Invisible Link to Search Engine Watch

[Advisor]

Did anyone else notice that the number 2 site for search engine at Google has invisible links to Search Engine number 8 link? They must figure that outbound links do indeed help, as I doubt they're trying to boost PageRank.

Oh, but wait...one of the pages on that they point to, has a visible link to their site. So it looks like they're trying to help rank, while in the process helping their own.

Oh what a tangled web we weave!

Jill

[MsSearch]

:eek: pretty sneaky......

They (the #2 ranked site) are NOT setting a good example for others to follow....and both sites are good resources...

[Advisor]

Just to make it clear...Search Engine Watch is NOT using invisible links. They have a regular link. It's the other site that is using invisible links.

Jill

[MsSearch]

The other site shouldn't have invisible links. I've gotten some very useful info off that site in the past. And they do have visible links/ads to other noteworthy resources...

[Alan Perkins]

Not sure if Google gives the same results here in the UK, but are you looking at the page whose source code contains a comment saying there are no secret tricks or spam? A tissue of lies.

Mind you Jill, if putting keywords into the alt text of a clear image isn't spam, why is wrapping a href around it spam?

Sorry - couldn't resist it. ;)

Alan

[Advisor]

I agree. Good site, good resource, good articles on that site. Interesting what they're doing. Probably testing something.

I found it by checking the backwards links from the SEW page. That number 2 page kept showing up as having links, yet I couldn't find the links. A quick look at the source code showed me what was going on.

Jill

[Advisor]

Originally posted by Alan Perkins
Not sure if Google gives the same results here in the UK, but are you looking at the page whose source code contains a comment saying there are no secret tricks or spam? A tissue of lies. It's the site that has the initials.
Mind you Jill, if putting keywords into the alt text of a clear image isn't spam, why is wrapping a href around it spam?I don't believe I ever said that *wasn't* spam! But you know, I don't think those help at all anyway. At least with Google. They seem to only care about alt tags that are in clickable images. I've even removed all my clear gif alt tags (when I happen to see them) since your chastisement of me a few months ago!

Jill

[Alan Perkins]

I've even removed all my clear gif alt tags

A score! I'm off to bed a happy man.

Don't tell your husband.

Alan

[ihelpyou]

Without looking, I am surprised they would do that.

tisk, tisk,... you just can't trust anyone.

How in the H am I up there like that WITHout any tricks? :)

[Advisor]

How in the H am I up there like that WITHout any tricks? LOL...been wondering the same thing myself, Doug!

Also, I don't think those invisible links are necessarily anything bad, and I truly wonder what kind of effect they have on the rankings, but I found it very interesting, nonetheless.A score! I'm off to bed a happy man. Don't tell your husband. Well, it wouldn't be the first time I made a happy man out of someone online right before bed :eek: LOL...just kidding, of course!

Jill

[JuniorHarris]

Doug's listing is a fine example of how high rankings can be obtained through honest clean HTML and of course content!~ I am in disbelief that they are using hidden links...but you do have to give him credit for showing the same source to both engines and users!~ ;)

[ihelpyou]

You may be surprised as well by checking on these:

search engine registration
search engine submissions
web site optimization
site submissions

Note that the second one is the Most searched on now by a lot, next comes "search engine optimization".

Also note that Jill is #6 on the term
search engine optimization

Shows us that honest SEO's can get ranks.

One week ago I add the word "positioning" on the page. Google already has it on the second page for
search engine positioning

Am I blowing my own horn? Well, someone has to do it. :D

[Advisor]

Yes indeed, Doug! You've done a wonderful job with all that. I think it's especially great because nearly all of the other sites in the top 20 (at least for search engine optimization) are more like resource pages such as Rank Write, SEW, and that Web Monkey article. It's rare to see an actual optimization company in there. It will be interesting to see where my new HighRankings.com site gets in (if at all). I hadn't really optimized it in the past for search engine optimization becuase when I did have top 10 rankings for that years ago, it didn't bring any visitors. I do think that most people searching for that phrase are simply SEOs themselves, checking ranks. But it still looks good to have it there!

I have made more of an effort with my new site to optimize it for that phrase. We'll see...

Jill

[ihelpyou]

Very true. The term
search engine submissions
has about 2000 searches a day according to wordtracker

and the term
search engine optimization
has about 1000 a day

The latter brings fewer visitors than the first one. And you are right that many SEO's probably check on that term. Although one must note that wordtracker tracks meta engines which they claim would be more accurate, and then they translate the results to the majors.

You are also right in that it "looks good". Many a client DOES check on that term and others when deciding who to go with.

[MazY]

Here's an interesting thing:

I spoke to loads of friends yesterday and asked them what they would type in of they were looking for search engine ranking companies. (I deliberately didn't use that term as I didn't want to influence them.)

The result? Over half of them returned the word "listings". Nobody said "rankings" at all. In fact, "places" came higher than "rankings". The term "higher listings on search engines" seemed to be the clear winner by far.

Shows what the average guy and gal thinks...

[ihelpyou]

UK'ers for sure have a different vocabulary. Those terms do not even register on wordtracker. "listings" gets 70 a day and "places" gets zero a day or not measurable.

Thank goodness as those words would certainly be hard to implement on a page. :)

[markymark]

I don't trust the Wordtracker results much more than Goto's in terms of number of searches. What it is useful for is getting related phrases for potential terms to optimise. I have a couple of examples of the flawed nature of Wordtracker, but I'll have to post them later.

This search term debate is interesting. There are some very low volume searches that I rank well on that almost always lead to an enquiry and I wouldn't change these for the world. I'm not going to tell you what they are, but if you visit my site, it won't take a brain surgeon to work them out.

Contrary wise, there are some higher volume searches - like search engine submission(s) - that I would never optimise for. I don't provide a simple submission service and feel that a very high percentage of the traffic would be worthless, but I am willing to be proved wrong.

The problem us SEOs have is that (especially in the UK) your average webmaster knows that companies like ours exist, but doesn't know what to search for to find them. And if they do, there is a bizarre expectation that we should be cheaper than their monthly offline advertising. This again is particularly true of UK companies. I get about 6 or 7 a week proposing a budget of 50-100 quid a month for my services. For that, I tell them to expect five hours work a month maximum.

Funny ol' game this, init Saint.

[ihelpyou]

Very true Mark.

The only reason I target "submissions" is simply cause it is searched on a bunch and do get a few hits. I always ask phoners how they found me.... the terms used range quite a lot. "submissions" is used often cause that is the way people talk in the US.

I do make it clear that I am NOT a submissions company and sometimes NEVER submit them anywhere. It is just that the "word" is so common with all the marketing hype surrounding it with the thousands of "submission" companies touting their so-called submission wares.

Tis a very funny game indeed.

[MakeMeTop]

I'm always amazed by what people have found me under.

Had a new client this week who found me by typing in 'how do i get my site top on search engines' - I asked on what engine and the reply was AltaVista. Sure enough, typed it in and there I was :)

Think I'll try the 'higher listings' one and see what happens.

[ihelpyou]

LOL. That is funny.

Just this morning, ... here are a few searches done who found these forums:

how to erase google history

msn smilies code

spam excite

free people Search england

Those are just a few. I ask myself why? :)

[Advisor]

I can tell you for certain that hardly anyone types in "high rankings" or "high search engine rankings" or "high rankings in the search engines." I do get a few visitors a week from those terms, but that's about it!

Jill

[Kal]

Being an Australian SEO firm targeting worldwide markets, I found that it was not possible to optimise a site for both UK/AU spelling : optimisation and US/other spelling : optimization. So I developed two sites, aimed at the different markets, utilising the different spelling.

Funny thing is, I've found that many people in Australia/NZ tend to type in "optimising for search engines" whereas in the US, people tend to use "positioning" or "placement" more than "optimizing" or "optimization". Also, "higher ranking" tends to be popular all over.

That's my experience anyway...

[ihelpyou]

wow, a world-wide gal! :) That is a good thing to do. Personally, I stick to market to the US, but do get clients from all over.

[MazY]

Originally posted by markymark
I get about 6 or 7 a week proposing a budget of 50-100 quid a month for my services.

:D :D Must be hard to stifle the laughter!

I believe Jill and I were speaking about key-phrases for SEO on ICQ a week or two ago. I think that we are often very guilty of doing exactly what we tell our clients not to do when searching for key-phrases: that is thinking only from within the terms of the industry.

I mean, really, "optimisation"? It's not a word that Joe Public is really ever going to use to a great degree is it? "Positioning"? Again, descriptive but I can't see Mr or Mrs Average pulling it from their list of everyday words.

WordTracker? Absolutely useless to me being as it is USA based. But I'm not even sure that it would carry much more use even if it was UK based. I still use it but only as a very rough guide to other suggestions.

Quite what real people would type in to improve their rankings, I don't know but I'm pretty sure it will not be "optimisation" or "positioning" or "placement". But yes, I do still cover them, just in case. :)

How many Jo Public's even call it "rankings" for starters. I know we do but is it really a common term for the non-seo? Who knows....

It's quite funny to think of all the SEOs chasing each others tails by using WordTracker!

Let me know how much or how little success you have out of "listings", Barry.

I suppose it makes even more sense as that is, essentially, what the search engines produce to the average guy - a list.

So the question is, who has the biggest Thesaurus?

[MazY]

Originally posted by markymark
This search term debate is interesting. There are some very low volume searches that I rank well on that almost always lead to an enquiry and I wouldn't change these for the world. I'm not going to tell you what they are, but if you visit my site, it won't take a brain surgeon to work them out.

LOL. I've been chasing you around on AOL for the past week or two. Can't quite nip you off the top but I get damned close!

In fact, I think you are sat right on top of me, hogging the number one spot, as I write this!

[MakeMeTop]

You are quite right that the average person is highly unlikely to type in search engine optimisation. However, the person that does has probably done a little research and may understand the difference between what we do and the 'get a zillion hits for $1' lot. So they are more qualified.

Interestingly, the most popular phrases used to find my site last week were 'search engine(s)', followed by 'meta tags' then 'search engine optimisation' followed by 'search engine optimization' (I am trying to see if I can do it on the same site Kal, as a bit of a personal challange). I average around 300 unique referrals per day - so get a reasonable view of what phrases give the best ROI. The week before I was top of AOL for 'free website promotion', 'free site promotion' - eeek - that was terrible. Loads of people expecting me to promote their sites for next to nothing - and when I said no politely, causing all kinds of grief.

[Kal]

Hey Mazy - If you show me your thesaurus, I'll show you mine ;)

Make Me Top - I too struggled with the "free" issue - especially after seeing how popular terms like "free web site promotion" and "free search promotion" etc were on WordTracker. Or maybe that was you running all those searches? :bandit:

But there's nothing worse than responding to hundreds of inquiries from people who want everything for nothing. I give plenty of "something for nothing" on my site, but after the initial freebie, I expect people to commit to something if they are serious about promoting their business.

I can usually pick the hard sells from a mile away. They are the ones that pick your freebie to pieces and then demand another... :shocked: