Top Ten Ways SEM Companies Bend The Truth To Win Business

[Igor718]

We had people come in from a pretty popular SEM company .... you know them for sure. Here are things they mentioned.

1. With Yahoo and Google you can do Paid Inclusion and get higher ranking. We can get you in top 10 quickly.

2. Our engineers know what Google will do with their algorithm in the future.

3. Google Site Maps is a great thing to get better results in rankings.

Guys and ladies ... please tell me your opinion on this??? Do they deserve a boot in their A**?

I am particularly interested in their "Paid Inclusion" suggestion.

[bhartzer]

When they mention "paid inclusion" they're talking about PPC (e.g., Google Adwords or Yahoo! Search Marketing).

Absolutely no one know what search engine engineers will do in the future. The Google algorithm is more closely guarded than the Coca Cola recipe.

Google sitemaps has absolutely nothing to do with actual search engine rankings.

[Nomadic]

When they mention "paid inclusion" they're talking about PPC (e.g., Google Adwords or Yahoo! Search Marketing).

Absolutely no one know what search engine engineers will do in the future. The Google algorithm is more closely guarded than the Coca Cola recipe.

Google sitemaps has absolutely nothing to do with actual search engine rankings.

I agree! Sounds like you were fed some hogwash!

[sootledir]

1) You don't need Paid Inclusion, and it won't guarantee your result. PPC means you Pay for clicks. You don't need them for that
2) Bullcrap. Their engineers wouldn't know if a meteorite was about to hit them, let alone what Google is going to do. Google is the text case for "Rule by Secrecy"
3) Google Sitemaps is for Sissys.

[David Wallace]

1. I have always been suspicious that Yahoo gives some preference to paid inclusion even though they will never admit to it. Google doesn't have paid inclusion and hopefully never will.

2. Load of BS.

3. Site maps can help if pages were having issues getting indexed but site maps itself gives no boost just for the fact that someone is using the program alone.

So, yeah, all in all sounds like you were fed a line.

[Chris Boggs]

1. I hate to be contradictory ;), but paid Inclusion IMO is becoming a very sound option to PPC, especially in areas where the Cost Per Click is going through the roof. If you can get PI for less than a buck per click, that blows the pants off paying way more, which we know happens now more and more frequently. I feel that the site has to be sound in order to rank highly when participating in PI. I do hope Google ends up offering such a program.

2. No one knows Google's future algo changes, not even Google.

3. what David said below.

[shor]

It sounds like a Guy Kawasaki list (http://blog.guykawasaki.com/) of Top 10 Lies told by SEOs (http://www.stuntdubl.com/2006/02/07/top-10-seo-lies/).

1. With Yahoo and Google you can do Paid Inclusion and get higher ranking. We can get you in top 10 quickly.
We can get you in top 10 of MSN search quickly if you aren't in travel, real estate, porns/pills/casinos or any other competitive industry.

2. Our engineers know what Google will do with their algorithm in the future.
Our engineers spend half of their day reading Webmaster World Google algorithm update threads.

3. Google Site Maps is a great thing to get better results in rankings.
We got tired of creating sites with a good navigational structure and a real site map, so we dump everything into Google SiteMaps.

Let's fill out the list!

4. Our expertise includes a SEO Knowledge Transfer session for your development team.
We're too lazy to put together a proper brief so we've prepared a generic powerpoint presentation for your developers.

5. We have several Fortune 500 clients on our portfolio
Last year, AA|Razorfish outsourced a search project to a SEM company who outsourced the PPC keyword campaign to us.

6. That was the fault of an overzealous junior optimizer who is no longer with the company.
We've since promoted the optimizer responsible for the hidden link text on Expedia/FT Online/Colgate to the role of senior search engineer.

7. We have extensive connections within the SEO industry that are on hand for consultation.
We outsource.

8. We share a deep rapport with industry experts such as Danny Sullivan, Matt Cutts, Tim Mayer
I took a picture of the panel speaking at SES San Jose and posted in the comments section of their blogs.

[Marcia]

Google has no paid inclusion and never has. Paid inclusion isn't the same thing as PPC.

[glengara]

Nice one Shor, and unfortunately probably a fairly accurate "translation" ;-)

[PeteBKay]

"3. Google Site Maps is a great thing to get better results in rankings."

That's akin to "We carefully hand-submit your site to the top search engines each month." :)

[Wilksy]

We have a player in SEO over here in Oz that ranks all of his clients in the serps via subdomains off his SEO and Travel domain. He also cloaks and braggs about it on his SEO site, which is no big deal considering he cannot get the best rankings anyway. He does rank very well in areas however.

Anyway he gets a lot of business and controls a fair amount of local businesses refferals from the web. My only problem is what happens when he pushes it too far and ruins everyone's rankings (his included) and faith in SEO. He has launched legit sites (although sub domains) unfinished and half cloaked into the top 10 before, which is fairly amatuer at best.

Recently after an update he got his site booted for one of the most popular accommodation search strings that a lot of his clients rely on for traffic I gave him a call and asked him to please be a little more careful with other people's web presences. He was a very nice man, to say the least.

The phone call was interesting, he simply rang his mate at Google Australia and got reincluded after 3 weeks. Oh and removed his htags positioned 5000px off the page, so some spam reports must work (and no I don't report the site).

Also he treats his clients like affiliates and if they are not getting traffic, it's OK cos he's not making money. I was shocked, it's people like this that ruin business's faith in SEO.

While it's no massive beef, hell make SEO as obscure as you can, works to my favour. But it's a shame when clients loose faith in SEO period cos they will need bailing out eventually...

added/

It is a great business model though, it's very interesting how much info you can glean from compeditors. It's a shame he can't actually link build and get their sites ranking independant of his network of sites, but I am sure that one day he will have to (oh and I cannot wait to see that day :p ).

[bobmutch]

On #2 I think that some SEO's do know what Google is going to to in the future with their algo. I got out of doing recip's for my clients over a year ago. I saw the writing on the wall and so did many others.

Those in the know have been saying for some time that Trustrank is going to get a larger slice of the ranking weight pie and that has happened (and they directed their clients it look at ways to get Trustlinks).

I am telling people that the next big thing it get hit is the 1000's of spammy web directories and/or the spammy article sites.

Some SEO companies don't have a clue where the market is going, others do. Site ownes need to hook up with those that are in the know and have a good idea where the Google algo is going.

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

Also he treats his clients like affiliates and if they are not getting traffic, it's OK cos he's not making money. I was shocked, it's people like this that ruin business's faith in SEO.
I have to disagree with that. In fact, it is exactly business models like that, that will save the SEO business. The problem today is that too many clients pay too much and gets nothing in return. If you only pay your SEO-firm for the values they actually bring how can that be bad? Well, maybe it's bad for the ones that don't deliver but honestly, I don't care for them. If you are not good enough to actually bring value to your clients you shoudn't be in this game to begin with :)

[PhilC]

2. Our engineers know what Google will do with their algorithm in the future.That made me laugh out loud!

bobmutch. You were a wee bit late getting out of reciprocals - I never got into them, so maybe you picked it up from me ;) j/k

Seriously, Bob. Nobody knows Google's future algo. Some people make educated guesses, and get lucky, that's all. But the educated guesses are based on what we think are good ideas for search engines, and everyone has plenty of those - such as, I predict that Google's future algo will do away with hidden text in the serps (note that you read it here first). Of course, people have been saying that many years, but one day they'll be right, and they can claim to have been clever enough to have known - but they didn't know.

I remember 2½ years ago, when Jill announced in her newsletter that reciprocal linking is dead - way before you got out of them (maybe that's where you got it from). But they weren't dead.

Nobody "knows" Google's future algo - people only guess, and occasionally they guess right, and some of them even contrive to make a new update fit something they'd said a while back to make themselves look clever.

I agree with Mikkel. There aren't many SEOs who are willing to put their bank account where their mouth is, but those that do are bound to do a good job, or they don't get the money. The problem with the Aussie guy is that the traffic comes via his sites, so the clients are permanently tied to him if they wants to keep the traffic. I think that's a bad model for clients, and the model can be used to create doorway sites that are liable for penalties, but there are other ways of doing it that are better.

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

Phil, with me its pretty simple: If you only want to to pay for traffic, sales or conversions you only get that - not a website. If you want me to make you a website, or optimize yours, I'll do that too, but most often it is just not possible to do so on a performance basis, as there are too many factors out of my control. If I build the trafic on my sites, I am in full control and can take full respisibility - if I don't deliver, I don't get paid. Thats a very honest model.

I've done on-site performance based deals too, but they are so much more complicated to do and not the least track and monitor.

[glengara]

It's a recognised business model Mikkel, but at the end of the day "the site" is still in the gutter....

[Wilksy]

Mikkel, I have no issues if that part is discussed with the client, but this guy does not and many come to him for optimisation of their website and can not really leave.

It is an excellent model if outlined appropriately to the client.

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

You should allways be honest to your clients

[PhilC]

Phil, with me its pretty simple: If you only want to to pay for traffic, sales or conversions you only get that - not a websiteThat's fine, Mikkel, although I've never come across a client, or potential client, who wasn't bothered if their own site attracted the traffic or not, but then I never asked. If I'd asked, my guess would be that they would all want their own sites to rank highly for the traffic - that's why they approach me in the first place - but I'd also guess that some would settle for no traffic - no payment, even if it meant that their own sites weren't SEOed.

The reason I dislike the model is because a client is tied to it on an ongoing basis. As soon as he ends the deal, the traffic stops, and he's gained nothing in the serps, so he is back to where he was before. It's not seo for a site - it's just traffic.

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

It's not seo for a site - it's just traffic.
True, and there is billions of dollars made each year on "just" getting traffic. It's a HUGE market. :)

As soon as he ends the deal, the traffic stops
Yes, exactly like PPC-engines, TV-advertising, newspaper ads and just about any marketing you can buy. It really is just PR and onsite-SEO where you get to keep the traffic after you stop paying. In fact, that is the least common concept around :)

[PhilC]

Billions, eh? I'm in the wrong business :(

The way you put it is fine as long as the client understands it fully, Mikkel. But when somebody comes to me for seo work, they are wanting their own site's rankings to improve. I could sell them the idea of something completely different (just focussed traffic), of course, but that's not what they came looking for, and I wonder how many SEOs will actually explain it properly to the client - especially the part about the client being tied. I wonder how many of those clients realise that they are not getting what they wanted in the first place. The model is very wide open for unscrupulous SEOs - especially because. Imo, it is better for the clients to have their own sites drawing the traffic, although I can understand merit on both sides.

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

it is better for the clients to have their own sites drawing the traffic
Its a simple question of ROI. Sometimes onsite SEO de definately pays out the best, but very often not. By the end of the day, what most clients want is marketing at a lower cost than what they earn. Pretty simple, that is. If onsite SEO can do it, fine, if off-site SEO do the job, do that. If it both pays out - do both and double your profits. This is really the same kind of discussion you can have on how much you should spend on PPC and how much on organic.

Marketing is not about "either or" but most often about "both and". If you have a gun and its wartime, why not use it ? :)

[RepairGuru]

I've hired seven different SEO companies in the past 6 years, most of them did such a poor job it wasn't worth sticking with them. As a customer I'd rather have an SEO optimize his own site rather than mess with mine. I can't afford to have the SE's blacklist me because of an SEO technique that they decided to attack. I disagree that most customers don't know the difference between having an SEO optimize a specially created site for them or to have their own site optimized. Most customers aren't that clueless. I think Mikkel's business model is completely legitimate as long as the customer knows what to expect. He's right that if he stops working for you the traffic should stop too. In fact, if ANY SEO stops working for a client it's very likely the little good they did will evaporate soon. I've never heard an SEO company promise rankings beyond the contract period.

[bobmutch]

PhilC:

>>>You were a wee bit late getting out of reciprocals

I don't think so. I think it was around 1.5 years ago that I stopped pushing my reciprocal package. Personally for my own site I really never did reciprocals.

>>>Seriously, Bob. Nobody knows Google's future algo. Some people make educated guesses, and get lucky, that's all. But the educated guesses are based on what we think are good ideas for search engines...

I would agree that no one knows for sure. But you can see the writing on the wall if you are in the know. Most SEO experts saw the demise of reciprocals before Jagger 1-2-3 happened.

To that degree I think that SEO's that are in the know can now tell people don't get into spammy directories, don't go for the article sites that allow 4 or 5 links in the content.

Some professed SEO's don't have clue on these things. Clients need to get with people who "know" where the Google algo is going.

[PhilC]

Jill announced that reciprocals were dead 2½ years ago, and I never got into them, so you were late, Bob. It was mild humour ;)

About knowing a search engine's future algo, I can only say what I said before, Bob - educated guesses that are based on what we think search engines would want to do - nothing more than that. There's no "in the know" about it. We all keep our fingers on the pulse in forums, etc. but that's not exactly "in the know", except when someone like Matt gives an advanced heads-up about something, as he has been known to do.

[bobmutch]

PhilC:

>>>Jill announced that reciprocals were dead 2½ years ago, and I never got into them, so you were late, Bob. It was mild humour ;)

By quote of your "You were a wee bit late getting out of reciprocals" as from your " bobmutch. You were a wee bit late getting out of reciprocals - I never got into them, so maybe you picked it up from me ;) j/k" not your "I remember 2½ years ago, when Jill announced in her newsletter that reciprocal linking is dead - way before you got out of them (maybe that's where you got it from). But they weren't dead." quote.

So I didn't know whether the first part of your comment or the second part was "j/k" or both so I responding that I thought I got out at a good time : )


>>>About knowing a search engine's future algo, I can only say what I said before, Bob - educated guesses that are based on what we think search engines would want to do - nothing more than that.

As noted before I agree with that. You call it educated guesses, I call it in the know. We both mean the same thing : )

[PhilC]

Actually, you're right. The "j/k" bit did just refer to me never getting into reciprocals. I have old-timer's disease y'know, and it affects the functionality of the old grey cells ;)

[stuntdubl]

True, and there is billions of dollars made each year on "just" getting traffic. It's a HUGE market.


Yes indeed, and lots of ways to grab a piece of it. There are probably 1001 ways to garner traffic on the web, but it's amazing when you have epiphanies for NICE pieces.

I've hired seven different SEO companies in the past 6 years, most of them did such a poor job it wasn't worth sticking with them.

Whether your purchasing or selling services, products, merchandise expectations are everything. Having realistic expectations from both a buyers and sellers perspective makes business transactions progress smoother. I'm on a belated cluetrain kick - markets are conversations. Know and understand your customers and vendors as people and you will have many more win/win transactions.

Rules for traffic vendor/client expectations:
-Always state your intended goals upfront
-What is your target traffic timeline
-What is the metric for performance
-What are the short and longterm goal outcomes
-Have realistic targets in terms of time and results
-Time, labor, or performance rates and expectations
-Good traffic is a long term investment

A few good ideas implemented correctly can be very valuable in terms of traffic.



5. We have several Fortune 500 clients on our portfolio


I don't understand how there are 500 top 500 companies but yet tens of thousands of marketing companies of different sorts have them in their portfolio.


6. That was the fault of an overzealous junior optimizer who is no longer with the company. We've since promoted the optimizer responsible for the hidden link text on Expedia/FT Online/Colgate to the role of senior search engineer.

Or that person was the best we had and they moved on to do affiliate work.


7. We have extensive connections within the SEO industry that are on hand for consultation.
We outsource.


So funny and so true. We choose between India, Romania, Pakistan, and other technologically evolving flattening economy because they do better work that can be marked up with a value when relationships are formed there. OUTSOURCING is a good example of managing expectations. If you can created business communications with someone outside of your own culture or country you are starting to listen to the global conversation that is search and the web. There are several solutions to sourcing so create opportunities for yourself by managing expectations with both your clients and your vendors. The funniest thing about most of the rest of the list that if they TOLD the truth (or less of a lie) they might have worked well together.

[mugshot]

interesting that these big comps have to use these shady "offers" to get a client - makes you think what's going to happen in the near future when it comes to the SEO industry.

Oh by the way, did they also say that they helped develope the search algo of Google and Yahoo? :D

[jZillan]

if you want to see the worst of the worst...checkout internetadvancement dot com (i don't want to give these crooks a link)

these guys are like a boileroom and paid on huge commission. i feel so bad for the customers that are lured in by this company's scams....truly terrible

just read these to see the truth:

1. http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff75212.htm
2. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002002970_nwbizbriefs12.html

if thats not enough...check it out, straight from the horses mouth: http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35291

"While you consider whether to go with an SEO, you may want to do some research on the industry. Google is one way to do that of course. You might also seek out a few of the cautionary tales that have appeared in the press, including this article on one particularly aggressive SEO: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002002970_nwbizbriefs12.html. While Google doesn't comment on specific companies, we've encountered firms calling themselves SEOs who follow practices that are clearly beyond the pale of accepted business behavior. Be careful."

Be careful out there peeps.

JN

[The Founder]

Actually the sitemaps thing is the only fairly accurate part of their otherwise BS sales pitch.

It's not that it's 'submissions' it's that the reports provided are somewhat useful... such as knowing when Googlebot had trouble spidering some pages and so fourth.

as I noted.. it's only somewhat useful...

[egain]

2. Our engineers know what Google will do with their algorithm in the future.
.

I don't think Google know what their algorithm will do most of the time, so that wouldnt help much anyhow :D

On a serious note, promises such as this will only result in long term disappointment for any client willing to take up these services.

One of the earlier posts, stated traffic is a long term goal. Managing expectations at an early stage is often far more beneficial for both parties in the long run.

[ContentWorth]

Hogwash. Sales pitch. Nothing new.

Did they include anything legitimate in their pitch or is it all "SEO secrets" they read after doing a Google search for "what is SEO?"

[vikasamrohi]

Well,

For beginner sites PPC doesn't make any effect on the organic part but if you are getting massive revenue from organic lisiting then PPC must be the essential part. Otherwise u will get down.