank should be very low, but this one page site has a good PageRank. I suppose a one page site might be considered to have a great theme if it contained the search phrase more than once in the body text, but this page does not qualify there, either.

Google is noted for doing a full page index and using, among other things, keyword proximity in its rankings, but this page does not even contain the search phrase in the body text.

For these and other reasons, I can only conclude that this is indeed a glitch in the Google algo, which will be rectified soon.

I would be interested to know more about your Google Optimization e-book. I agree that an ebook is the way to go for a topic like this which is subject to change monthly.

The new book by Frederick Marckini on search engine positioning was just published in May, but already has some items outdated, but with an ebook you can update it daily if necessary.

[Mel]

Hey Doug;

LOL thats an interesting idea, but I think outside of the Robots.txt protocol.

I think I agree with you that its just a temporary glitch which will be discoverd soon and rectified.

[JuniorHarris]

I'll back Mel up on the Google cache.

Since our web pages all include a date, it's very easy for us to match indexed cache pages to the same date in which the Google spider indexed our site. No doubt about it, these cache pages are indeed what the spider indexed.

I'll also add that it could be possible to cloak a robots.txt and even implement a redirect as Doug suggested. This may work for users, but I would suspect any decent spider would ignore anything but valid robots.txt protocol commands and any deviation could even possibly cause the spider to leave entirely.

Welcome Sharon and Roy to the forums...I'm sure you'll find this place very friendly!~

:hi:

[Sharon & Roy]

Welcome to the forum, hope you enjoy your stay and that we can all learn from one onother.

Thanks for the warm welcomes, MazY, Doug, Mel and JuniorHarris

Yes, we can already see that we will enjoy our stay here and we are sure ready to absorb all we can from you all.

Sharing what we all know with each other and brainstorming, testing and researching is definitely what we are all about.

As to the question to me; I simply feel Google is better than the rest. Period. and my favorite.

Thanks Doug! We had a feeling that Google was your favorite and that's why it was listed first. From the looks of the amount of postings, it seems to be everyone's favorite. It sure is ours. <wink>

We know the Cached page is the same page the spider saw because Google does a full page index and stores the pages in its database.

Thanks Mel! We just learned something new and picked up another Q&A for the eBook were working on.

I think I agree with you that its just a temporary glitch which will be discoverd soon and rectified.

Well, that sure seems to be the answer for now. And just to let you all know, we've saved a copy of the results page right here (http://www.iwon.net/articles/seo/google-results-07-30-01.shtml) in case any of us wants to "study" it further and/or later, plus it would make a good example for the eBook, depending on what eventually happens with that page.

I would be interested to know more about your Google Optimization e-book. I agree that an ebook is the way to go for a topic like this which is subject to change monthly.

The new book by Frederick Marckini on search engine positioning was just published in May, but already has some items outdated, but with an ebook you can update it daily if necessary.

Thanks for asking Mel.

The concept is still in the beginning stages and fairly rough. Sharon and I have bounced ideas back and forth but do not have anything really etched in stone yet.

We thought to present and brainstorm it with all our forum-mates at the other forum, but alas, there were a couple of people who immediately attacked the idea with their wrong assumptions before the administrator/moderators could respond and unfortunately (or fortunately) it was not allowed.

Anyway, we'd love to do the same here, with you all. So we've prepared a quick little visual to help explain the concept better.

Why don't you give a quick look here (http://www.iwon.net/articles/seo/google-seo-ebook.shtml) and we'd appreciate any and all feedback and suggestions on how we can make this a group project and how it can be fair for all involved, that is if it's okay with Mr. Heil.

Thanks for your consideration.

Basically, it will be a Q&A type of layout with a search by keyword feature included. So you can easily and quickly find anything you need at the click of a button.

[ihelpyou]

Hey Sharon and Roy,

Neat idea you have there.

Just a couple of things:

All postings in this forum are the property of ihelpyou Services AND the actual poster of each post.

If you use any post in your ebook, you have to get the permission of the poster and then you have reference the poster's site and this forum.

To tell you the truth, I know you said that you were giving away the ebook, But to even if you sell it, I DO NOT care,

As long as you give all credit where credit is due.

That is it. Pretty simple and easy. :)

[MazY]

I've just taken a look at the sample and offer this:

If it maintains the same clean and punchy layout throughout then I like it.

Of course, the real testing is in the atual content but that will evolve in time. Just the appearance, I'm for it and I'm not that easy to please! lol

[MazY]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
Hey Sharon and Roy, To tell you the truth, I know you said that you were giving away the ebook, But to even if you sell it, I DO NOT care,

And to add my wee bit onto that. I post in here with the full knowledge and expectation that it is to help someone else. I care not a jot whether it is used on a personal SE problem or to advance an e-book. I freely give anything I write within this forum (as the author) away for those that need it. Whether you choose to acknowledge your sources is another matter and one that is entirely up to you guys and your own discretion. I personally do not mind either way.

With the exception of my SpamCatcher texts, which I would, at this stage, be reluctant to share. lol Call me a big old softie if you like but it's growing on me.

But I can't see that being put into an e-book anyway. LOL

[JuniorHarris]

Roy thanks for saving the results page...I'm quite busy with other work right now and am struggling to complete it and not jump over to Google and do research!~ Now I can stay focused!~

[Blue]

I think the eBook is a great idea and I like the layout, as well as the Q&A form factor. I'm sure it will be an invaluable resource to all of us here and to those elsewhere.

I especially like the idea of "that would involve input from the Forum Members " as I think this would lend it a highly unbiased flair.

[Sharon & Roy]

Welcome Sharon & Roy!

I think the eBook is a great idea and I like the layout, as well as the Q&A form factor. I'm sure it will be an invaluable resource to all of us here and to those elsewhere.

I especially like the idea of "that would involve input from the Forum Members " as I think this would lend it a highly unbiased flair.

Thanks for your warm welcome Blue and your kind words about our concept, as we absolutely appreciate all the feedback we can get.

<personalstuff>Hey small world Blue, we have a client who lives in Yorba Linda (phone prefix 714 524-xxxx) and has a store on 2350 N. Rose Drive, in Placentia and we lived in Buena Park last year, and now Weldon, CA. (200 miles from you now, instead of 12)</personalstuff>

We are certainly looking forward to interacting with you here, Blue.

[Sharon & Roy]

All postings in this forum are the property of ihelpyou Services AND the actual poster of each post.

Absolutely Doug, we completely understand that.

If you use any post in your ebook, you have to get the permission of the poster and then you have reference the poster's site and this forum.

Again, we completely understand this. (Further down we offer a few suggestions to help us in attaining permission from folks).

To tell you the truth, I know you said that you were giving away the ebook, But to even if you sell it, I DO NOT care,

As long as you give all credit where credit is due.

WoW! What a Nice Guy!!! Well if that's the case, Doug, then we will THANK YOU for your most generous offer right here and now and also say that we may just have to re-think our initial concept and maybe offer "part" of the eBook for free and the more "meaty" stuff we could offer for a fee. Either a ONE time fee or maybe even a small affordable monthly fee (since folks will want to keep up with the frequent changes and updates) and we could even possibly set up an affiliate program that pays 50% to any and all members of this forum who are interested in participating to help get the word out (and of course put a few pennies in your pocket too, <wink>)

Our primary concern is that you, our forum-mates view this project as selfless and fair on our part. If you feel that we are taking advantage of you and/or Doug by all means please let us know your concerns and we'll certainly be prompt to address them.

We are just "throwing" out these ideas right now, in light of what Doug mentioned about not caring if the eBook were sold. We'd like to hear everyone's feedback on this first before we decide one way or the other.

We would still stick with our original idea even if there were some kind of a fee, and that is to (GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE) post a link back to each page here at the forums as a reference of where we discovered the source to a Question or Answer we use in the eBook, which in turn shows each individual contributor's contact information (so make sure you have a detailed profile and signature file so folks can easily contact you and find your Web Sites, a great way to get additional exposure for us all should this eBook just happen to become hugely popular. <wink>). We'd also run rotating text ads for all the member's whose "contributions" we used (a more detailed definition of what constitutes a contribution this will follow) and a complete list of all contributers (who desire a listing that is) would be available on every page of the eBook as well (BTW, everyone is welcome to "contribute" and you don't need a Web Site to be listed, just a valid eMail address is all.) Also a link back to the Forum's Home Page here would be on every page as part of the naviagtion links so folks can find the answers to their questions (and they will have questions, right?) a.s.a.p. and/or become contributing members to the forum themselves.

Doug, we'll need your input on how to best handle the fact that some folks who post here may not want to be included in the eBook in any way shape or fashion, so how do we handle this?


Would starting a separate thread for just those who give us permission to use their contributions here (with credit of course) be appropriate or maybe the reverse?

Like starting a separate thread for just those who do not give us permission to use their contributions here? Or would this disrupt the flow of the forum as it currently stands? (It's not our intent to have this project cause you or our forum-mates any confusion. God forbid. But we would like to make it simple and FUN for all.)

Maybe we could just set things up to where we will only use the posted information when we start a thread and put some kind of notice at the beginning of each new thread we start stating something like this (open to editing of course) ...

By posting and contributing to this thread you are expressly and knowingly giving your permission to possibly use your information (with credit) for an upcoming eBook by Sharon & Roy Montero - (Posted with permission from Doug Heil)

... And then if and when we desire to use information posted outside of these "eBook Threads" we will ask the author for permission (if they have not already granted it).

... And lastly we need to address the issue of whether we should create links directly to a certain post in the thread or is it okay to link to the start of a thread, when that thread includes information we haven't expressly used in the eBook or have permisson from EVERYONE in the thread? < Whewww! >

Also we could possibly do something like adding a uniform type Subject Line so folks can distinguish the eBook threads, maybe like this ...

SEO eBook Question #1 - SEO eBook Question #2 - SEO eBook Question #3 - etc.

We know this is a lot to think about and we don't need an answer today or even tomorrow, whenever you say, whatever you say, is soon enough for us, Doug, thank you!

We sure don't expect the eBook to be finished overnight, but whatever Doug decides, we just want you all to know that this is a wonderful place to be associated with, and everyone has just been so friendly and helpful (unlike some folks at the other forum ... sorry about that, but we just had to make that night and day comparison.) You all seem to be of the same mind-set, to share yourself unconditionally, and it shows, and it's appreciated, thank you all.

And we know there's a HUGE difference between sharing your information and sharing yourself ... Kudos to you all.

We certainly want everyone to know that without Doug's generosity and foresight, this particular eBook would not be possible. THANK YOU, Doug!!!

---

Now, let's please brainstorm this concept a bit ...

The eBook is Free, but don't we need "something" to add value or at least to add a perceived value? Since so many eBooks are free and everyone seems to be giving one away to encourage folks to subscribe to their newsletters, has the VALUE of a free eBook lost something along the way? It's not really worth anything to most folks anymore, or is it? Wouldn't these folks who have subscribed and received upwards of 10 or more eBooks, have the mind-set that if an eBook is completely free then to them it is also worthless, because those prior eBooks were not as good as they expected them to be, and they've developed the attitude of ... "No wonder they were free, cuz I sure wouldn't have paid for it." So what do you think about that assumption, do you agree or disagree with it?


---

[MazY]

You know, I am a great believer in the notion that if you charge nothing then the recipient automatically assumes a negligible value to it too.

Some would say that the concept of charging for an e-book in this day and age is horrendous. I say why ever not? Gone are the days of "internet for free". Your time is money.

I have always said to my partner, it doesn't matter what it is - there is always someone somewhere that wants it. Your main responsibility as a supplier of whatever it is, is to make it value for money. Getting something free is not real value for money. One side invariably loses out. It seems poor business sense to me when it is the supplier that loses out! Time is a very precious commodity and if it wasn't then people would not really be bothered about SEO in the first place. They would be more than happy to say "arrh, my rankings will go up with time if I leave them long enough." They don't. They want things yesterday.

My only comment is that you seem to be complicating things for yourselves at this very early stage. As far as I can tell, nobody in here has objected to your concept and many have, in fact, encouraged it. Doug, who really has the final word with regards to the context of the forum has certainly given his blessing.

If I were you I would crack on! Good luck with it I say :cheers:

[MazY]

Originally posted by Sharon & Roy
You all seem to be of the same mind-set

LOL. It's official. You're all as weird as me!

[ihelpyou]

All that was said is fine by me. Can't quite remember all of it though.. :eek:

Just one more thing I need to mention. You also need to put in the ebook that everything in it are opinions and nothing more. You, we, or I cannot and will not predict any particular outcomes your readers will receive from your book. All comments are simply opinions, and can be right or wrong.

Also, these forums and ihelpyou Services are not responsible for anything in your book. You are just using these forums as a resource. ihelpyou Services is not associated with it in any way other than as a resource.

Just had to get that out of the way.... :rolleyes:

That's it!

[ihelpyou]

Oh, and yes, labeling the threads is a good idea so members know when you may use the posts in the book. :)

[JuniorHarris]

Well let me just say:

All posts are personal opinion and should be taken as such. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the forum, owner, or administrators. This also includes any implied representation and/or associations with the forum and its members. All information is for educational purposes only and will not be held liable for any resulting implementations.

Other then that... I'm with MazY and say crack on!~

[Advisor]

Have you boys been drinking without me???

That is one weird site to be number 1 in Google. The only thing that makes sense is the domain name, and man, that would go against everything I say. i.e., don't worry about your domain name, worry about your content!

Boy, do I have egg on my face!

Let's all by keyword rich domain names and make splash pages that say "ENTER"! Yeah!

Jill

[MazY]

Originally posted by webwhiz
Let's all by keyword rich domain names and make splash pages that say "ENTER"! Yeah!

[Quick note to Sharon & Roy.]
I'm just guessing here but I'm willing to bet that Jill doesn't really recomend that as a strategy. :D

Actually, I think Jill is onto something and is trying a little deflection. I reckon that she knows it to be the latest "SEO Secret". I'm off to go create mine. Do you think I should use "Enter" or just put "E" and let the user guess the rest, Jill? :D

[Advisor]

Well, the E might be good, but I think you need to create a moving E in Flash to ensure a number 1 ranking...hehehehe

Thanks, I WILL have another one :drink:

J

[MazY]

Originally posted by webwhiz
Well, the E might be good, but I think you need to create a moving E in Flash to ensure a number 1 ranking...hehehehe

Thanks, I WILL have another one :drink:

J

Thanks! A great tip! Is it true that if I don't see my page in the major search engine thinummybobs then I should resubmit it every half hour until they call me at home to say they have it?

[Advisor]

then I should resubmit it every half hour until they call me

According to many "authorities" on the subject, I would certainly say so! Submitting every minute as opposed to hour may be even more effective.

Gee...can you imagine people quoting us on this stuff...

But Jill said you should submit every minute...

Jill

[MazY]

Originally posted by webwhiz
Gee...can you imagine people quoting us on this stuff...

But Jill said you should submit every minute...

Jill

LOL. It'll be a killer headline on search engine watch tomorrow.

It's Official - Jill Says "Submit by the Minute"

[Sharon & Roy]

Originally posted by Sharon & Roy

Okay, so if we completely rule out the fact that the page was cloaked, then we offer for further perusal the weight Google may place on the domain name and file names.

We'd like to offer up possibly some more evidence for the "amount" of weight Google is currently placing on keywords in the URL.


This Site ... http://www.searchengineadvice.com/ ... is #24 (http://www.google.com/search?q=search+engine+optimization&hl=en&safe=off&start=20&sa=N) for search engine optimization (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&imgsafe=off&safe=off&q=search+engine+optimization)

Doug's Site ... http://www.freemoneyservices.com/ ... is #5 (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&imgsafe=off&safe=off&q=search+engine+optimization) for the same term

Now if we add the keyword advice ...

This Site ... http://www.searchengineadvice.com/ ... is #3 (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&imgsafe=off&safe=off&q=search+engine+optimization+advice) for search engine optimization advice (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&imgsafe=off&safe=off&q=search+engine+optimization+advice)

Doug's Site ... http://www.freemoneyservices.com/ ... is #4 (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&imgsafe=off&safe=off&q=search+engine+optimization+advice) for the same term


That Site jumps 21 places to pass Doug's Site who moves up just 1 place

Judging from the comparison below, Doug "wins" the comparison battle on all counts except for keywords in the URL.

Compare: Their Site has advice twice in the visible body text (not in a heading tag) and Doug's Site once (in a heading tag <h2>)

Compare: Their Site has advice 0 times in the meta keywords/description tags and Doug's Site once in each.

Compare: Their Site has advice in the filename of an interior page twice ... advice_column.html and in the domain name ... and Doug's Site 0.

Your thoughts as to what it was that gave that Site such a dramatic increase by simply adding the word advice?

[ihelpyou]

My thoughts are that Google has maybe put a little tweak into the algo to adjust for terms in the Url.

Also, that site had much more room to move up, being #24 without "advice" in the term.

[Advisor]

Perhaps Google is going to start selling keyword rich domains as a way to make money!

Actually, I am surprised that they would give so much weight to the domain name. It's one of the easiest ways to spam. If I were Google I would penalize for keywords in the domain. Or at least for obvious long ones like "www.search-engine-optimization-advice-help-services.com" and the like. I mean, duh, I wonder why they'd want a URL like that except to rank highly?

Sharon and Roy do you have sleep with your calculator under your pillow ;) I think it's great that you guys can figure out all that math stuff, but I'm with Doug, that kinda thing gives me a big ole headache!

Jill

[ihelpyou]

Yes. Although I admire those who love the numbers thing. I have simply always hated numbers. Never liked them in school either.

I just look at a page and maybe say ... "okay. that is what I will do", and then run with it. :)

[JuniorHarris]

LOL!~ I suppose the bigger the headache the bigger the reward!~ At least this is what I've discovered, nothing good comes easy!~ It's usually my biggest headaches and blood vessel busting issues which tend to provide the greatest rewards!~ (though it would be nice to get a freebie now and again)