yeah... backlinks aren't important? next time you guys search for something and see a totally shitty page ranking well for what you are searching for... stop and ask yourself why that might be. it's sure not because of the crappy, unintelligible auto generated content, NON-EXISTENT updates and being an obviously fake site.

there can't possibly be any other aspect of web marketing filled with so much bullshit, misinformation and myths.

Text content, matched up well against the words assembling search phrases targeted, boosts Your RELEVANCE factors...

But most often when wanting to be on the first SERP's, all Your competitors have insane "link juice" at the SE's, so in order to compete with them...
"Link juice" does the trick - knowing what gives/is that juice is the key today... but sooner or later things will be reworked, and PPC will be the only way to "be up there".

Despite the bickering in here, and maybe because of it, this is one of the best threads ive read here in months.

Diligent,it won't happen, not in such degree at least. PPC concept of taking over normal listings has been tested and failed again and again over the last ten years or so. Those are 2 different things and the current status of major SEs we see is nothing more than a successful combination. It is this mix that drove google to the revenue monster it is in our days.

total bullshit :warning

Wikipedia rank higher because their content are worth it and people love (no, they L O V E) to link to, second big thing is their domain value and TrustRank .. its pretty very very high.

This is what gets Wikipedia ranked.

If you think you can get ranked similar to wikipedia (or generally on the top for everything) with a few million pages, and every page linking to index ... you need to revise your SEO knowledge.

Don't you think it would be the easiest fucking way to rank, then?

PS. Well, I am not amazed .. SEO how-know of an average adult webmaster is very low. I am not talking about everyone, I do know some of you fuckers are really smart and don't even participate in such threads :winkwink:

You seem to have a very good grasp on things Vick.

*pimp-blushed* :pimp

agreed, there are far toooo many people that "think" they know what they are doing. It takes a certain skill and patience.

Wikipedia is what happens when you do something because you are passionate and not because you are greedy.

That is my SEO tip...

Loaded with tools? Like Photoshop or like MS Paint?

Using CS3 Photoshop you almost don't need other tools like plugins...

Using MS Paint you would need every tool ever made because of the limitations on what it can do.

I wouldn't say Google has a load of tools.

great tip :thumbsup ... this is same as players say design sites for users not for search engines.


damn, i design for both :winkwink: :upsidedow

https://siteexplorer.search.yahoo.co...&fr2=seo-rd-se

Inlinks (4,394,010)

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

:thumbsup

also worth looking..

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=...iscqry=&fr=sfp

36,100,000 :winkwink:

This should settle the argument.

I have a number of pr6 sites with no content at all. Just an image saying coming soon.

Verifiedcharge was a pr7 with no content (just a coming soon image) now since we launched beta it went down to a pr6 with content :1orglaugh

So there you go.

What you are trying to say? I mean how PR is related to the content?

:1orglaugh

PR is way over rated

my PR went down on a few sites but the ranks went through the roof

I was answering the original post. What does more for pr? Content or inbounds.

Did the thread go off track? I didn't even realize it was already two pages :1orglaugh

I read the initial post too quick. I just reread it and realized I need coffee. Carry on :1orglaugh

:winkwink:



PS: /me heading to kitchen for coffee too .. damn, i love this thing.

You made me go back and read the original post, I thought I missed something.


Glad to hear it was you.

100 "SEO Expoerts" :1orglaugh

Edit: 101 now...



my math is not broken, I am just discounting myself :winkwink:

thats a horrible way to look at things in my opinion.

i have never been a fan of the "if you build it, they will come" mentality because its just not true. for every wikipedia - there is 1,000,000 carcasses of sites that went nowhere that were created by very clever, very passionate people with great ideas, lots of energy and enthusiasm and wonderful content and so on.

that thinking also fully discounts all the relevant factors that actually caused their success and brought them to that point of critical mass where the entire internet was linking back to them.

I read this whole thread. I think I learned some new things but I'm left feeling a bit confused. I'll have to re-read it again.

I didn't read through all 104 posts sorry -

Inbound links are the most important factor, optimized content follows

It's important to optimize your web page contents for your keywords. By optimizing your web page contents for your keywords, you tell search engines that your pages are relevant to these keywords.

Your web pages will get top rankings for these keywords if there is no competition. Unfortunately, there's a lot of competition and many pages are optimized for the same keywords as you have chosen.

That's where inbound links come to play. If more than one web page is optimized for the same keyword,(Obviously) then the web page with the best inbound links will get the best rankings.
:2 cents:

Many people make their money by being the first to promote the product, then moving on as soon as it becomes popular and finding the next hot item.

No SEO required.

We should have a competition and see who can rank higher for a keyword within a few weeks.

I like the sounds of this.. however.. i'm not in this business for bragging rights - i'm here to make some extra cash and well... 5 years later... i'm still here.. so... who cares. :helpme

I wonder who would come up with at least a 6 figure prize... if the prize is any less, all we would see is bunch of seo wannabees....

Id be down for this :pimp

Yes, they do.

bulk links get you toward the top, then the % of relevant links will determine who lands 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10

see sig

sure, what ever you say :thumbsup

"SEO" is now a genre of comedy.

Google ranks sites higher that have more ORGANIC imbound links. Why? Because Google figures that a site with lots of inbound links is important, popular, and relivant.

There is more to it than just this, but the algorythm that drives Google is a carefully guarded secret. Anyone who claims to know it or how it works is full of it.

As your site gets popular, and more people link to you, Google will notice and rank you higher.

Companies that create a bunch of bogus domains to link to you are not unkown to google. If the links are from BS places, or the context of the links is false, Google will push you to the very bottom of the list.

For more check out this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank


m

there is no money in seo. stop doing it now.

build a tgp or something.

If you would all like to have a competition over a keyword I'd be happy to supply a domain for you to compete over. You can all take turns trying to increase traffic to my new site and I promise to honestly let everyone in the thread know who sent me the most traffic :kisskiss

many would do it for free just for the title of winner, bragging rights, and instant credibility to boost their consulting business.

A rule would be that the competitors couldnt register a new domain name for it until after the competition starts. So everyone is on the same level playing field.