Site   Web

March 20, 2012

SEO and the Fool’s Gold Fantasy — A SPN Exclusive Article

spn_exclusive

Do you want to be on Page One of Google? Of course you do. Who wouldn’t! All you have to do is believe everything you’re told by the so-called SEO experts.

‘Page One’ is Nirvana, Utopia, and the Holy Grail all rolled into one Google Street Map location where the little yellow man hovers triumphantly next to your company offices. Better change that ‘yellow man’ to ‘solid gold man’ – 24-carat success that’s heading down your street sometime soon. And it’s all thanks to those SEO people who strode confidently into your world last week.

“We’ll have you on Page One within weeks,” they tell you. “We’ll do some keyword research and pretty soon you’ll be drowning in sales leads.”

This is a beguiling scenario – and one which is probably played out thousands of times in as many businesses every week across the world. The mere mention of the word ‘SEO’ makes corporate eyes glaze over with dreams of world domination.

What some of the more unscrupulous SEO people fail to mention is that Page One rankings don’t come easily – and certainly not where the more competitive (and therefore commercially worthwhile) keywords are concerned. They omit to mention that SEO isn’t a magical ‘quick fix’ that will propel web pages to top rankings in a matter of weeks. They also forget to remind you that there are so many aspects to web page rankings other than placing keywords in all the right places. (That may have worked five years ago. Today, things are very different.)

The other side of this coin is that clever SEO can result in high page rankings for companies who are not necessarily the best in their field. Unfair? Yes – but it was ever thus. Just think about the big companies of ten or twenty years ago with huge advertising budgets who created massive exposure for brands that weren’t necessarily ‘the best’. (More about this later!)

Is Page One Always Paved With Gold?

Even when all the SEO elements are in place to give you a fighting chance in today’s complex and competitive SEO environment, there is still a raft of awkward (and often unanswerable) questions that arise about the value of web page rankings.

Depending on whose research you read, the difference in click-through rates (CTRs) between a Number One ranked page on Google and the page in second place can be a massive two or three times! This difference narrows considerably between pages ranked second or third. It continues in rapidly diminishing slices to the bottom of Page One where a Number Ten ranked page is of dubious commercial value.

To give you an idea of how insignificant a number ten ranking can be: the CTR figures for a number eleven ranking – i.e. top of page two – are marginally higher simply because the eyes of the relatively few searchers who click onto page two are drawn to the top of the page!

Getting back to the top rankings of Page One – a page ranked at Number One on Google is rewarded with a ‘winner-takes-all’ jackpot. The value of a top-ranked page is likely to be out of all proportion to its relative ‘quality’, usefulness or relevance to a searcher’s keyword query. Arguably, this is the biggest single flaw in the whole ‘search’ concept. The fact is, however, it’s only human nature to click on the top-rated page because it’s perceived as being ‘the best’. If Google ranks it Number One (with all its sophisticated selection techniques), conventional wisdom says it MUST be the best!

What a layman wouldn’t realize is that a Number One ranking may be the result of superior SEO, and nothing to do with the merits of that particular business. The other ‘problem’ is that, by definition, there is only one ‘Number One’ spot. Google has no place for ‘joint second’ or ‘joint-anything’ in its rankings! That can only be in the eye of the beholder.

Statistically, lower-ranking web pages can still attract respectable numbers of viewers and clicks. The reverence given to top pages in the web rankings may be about misplaced confidence, but all pages ranked below the top two or three positions will inevitably attract a certain degree of skepticism whose quality appeal will be compared, rightly or wrongly, in a less favorable light.

The saddest part of all this is that Google’s algorithms rank pages with great accuracy – but only according to their own criteria. Can robots realistically assess product quality, for example, or amazing customer service?

Herein lies the paradox – or unfairness – of SEO. For companies whose offerings aren’t necessarily the best, good SEO is worth its weight in gold. For those companies without effective SEO support (for whatever reason), the otherwise brilliant aspects of their business will go begging, in the online world at least.

Some would argue that a top-ranked site would soon be rumbled if it didn’t deliver on its promises. The ultimate business truth for a top site begins to emerge with the landing page that a ‘click’ delivers. What first impression does the site create? More specifically, how impressive is the design, website copywriting, ease of navigation and every other aspect of usability?

This extends to the pure ‘physical’ contact that a prospect has with the business in terms of inter-personal chemistry and service efficiency at every stage in the sales process. Much of this lies outside the scope of SEO where the ultimate responsibility of converting leads to sales rests with the company itself.

The REAL Value of Keywords

An important question in SEO is how much intrinsic value resides in a specific keyword and, whether SEO has the potential to take everyone on a fool’s errand?

When it comes to bigger companies, for instance, can a massive SEO investment in trying to achieve top ranking for almost-generic, ultra-competitive keywords be worth all the disappointment and soul-searching? Surely, in so many cases, there has to be a better way?

At the other end of the scale are smaller companies with a limited marketing budget, particularly in the business-to-business sphere. There is often a fine balance to achieve when it comes to investing in SEO for what can only be low-traffic keywords in niche sectors, even where higher gross margins per sale indicate otherwise.

Realizing this, many companies will opt out of the online sales dance, or resign themselves to having a website that is little more than an ‘online brochure’ presence or a support mechanism for Pay-Per-Click or social media activities. Others, however, will persist in their delusion, often encouraged by SEO companies who – out of business naivety or pure self-interest – will over-promise when it comes to levels of return on investment (ROI).

Whatever the type or size of business which embarks on SEO, a Page One ranking would likely be the original aim. Raw keywords, by definition, are the online thread running through everything a company does. To achieve sales inquiries based on effective keyword selection will validate its SEO involvement. Whether it delivers on ROI or not depends on many factors outside of SEO on the one hand – but also within the scope of SEO on the other.

Despite the voices of so many SEO evangelists, the down-to-earth reality is that the online sales process is, in its essentials, no different from the bricks and mortar process – except of course in the false expectations whipped up by SEO hype.


Mike Beeson is a UK freelance copywriter, journalist and PR consultant specializing in website and SEO copywriting. Mike’s company, Buzzwords Limited, was established over 20 years ago and is located in Knutsford, Cheshire (south Manchester). For more information, visit: www.buzzwords.ltd.uk/website_copywriting.htm or e-mail open@buzzwords.ltd.uk

7 Responses to “SEO and the Fool’s Gold Fantasy — A SPN Exclusive Article

    avatar Former Marine says:

    This is a great article Mike, especially for new site owners who believe that “We’ll have you on Page One of Google in days / weeks” crap almost all alleged SEO companies claim while they laugh after taking your money.

    They MIGHT get you on Page one for a few days, but you won’t remain there for long and people get frustrated when they realize they fell into the SEO trap.

    So, it just came out a few days ago that Google is going to Penalize Over-Optimized Sites as shown in this article of which SEO companies and all site owners should seriously consider reading:

    Matt Cutts let it slip that Google will very soon be rolling out penalties for over-optimization. Exactly what this means is still up in the air, but there’s no question, this will be big</b

    avatar Adrian says:

    Quite frankly I think the hype of Page 1 Position 1 is another fallacy of the dubious SEO companies.

    When I do a search I will click on the result which at least appears to provide the information or service I am looking for. That is what is displayed in the “page description” area below the Page Title.
    If this just contains a list of Keywords/phrases it gets ignored, if it details what the page contains and is relevant to my search it gets clicked.

    It doesn’t matter whether it is first, third or last it is the relevance that is important to me and quite often I find I need to go past page 1 to page 2 or 3 before I find what I am looking for.

    Am I unique? I don’t think so. Searchers want answers to questions or services they are seeking and are more likely to click through to a site which provides that information in the search snippet than just because it is number 1 on the page.

    avatar moonbeam says:

    Don’t bag all SEO companies in thwe same lump. Unscrupulous companies are around every corner, BUT, there are those SEO who are

    avatar moonbeam says:

    Don’t bag all SEO companies in the same lump with unscrupulous ones.

    Your article rants like you ran into a bad one.

    Also, your little snippet about the research really got to me. It is the research I do that tells me whether or not to accept a client.

    For instance, I received a call from a business owner who said Google shut down all their accounts and they need help right away to fix things.

    Well, guess what I found during my research? (you know, the research you balked at in your rant) What I found was simply amazing! The business owner had multiple, multiple listings for the same business, fake addresses and fake phone numbers that could be re-routed at will. Breaking every rule in the book. And he couldn’t figure out why Google shut him down. Of course it was a competitor that did it (so says the business owner.)

    So, what was that you said again about research being so much BS?

    As an SEO company, if you don’t research the business environment of your potential clients, you could be walking into a freaking lion’s den.

    avatar Mike Beeson says:

    What we have here is an unwinnable war of attrition between Google on the one hand (who wants to retain the integrity of its search results) and the SEO fraternity on the other where reputations are made or broken on their ability to out-smart the search engine.

    In the middle are greedy clients with unrealistic expectations who are equally as culpable as opportunistic SEO companies. As with any ‘gold rush’ – for this is what SEO has become – the heads of normally rational people are turned by thoughts of riches where vanity collides with sanity.

    avatar Alex Bowie says:

    Great article Mike.

    I totally agree with you. After two years, my site http://www.honeymoonguide.com.au is #1 in Australia.

    Why, because I concentrated on good original content and as you state ‘effective keyword selection’. I haven’t paid anyone for any SEO advice . . . I’ve just read articles like yours and applied the common sense advice!

    Cheers,

    Alex

    […] (by Mike Beeson – view original article here) […]

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *






You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Please leave these two fields as-is:

Protected by Invisible Defender. Showed 403 to 4,213,291 bad guys.

css.php