Collecting Junk as a Form of SEO

Lets say you write a blog about poker. It is pretty hard to get legitimate links to a poker blog, but lets say you talk about how you met Phil Ivey but the story is not that interesting sounding. You can add a bit of authenticity to the sound of the story by buying a Phil Ivey autographed poker chip for $23 and include it in your post.

In certain markets (like poker) just about any type of link is worth $23. There are also other types of junk or collectibles that may be selling for far less than their linkability factor - weather you post about them and get a few links or you hold a contest of some sort to give them away, and get many more links.

Collecting allows you to easily create original linkable content which leverages the value of a celebrity or brand without needing to fully invest into the cost of building that brand or getting a celebrity to endorse your site. Branded keywords or celebrity keywords are typically high traffic and / or high value terms.

Passion and Pornography

Many markets are said to be hyper competitive and beyond competitive reach for most people. Amongst this group are porn, pills, and casino sites. But most websites are garbage, and lack passion.

I am not advocating this idea for everyone, but...

Imagine a blogger who created the ultimate fan blog for one porn star. Reviewed all of their work. Eventually the porn star finds the blog and likes the blog owner so much that they want to have sex with the blogger as a thank you. The blogger, being a savvy business person, decides that they should shoot a video and sell it directly and exclusively on that blog.

Ultra targeted readers and an easy marketing story to spread. What more do you need?

Now I know that idea sound ridiculous to most people, but that is exactly why it would work so well if it was done well.

In a recent post I mentioned a couple Viagra humor examples and there are many ideas that would work equally well in the gambling vertical. All competitive markets are less competitive if you think of them in terms of how people share ideas and information.

What about a more mainstream vertical that is hyper competitive? How big of a competitive advantage would it be for an online flower shop to buy and integrate a design color tool like this one into their site? Something that no other site has.

Sell water purification equipment? Talk about how many people are going to be without clean water shortly as the population grows. Source other important documents, create an authoritative topical document and channel. Teach people how to solve the problem even if they do not buy your equipment.

In any and every vertical there are ton of easy marketing opportunities. How does your product, service or idea relate to people? How can you invoke an emotional response or get them to want to share it?

If you get to where you are evangelizing your industry instead of just selling stuff it is going to be hard to fail.

Clicktracks for Free

Clicktracks offers up a free version of their analytics software by the name of Clicktracks Appetizer.

Sensationalism, Hoaxes, and Bogus Predictions: SEO Techniques

Internet to peak soon - the guy is full of shit with his claim, but it is an easy claim to link at.

Viagra Prank - hahaha to $5,000 a day

how many ways can an email spammer spell Viagra? - imagine that, another funny Viagra page that became a high ranking advertorial

Like humor, it is just as easy to work the ethics angle and then switch the purpose to promote what the site once claimed to hate. Even if you are creating a fake business or site that will be hated many of the people hating it will be so stupid that they link at it anyway.

penny stock scams - decent link popularity

Google is an easy target. Google China's name is no good - link link link

You can even run ads that are irrelevant or violate Google's guidelines, then claim that Google censored you as a link building trick. Just get Google in the press release and some media person will be dumb enough to pick it up.

Suing Google is, of course, easy press.

And everyone loves sex. if you link at me I win sex - long after the traffic falls the links stick, which can be leveraged in a nearly unlimited number of ways, although it helps if you can get the perfect anchor text built right into the initial marketing.

As long as you are first with the angle you take (see point #4 here) and know a few people who can help spread the message you are good to go.

New Flash Detection Script

At WMW Boston Mike Nott pointed me at FlashObject, which is a Javascript Flash detection and embed script.

It is XHTML compliant and allows you to use flash detection and is probably the best way to do SEO for a flash site. A couple old related posts:

Flowing Internal Links Popularity on External Sites

Dominic posted on DP about flowing Wikipedia PageRank internally to pages where you are mentioned.

Search wikipedia in goog for a mention of your keyword / phrase. Edit those wikipedia pages to link to the lovely wiki page that links to your page.

And, of course, if you can't get your stuff linked to then a few additional options are:

  • point Wikipedia pages to other pages that link at you

  • add links to your Wikipedia profile page (and link to your profile page by commenting on a couple high profile controvercial subjects)
  • add links with questions to talk pages for controvercial subjects.

Some people may also point Digital Point coop weight or other external links at the pages linking to them to help build up their citation value.

Do More With Less: Getting Rid of Junk

I am probably not the biggest conversion expert in the world, but after you start playing around with pixels and offers sometimes doing a few small things makes you realize how important some of them are.

One of my web only clients was making about $3,000 a month in sales when he contacted me. I did SEO and PPC for them and got them up to $12,000 a month. I tweaked some of the conversion aspects of the site and the same traffic now brings in over $40,000 a month in sales. Some sites have their link equity split up between the www version and non www versions of their sites. By consolidating that link popularity (via a 301 redirect) your net number of pages in the index goes down, but each page becomes more authoritative.

My sales letter had a couple broken links to reviews (due to a JupiterMedia analyst moving on and another site changing its URL structure).

My sales letter had a couple broken links to search results due to MSN changing their search string and Ask killing the Teoma brand.

Some sites use sequential URL names and screw up their page level link reputation when they add a new page.

Some about pages or sales letter pages place AdSense front and center, which end up killing the brand credibility of those sites. Many of these sites would also make far greater profits if they sold ads directly instead of through AdSense.

Many websites have Liveperson contact me buttons even on content pages about topics they would not want contacted about. Many many many sites have too many things competing for attention which end up killing their conversion ratios. Give me too many things to do and most likely I will do none of them.

If you flip a person to a related idea in your content make sure you label it as being relevant and explain why the related idea is relevant and useful to the site visitor.

Many sites have content areas with text but no headings or subheadings, and worse yet no links in the active content window of their site. Assume people are going to ignore your sitewide navigation if you want to build a site that converts.

If you are using pay per click marketing try to aim some of your ads at the high end of the market. Write ads for conversion instead of clicks, and perhaps sell the idea of selling a quote for large orders instead of selling an item. If you already rank in the regular search results then you can limit the incremental spend of PPC while ensuring you attract the big fish by reminding them that you service big orders.

Use analytics. Some of the terms you are focusing on may be a complete waste of time.

Your email address may also hurt your conversions. If you are selling relationships some people may prefer to email help@, name@ or support@ instead of sales@.

If you give people information via your site give them an automated follow up email. This is an area where I need to work on. I also should have an autoresponder series set up, as that would surely help me make thousands and thousands of dollars for minimal effort.

Direct transactions also likely convert at a better rate than transactions which require you to go to another site. Eventually I hope to either better integrate the payment system or move away from Paypal for some of my transactions.

What are some common errors you see on many sites that could be corrected to drastically increase their profitability?

Does Domain Extension Matter?

Some countries have certain rules which make it harder or more expensive to get a local domain than a global one. For local search queries sites which match the local domain extension or are hosted on a machine in that country may get a boost in relevancy over global domains. (ie: .uk may rank well in UK, .de may rank well in Germany)

Google can use the increased price of local hosting and/or the rules associated with gaining a local domain extension to assume that locally hosted or locally registered domains may have a greater local relevancy.

Likely due to less spamming incentive, a smaller content base, and a lesser understanding of local language many of the filters that are applied to the global search results may not be applied to some local results.

By looking at link reputation scores Google lets pages on websites vote for other pages. On the commercial web the purity of many votes may be in question. Weblogs Inc., for example, has gambling ads on over 40 of their blogs - in spite of Google being a minority owner in that network.

In a recent WMW thread someone mentioned this URL (maricopa.gov) as a .gov domain that accepts advertising links, but generally it is much harder to buy .gov or .edu links than .com or .net links.

Beyond .edu and .gov there are also other rare domains which people probably do not talk about that much which also have similar importance. In the UK .ac.uk is the equivalent of a .edu, and perhaps some .mil extensions may be trusted a bit more than the average .com, .net, .info, or .biz type domain.

The factor of trust would be three fold:

  • The standards required to get a .edu (or other rare domain extension) implies a certain level of credibility.

  • When the web started educational institutions and governmental bodies were at the core of it. Thus, with greater history, they are more likely to have more link equity. Over time webmasters of scraper sites and legitimate web pages are going to be more inclined to link at the top ranking pages, which reinforces the link popularity.
  • Generally much of the well cited college papers or governmental pages are of higher quality than the average web page due to internal requirements. On top of that they are harder to influence than most average web pages. For example, it is pretty damn hard to get a professor to link at your site or update his or her outdated links. No professor wants some random self promotional asshole (which is how they will view many people who contact them) telling them that their content is outdated or inaccurate.

When you read about Trustrank the seed set of sites were all backed by government, educational, or corporate bodies. If you don't think Google relies on third parties in this way think about how they limit what sources they accept for their local search product or for their news search.

Surely many college students are selling .edu links by now, but those are still a bit harder for the AVERAGE webmaster to find than .com links for sale.

That which is rare, hard to obtain, hard to influence, or vetted by other trusted bodies may aid in relevancy scoring.
It has been a long time since a link is a link.

Google's Recent Search Result Changes

Google has been testing adding more information near search listings, including
- search this site
- inside this site (links to other pages on that site)
- related (links to related sites)

Testing the above, inline query suggestions, including vertical results via Google Onebox, and suggesting specific verticals for the most broad query types allows Google to attack vertical search from many angles.

Suggesting the broadest databases (shopping, news, images) for broad query types allows them to prevent too many large verticals from being created unless their creators do something fundamentally innovative. Increasing minimum bids for low quality ads also filters out some of the arbitrage model.

Query suggestions as you type and inline suggestions guide searchers toward more common (and likely more meaningful) search paths which will - on average - lead searchers to more useful results. They also aggressively aggregate data in some of the larger verticals, which adds value to the top few players they trust while making it harder for new players to spring up in those markets.

By adding more information near regular search result listings (including site search, related internal links and related external links) they only have to get near the search answer without necessarily needing to precisely answer it. Get close enough and then teach people about things like related links and site search and they should be able to get the rest of the way where they want to go.

The search box has the most value per pixel second, and until some major publishers find new monetization models or ways to challenge Google it is obvious that Google is going to keep adding more and more information to their results. Google may even be the one who helps them find better ways to monetize.

Unlike the competition, Google is not afraid to keep pushing the boundaries of their results, even if in the short term those tests lead to lower earnings. Why hasn't Yahoo! done anything with their Mindset search yet?

Once an engine gets enough marketshare there is a virtual endless stream of revenue possibilities so long as they listen to their users.

The value isn't just in the network, but in how quickly and smartly it reacts to changes. Google generally is the king at that.

They lower costs across the board while making information more accessible. Clicktracks now has a free version. If companies like Britannica listen to the advice they are given then Google may have access to encyclopedias of information for free, on top of having the largest userbase.

I think Wall Street is a bit stupid for reacting to quarter to quarter results. I just don't see a way of Google losing at this point. Even if eBay partners with another large player it still does not change the fact that their value add and relevancy is decreasing with each day of non innovation at eBay.

While keeping an eye on general search Google has also refined some of the more important verticals, which allows them to more precisely answer queries for those who care so much that they want to get much closer than just nearly answering the queries. In some of those verticals they are creating new standards for what is important.

You can count on Google hitting the education market hard, from funding literacy to pointing librarians at lesson plans.

From a marketing perspective these changes all add value to legitimacy while making the marketplace and SERPs more relevant. But as Google pushes these types of features they will also create new types of spam. For example, if you can't easily rank #1 for a competitive phrase, but you can easily make Google believe your document is somehow one of the most related documents to what is ranking at #1 that might be a cheap way to garner targeted traffic. Learning how to become related will be exceptionally useful if the current results may not answer the query as well as it should.

Inline Query Refinement - the Cheap Way to Rank

Instead of going after broad terms sometimes frequently searched for slightly less broad terms will rank in the search results for the broad terms.

It is likely going to be much easier to rank in the top 2 to 3 results for a longer query than it is to rank in the top 10 for a short generic query. Bill reviewed Google's query refinement here, and on this post I noted that on under $1 I was able to rank #4 for Marlboro by ranking #1 for Marlboro Miles.

Pages