Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: My rating of SEO techniques in order. What is yours?

"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message 
> __/ [Dan V.] on Saturday 05 November 2005 15:00 \__
>> I am attempting to rate search engine optimization tasks (internet
>> marketing) in general in order of most effective.
>> And then what % of time and money should be spent on each item.  Please
>> feel free to add or delete and please rate them if you have a few 
>> minutes.
>> If that is too generic for you, how about choosing an industry like (web
>> design).
>> My first draft:
>> What works best list for SEO (in order of priority):
>> ------------------------------
>> -link building
>> -text in incoming links
>> -building content
>> -sponsored search results
>> -Internal descriptive text linking
>> -pay per click advertising (contextual based advertising) like Google
>> Adwords
>> -Paid inclusion
>> -SEO page optimization (descriptive headers, sub headers, page Titles)
>> -having a blog
>> -Text Navigation (with each page having it's own context link e.g.: Home 
>>  >
>> Services > Web Design FAQ
>> -Site map page
>> -contributing to forums
>> -writing articles
>> -banner ads on other sites
>> -submitting to directories
>> -domain name itself
>> -words per page
>> -keyword density
>> Where should the most time be spent on?
>> -----------------------------------------
>> -Link building -30%
>> -building content - 20%
>> -Pay per click 10%
>> etc...?
>> Where should the most money be spent on?
>> -------------------------------------------
>> ...
>> Thanks I look forward to seeing the results!
>> Dan V.
> They are all factors to consider, no doubt. However, to rank them or embed
> them in a priority list, you will have to quantify them.
> Example:
> "link building" > having a blog (where '>' means "greater impact than")
> What  link? How many links? Is anchor text (text in incoming links) not  a
> subset  of  that? It's a trade-off where the investment (time) per  reward
> ratio is the only means by which you can ever quantify.
> The  model  you  look at should be more complex. It should be drawn  as  a
> graph perhaps. Here is one possibly way of categorising those points:
> -Links
>  * incoming
>     o text in incming links
>     o link impact (e.g. PageRank & number of links in page)
>  * outgoing
>     o internal descriptive text linking
> -Building content
>  * SEO page optimization (also helps users)
>     o text navigation
>     o site map page
>  * having a blog (or under "Links")
>  * contributing to forums
>  * writing articles
> -Promotion/marketing
>  * sponsored search results
>  * paid inclusion
>     o submitting to directories
>     o banner ads on other sites
>  * pay per click advertising
> -SEO-specifics
>  *domain name itself
>  *words per page
>  *keyword density
> I didn't spend much effort on this, but I think you ought to make this hi-
> erarchical  and  hence better-structured. There is also  repeatability  of
> points,  which  rather than contribute, might confuse the reader  and  add
> clutter. People are good at remembering lists of at most 7 items. Use lev-
> elling to make the points more 'digestable'.
> Hope it helps,
> Roy

Excellent points Roy!  As  you can see I am very new to this and it is more 
I guess I should also put submitting to free directories under Promotion.

Is it not implicit that a has greater impact then b when you have an ordered 
list of priorities?

You could prioritise cateogories first, then rank sub points in each 
category, and lastly, what I proposed, is just ranking every point.
Or am I missing something?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index