Tags |
|
|
Casual Articles - Can you Please Them All? Universal Search Engine Ranking Algorithms
If you've ever held a brainstorming session to come up with new product names, you know that it is usually not hard to get people to attend. In fact, such meetings generally start off with a lot of enthusiasm and elation. This quickly fades though as the cold reality sets in. Naming a new product is really difficult.Naming a product is about as close as you can get to having a root canal without going to the dentist. Even done well with an expert team, it's an exercise in pain, frustration, and disappointment.Nevertheless, there are some things you should know about the process.First of all, get a reality check on how important a product name really is. Some people tend to think that it's a life and death matter, others rate it as inconsequential, and the truth is probably somewhere in between. Having a great name is a definite asset. Having a poor name is a major liability. But in the area between, there is probably not much difference as to whether a product has a good name or a mediocre name.Second, it is vital that you enlist the support of some legal experts, perhaps an on-staff paralegal or an attorney with expertise in trademark registration. They will tell you that you cannot trademark
Wall continued his rundown, suggesting that Yahoo focus was quite literal for years, but recently changed to be more like Google. "Nepotistic links" still working there. Bias toward commercial sites with their algo's. MSN newest to search and they entered when spam was already heavily gaming system. Google has biased toward information resources like .gov and .edu best at determining true link quality and bad links can hurt crawl depth. Places a lot of weight on domain level trust. Aggressive duplicate content filters. Google looks much more at linguistic patterns than the others and filters out some hyper focused pages. Some have called that "over-optimized".
He mentioned that ASk is not studied as much as others due to small size, s
eMarketing, commonly known as an Internet marketing tool, refers to 'how' businesses market their services or products online. In this new age of technology, an Internet presence directly affects the success of a business. From an ecommerce site to an informational site, eMarketing begins at your homepage.Utilize a WebsiteEvery website has one goal and that is to heighten the interest of the reader. For the homepage to be an effective eMarketing tool, web content needs to follow the search engine optimized (SEO) techniques outlined by search engine domains like Google and Yahoo. Once landing on your site, the content will act as a sales letter.Whether you operate a service or sell products, eMarketing is more affordable than the traditional means of marketing. Over 130,000,000 people surf the Internet daily. It would take a hefty investment to reach this number of people in the more traditional means of marketing.Producing a website that ranks well in the search engines, will assist you in obtaining more visitors and visitors easily convert into customers at a rather amazing rate.Cost ComparisonPrinting promotional material can be quite costly. With a website, this cost is
Most SEO firms now realize that the vast majority of referred search traffic comes from Google and that it is followed only (often at less than one-third the referral traffic) by Yahoo and then half as much again from MSN (with Ask trailing far behind at just fractional percentages of the referrals brought by the others). Therefore, most optimization efforts are spent toward making Google happy, and the others will mostly fall in behind by bestowing rankings at similar positions to those achieved at Google. Still, there are many interested in improving positions at Yahoo, MSN and Ask once they have achieved their best rank at the big G.
First speaker Aaron Wall of SEObook.com emphasized that algorithms are always in a state of evolution and offered a brief overview comparing observed ranking factors of each of the top search engines. Wall elicited a chuckle from the audience with the webmaster's quip, "A good search engine is one that ranks my sites well, a bad engine is one in which my site does badly." He suggested that there is "No such thing as a perfect algorithm." Wall asserts that, of necessity, SEO techniques evolve with the algo's. Because you rank well in one engine, it does not mean you'll do well in all.
Infrastructure or algorithmic changes may have unintended side effects. Wall mentioned Google Sandbox effect and suggested that it was really a side effect of an aging factor added to the algorithm, but that its' effect was positive overall to the index, so it was kept. He moved to discuss "Big Daddy" infrastructure effects, which for many webmasters meant large numbers of temporarily disappearing pages dropping from search results.
That effeect of BigDaddy update was widely discussed in webmaster forums when it resulted in wide swings of results for many until the index was able to readjust and settle over a few weeks. Many sites didn't regain positions they had before Big Daddy because they emphasized factors in their optimization that were downgraded by that major overhaul to the Google infrastructure.
Wall mentioned that new publishing formats can create algorithmic "holes" and gave two examples - Wikipedia and blogs. This was an "advanced" session, according to the conference schedule, so terms were not defined and it was assumed that most in attendance understood how different those publishing formats are. He also suggested that many will always attempt to game the system as new formats emerge. (Suggesting that he was aware of those two publishing systems being used to game the search engine ranking system currently.)
Wall continued his rundown, suggesting that Yahoo focus was quite literal for years, but recently changed to be more like Google. "Nepotistic links" still working there. Bias toward commercial sites with their algo's. MSN newest to search and they entered when spam was already heavily gaming system. Google has biased toward information resources like .gov and .edu best at determining true link quality and bad links can hurt crawl depth. Places a lot of weight on domain level trust. Aggressive duplicate content filters. Google looks much more at linguistic patterns than the others and filters out some hyper focused pages. Some have called that "over-optimized".
He mentioned that ASk is not studied as much as others due to small size, so
There has been much talk lately of Latent Semantic Indexing – do in part to Google placing a higher relevancy to it in it’s algorithms, and consequently the hits and lower page rankings some webmasters encountered when Google instituted the change. If you are utilizing SEO or wanting to-- learning about LSI is important. What is Latent Semantic Indexing and how can it help or hurt your site? These are the questions that I will attempt to address in my article.What is Latent Semantic Indexing?Latent Semantic Indexing has been around for a while. According to the Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent_semantic_indexing) Encyclopedia, LSI was first patented in 1988. The LSI concept attempts to convert information from computer databases into normal-sounding human language. Understand? Yeah, my thought exacting. Let me compare and contrast and maybe, as for me, the understanding will be a little clearer.With the old system of keyword search, the search engine would go through your web page and grab the keyword or keyword phases that were relevant – if no relevant keywords were present – the information on the page would be tossed aside and not be considered relevant—no inbetweens, and t
First speaker Aaron Wall of SEObook.com emphasized that algorithms are always in a state of evolution and offered a brief overview comparing observed ranking factors of each of the top search engines. Wall elicited a chuckle from the audience with the webmaster's quip, "A good search engine is one that ranks my sites well, a bad engine is one in which my site does badly." He suggested that there is "No such thing as a perfect algorithm." Wall asserts that, of necessity, SEO techniques evolve with the algo's. Because you rank well in one engine, it does not mean you'll do well in all.
Infrastructure or algorithmic changes may have unintended side effects. Wall mentioned Google Sandbox effect and suggested that it was really a side effect of an aging factor added to the algorithm, but that its' effect was positive overall to the index, so it was kept. He moved to discuss "Big Daddy" infrastructure effects, which for many webmasters meant large numbers of temporarily disappearing pages dropping from search results.
That effeect of BigDaddy update was widely discussed in webmaster forums when it resulted in wide swings of results for many until the index was able to readjust and settle over a few weeks. Many sites didn't regain positions they had before Big Daddy because they emphasized factors in their optimization that were downgraded by that major overhaul to the Google infrastructure.
Wall mentioned that new publishing formats can create algorithmic "holes" and gave two examples - Wikipedia and blogs. This was an "advanced" session, according to the conference schedule, so terms were not defined and it was assumed that most in attendance understood how different those publishing formats are. He also suggested that many will always attempt to game the system as new formats emerge. (Suggesting that he was aware of those two publishing systems being used to game the search engine ranking system currently.)
Wall continued his rundown, suggesting that Yahoo focus was quite literal for years, but recently changed to be more like Google. "Nepotistic links" still working there. Bias toward commercial sites with their algo's. MSN newest to search and they entered when spam was already heavily gaming system. Google has biased toward information resources like .gov and .edu best at determining true link quality and bad links can hurt crawl depth. Places a lot of weight on domain level trust. Aggressive duplicate content filters. Google looks much more at linguistic patterns than the others and filters out some hyper focused pages. Some have called that "over-optimized".
He mentioned that ASk is not studied as much as others due to small size, s
Blogging is a lot easier than writing fresh content all the time. Anybody can learn how to blog, and even the software needed is free. Contrary to what most people think, it is easy to set up a blog, and newcomers to the technique are normally pleasantly surprised at how easy it is. You can update your blog in a few minutes, and you only have to do this a few times a week to keep the search engines happy.Blogging is not spamming, because your blog readers have to take action to get access to it. You don’t send a blog like you would send an email. Spamming is not an issue, and there are no such things as blog filters, so it will reach anybody that wants it. Another benefit of blogs, is that other blogs can feature them. You can get a lot of traffic to your site that way, and you can email details to your list. Just send them an email with a link to your blog. Tell them what it is and do your sales spiel, telling them about how much they can learn from your blog, and you should get the traffic.Keep in mind that traffic to your blog is traffic to your website, and you can use it as a marketing tool. If you combine your blog with RSS you will be able to syndicate it to a very wide audience, and again, si
Infrastructure or algorithmic changes may have unintended side effects. Wall mentioned Google Sandbox effect and suggested that it was really a side effect of an aging factor added to the algorithm, but that its' effect was positive overall to the index, so it was kept. He moved to discuss "Big Daddy" infrastructure effects, which for many webmasters meant large numbers of temporarily disappearing pages dropping from search results.
That effeect of BigDaddy update was widely discussed in webmaster forums when it resulted in wide swings of results for many until the index was able to readjust and settle over a few weeks. Many sites didn't regain positions they had before Big Daddy because they emphasized factors in their optimization that were downgraded by that major overhaul to the Google infrastructure.
Wall mentioned that new publishing formats can create algorithmic "holes" and gave two examples - Wikipedia and blogs. This was an "advanced" session, according to the conference schedule, so terms were not defined and it was assumed that most in attendance understood how different those publishing formats are. He also suggested that many will always attempt to game the system as new formats emerge. (Suggesting that he was aware of those two publishing systems being used to game the search engine ranking system currently.)
Wall continued his rundown, suggesting that Yahoo focus was quite literal for years, but recently changed to be more like Google. "Nepotistic links" still working there. Bias toward commercial sites with their algo's. MSN newest to search and they entered when spam was already heavily gaming system. Google has biased toward information resources like .gov and .edu best at determining true link quality and bad links can hurt crawl depth. Places a lot of weight on domain level trust. Aggressive duplicate content filters. Google looks much more at linguistic patterns than the others and filters out some hyper focused pages. Some have called that "over-optimized".
He mentioned that ASk is not studied as much as others due to small size, s
Spanish is one of the most spoken languages in the world. If you look for keyword searches in any search engine for any product, there will be searches related to that product, asking for information in Spanish, or for example in the case of books or audio books, a Spanish version of it.As it was said, audio books are not the exception. There are hundreds of people looking for "Spanish audio books" or "audio book in Spanish" in most of the search engines and directories.Fortunately, there are some audio book stores that are starting to have spanish audio books as one of their categories. There are some classic titles such as Papa Rico, Papa Pobre o La Ola Latina that can be found on almost all audio book stores.In addition, there are other important categories in which people looking for spanish audio books can be interested. These are language learning audio books, as an audio book is an excellent tool to learn a foreign language, because you can also learn the correct pronunciation of words.The most common Spanish audio books in these categories at this moment are English courses for Spanish speakers, but without any doub
Wall mentioned that new publishing formats can create algorithmic "holes" and gave two examples - Wikipedia and blogs. This was an "advanced" session, according to the conference schedule, so terms were not defined and it was assumed that most in attendance understood how different those publishing formats are. He also suggested that many will always attempt to game the system as new formats emerge. (Suggesting that he was aware of those two publishing systems being used to game the search engine ranking system currently.)
Wall continued his rundown, suggesting that Yahoo focus was quite literal for years, but recently changed to be more like Google. "Nepotistic links" still working there. Bias toward commercial sites with their algo's. MSN newest to search and they entered when spam was already heavily gaming system. Google has biased toward information resources like .gov and .edu best at determining true link quality and bad links can hurt crawl depth. Places a lot of weight on domain level trust. Aggressive duplicate content filters. Google looks much more at linguistic patterns than the others and filters out some hyper focused pages. Some have called that "over-optimized".
He mentioned that ASk is not studied as much as others due to small size, s
Customers choose the same old, same old when they can’t tell the difference between offerings. These steps will help them see why you’re the clear choice.In a recent Forrester Research consumer survey, 47% of consumers indicated they see no difference between competing brands. That should be incredibly disturbing for brand managers and CEOs everywhere. Especially considering that, according to emarketer.com, businesses spent 281 billion dollars on advertising in 2006.When customers can’t distinguish between competing products they’re left to choose based on the one obvious difference: Price. As business leaders, we need to help our customers understand the value we deliver for the price they pay.No matter what you sell, these steps will emphasize your brand’s differences and help you stand out from the competition in the ever-crowded global marketplace.Step 1: Market the right message Whether you’re selling to consumers or to businesses, people don’t buy features; they buy benefits. Yet 99.5% of all advertising promotes features.When you understand the benefits customers get, you can emphasize them in all of your marketing. People who want those benefits will then be drawn to you.nking system currently.)
Wall continued his rundown, suggesting that Yahoo focus was quite literal for years, but recently changed to be more like Google. "Nepotistic links" still working there. Bias toward commercial sites with their algo's. MSN newest to search and they entered when spam was already heavily gaming system. Google has biased toward information resources like .gov and .edu best at determining true link quality and bad links can hurt crawl depth. Places a lot of weight on domain level trust. Aggressive duplicate content filters. Google looks much more at linguistic patterns than the others and filters out some hyper focused pages. Some have called that "over-optimized".
He mentioned that ASk is not studied as much as others due to small size, so less is actually known about their algo's.
Dave Davies of Beanstalk SEO then took the stand, emphasizing items such as site architecture and URL importance on his first slide, showing standard SEO factors such as key content appearing higher on the page, above the fold. Heads around the room nodded as attendees agreed with the basics as he reviewed each item on the standard SEO checklist.
As he moved to the "code to content ratio" he claimed it was a sizable weighting factor for his clients. While not revealing names of those clients, he did show several slides of example sites with keyword phrases highlighted and circled on the pages. He claims that extensive on page use of javascript, nested tables and complex table structure hurts many sites and that when Beanstalk switched to "table-less design" from table structures, that his own site saw immediate increases in ranking with absolutely no changes to content. He went on to discuss SE friendly URL's and "flat filing" of dynamic content.
Davies said that when optimiizing for separate engines - MSN is by far the easiest, then Yahoo then Google. But then he said, "Ranking on MSN is essentially useless though, so I'd rather be on page three of Google than on page one of MSN." He claimed that relative ranking results in far more traffic, even though few searchers go past the first two pages of results. Google has very much higher referral numbers, so rankings are worth more on page three of Google results than page one of MSN. Determining which engine to target first for top ranking is therefore, quite easy. Ranking on MSN search is still not as valuable as ranking well on Yahoo.
Other factors include age of a page, content adjustments, freshness, keyword density, How it fares in search results (clicks from result pages out to SERP listed site), backlinks, visitor stats and user analysis. Traffic is better that way. Referrer analysis - where are they coming from. Which keyword phrases are actually converting? Path analysis important to determine what users do on the site and then comparing each of the engines for path analysis and which engines result in more referred users taking the most desired action from each engine. Do users referred from MSN result in sales or quote requests? He recommends doing that same analysis at each of the engines referring search traffic.
Next up on the panel of experts for "Can You Please Them All" session was SEO Michael Murray, VP Fathom SEO, who suggested that audience members make slow subtle changes to their important pages and overall to the site, and recommended against major reworking. Don't do a complete overhaul. Make some baby changes first to get rankings and go from there. He warned attendees, "You can't get all the rankings with one page. Think multiple pages to achieve results for different engines.
Murray provided a fun example of what it takes to woo a search engine when he said, "MSN is easy, it just takes a little kiss." The powerpoint slide showed the MSN name and a photo of a Hershey's Kiss. The next slide showed the Yahoo name alon
HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
<a href="http://www.casualarticles.com/article/77059/casualarticles-Can-you-Please-Them-All-Universal-Search-Engine-Ranking-Algorithms.html">Can you Please Them All? Universal Search Engine Ranking Algorithms</a>
BB link (for phorums):
[url=http://www.casualarticles.com/article/77059/casualarticles-Can-you-Please-Them-All-Universal-Search-Engine-Ranking-Algorithms.html]Can you Please Them All? Universal Search Engine Ranking Algorithms[/url]
Related Articles:
How to make Huge Profits Selling E-books
Internet Marketing Strategies That Really Work II
Bookmark it:
|