Setting Client Expectations

[stacywms]

Hello everyone...

I've got a client (in the B2B software industry) whose expectations I have apparently failed to set correctly in the 8 months we've been working together. My lips are moving but apparently nothing is coming out.

They have insisted that some of the search terms we target be too broad ("quality management") or too competitive (literally 34 million other pages showing up in the SERPs). I've tried to explain the many reasons it's a bad idea to target these terms, but after enough arm-twisting, we did optimize a couple of their pages for these types of terms (and, fortunately, the rest of the site's optimized for more targeted, appropriate, less competitive terms).

You can guess the results -- zero rankings, zero traffic, zero conversions for the broad, competitive terms. Now that I've shown them why it doesn't work and am offering to re-optimize those pages at no charge...I'm still getting flak from them. They still do not understand why, if they do "X", and we optimize a page for search term "X", that we don't automatically show up on the first page of results. In frustration, I even asked them if they honestly thought their site was more relevant for that term than the other 34 million pages we're battling.

They obviously aren't "getting it" the way I've been explaining it, so I thought I could point them to articles written by other people. Maybe it'll sink in if it's explained differently -- or maybe hearing the same thing from different authorities in the industry will make it sink in finally.

Anyone have any suggestions for good, basic articles that explain how to select appropriate search terms and/or why your site may not always rank high and/or that SEO is a long-term process without guaranteed results, etc.?

Thanks bunches (for articles and for letting me vent),

Stacy Williams

[toprank]

Hey Stacy, Maybe you can share with them concepts like broad vs specific search queries based on the prospect's position in the buying cycle? I think Enquiro (http://www.enquiro.com/research.asp) has something helpful regarding that type of article. Say hi to Matt for me.

[Chris_D]

Hi Stacey,

If a client wants to have pages optimised for competitive phrases - really competitive, generic phrases - then you do need to set different expectations.

At the least, you need to get them to accept that a separate budget for that project (for links) will be required, and the timescale for results will be longer.

Separate those from the mainstream.

[Robert_Charlton]

If they have the budget for it, you might want to do some ROI testing with AdWords to demonstrate the concept that "quality management" isn't going to convert very well for them because it's too broad.

It could be that even "quality management software" would be too general... Don't know what your niche is.

In targeting for "quality management software" in organic SEO, btw, you would also be targeting for "quality management." But even "quality management software" is extremely competitive.

At least they're not insisting on ranking for "quality." I had a client once who wanted to be #1 for "music." ;)

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

I even asked them if they honestly thought their site was more relevant for that term than the other 34 million pages we're battling.


In my experience clients really don't care about that. And why should they? They are not running a search engine - they are running a company that needs marketing, trafic to the website and new customers.

Instead, I would be honest and let them know what it will cost to get that position. They WILL understand that :D

Depending on why sites rank high in their industry they will need to build a lot of linkpop and possibly move into the dark areas too (again, depending on what the other top ranking competitors do).

[St0n3y]

Here is a good article on keyword targeting (http://www.pole-position-web.com/keyword-analysis.htm) and choosing keywords that produce the best ROI.

[stacywms]

Thanks for your replies, guys. Mikkel, to your point, I just figured out that their biggest competitor is doing some serious cloaking. Very frustrating trying to battle that! Stoney, that's a great article -- just what I was looking for. Thanks so much!

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

Yes, in some competitive industries you will find a lot of cloaking, disposable domains and other tricky stuff. It can be virtually imposible to compete with that unless you pick up on some of the same strategies.

If this is true fo your industry this should, in my opinion, lead to a discussion with your client about risks, how to minimize the risks (if they chose to participate in the battle) and possible consequences. A lot of factors play into determining the risk profile of any company in any case.

Anyway, I think this is another discussion :)

[stacywms]

You're right. I learned a lot from the "White Hat - Black Hat" session at SES Chicago, where you were on the panel -- it left me realizing that there's a lot more "gray" in the issue than I had thought before. Still, not only am I too square and conservative to use those tactics myself, I'm also not technically-savvy enough to use them. If they want to pursue those kinds of tactics, I'll have to refer them elsewhere. Thanks for the alternative viewpoint!

[glenn]

The only thing Mikkel offered in Chicago was a bunch of pics of fancy hats and a book on the military tactics of marketing. I admit, I laughed along with everyone else, but if you aren't willing to describe this for your client please tell me why you are here!

The most important thing that came out of the Chicago "White Hat vs. Black Hat" session was that you should tell your client exactly what you are doing to increase their search visibility on their behalf.

[Mel]

A well written contract which explains clearly what terms are being targeted and what results are anticipated or targeted I find goes a long ways towards solving this problem.

Another approach is to say my recommendation is that you target the search term Quality blue widgets Chicago and the price/timeframe for that project is so much. If they want to target say the search term blue widgets only then give them another price/timeframe proposal.

If you cannot get them to sign a fair contract where everything is clearly spelled out, it may be best not to work with them.

[Chris Boggs]

Hi Stacey,

If a client wants to have pages optimised for competitive phrases - really competitive, generic phrases - then you do need to set different expectations.

At the least, you need to get them to accept that a separate budget for that project (for links) will be required, and the timescale for results will be longer.

Separate those from the mainstream.

lot's of good thoughts in here leading down the right road. To answer's Stacey's question I would have to highlight the importance of Post #3 by Chris D. If the client wants to "pony up" for the amount of hours required to achieve links (and maybe pay for some legitimate traffic), they will achieve success, even for a term with 34 million competitors. In order to go this route, it will take an "upgrade" sale...hopefully the trust level is adequate between said parties to achieve this. Stacey's offer to redo the pages for more attainable kw's is a legitimate olive branch, in my opinion. Some SEO's I know would probably say "too bad so sad" :p

Mel writes just before this that a well written contract is the answer. In the past I have focused on numbers of pages to be optimized, etc, but I agree that in the case of a very competitive market, perhaps the keyword phrases should be included in the contract as well...

[Chris Boggs]

I just had a call minutes after the last post I made. The client "just realized" that the focus of our project was going to be on antique "widgets" terms, and has now informed me that 50% of their business is the sales of new "widgets."

:mad: :mad: :mad:

This is after signing a contract 2 months ago clearly stipulating within the pages to be optimized portion that "antique" would be the focus, as well as allegedly understanding that further SEO could be done for other products later.

I will have to now re-explain the whole thing, as well as attach an addendum to the contract which will probably triple the price if she wants to target the much more competitive "new" terms.

This reinforces my growing opinion that keywords should be part of the contract. I believe I will now stipulate that an addendum is to be added to the contract after the kw research portion of the job is complete, that stipulates exact phrases targeted. It is the only way to avoid this kind of thing from happening. We cannot unfortunately spend the hours on kw research prior to the creation of the initial contract, so the list has to be promised as an early stage deliverable.

Thoughts on how others have approached a similar situation?

[St0n3y]

Our contracts state that re-optimization due to keyword changes or the client just screwing someting up (like a total site redesign, removing all previously optimized work) is subject to an additional hourly fee. Keyword research would be a part of re-optimization.

On the other hand, we are always doing additional keyword research for our clients as a way to try to upsell them on more optimization work.

[Jill Whalen]

Stacy, it's simply not true to think that you'd have to suddenly go to the darkside to compete on competitive phrases. I bet you will find most of the top-10 for the keyword phrase you're looking at, are not doing anything spammy.

Yes, it may take more time, and yes it may take more money to do it the right way, and if they're willing to spend those they might have a chance. I would recommend that you seek out some home page text ads that they can buy which will use the one phrase they're looking for, and purchase those. Lots of 'em.

Jill

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

So, Jill, is active linkpop manipulation for the main purpose of gaining better rankings not on the dark side? Just a little bit grayish? :rolleyes:

[Jill Whalen]

How do you figure that advertising your site on other sites is a gray area?

If Google chooses to give higher rankings to the site that buys the most ads, then perhaps they need to readjust their algorithm, no?

There's certainly nothing wrong with buying as many ads as you want from relevant sites that can and will bring you additional traffic. What Google chooses to do with those ads is up to them. :)

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

Yes, thats my whole point, Jill - just like the same could be said about a lot of other publishing decission I do on MY website.

Buying many links with the same keyphrase, as you suggest, is also known as Google bombing as is just as "black hat" (or not) as many of the other things you could do to compete in a very competitive market. It's a question of choice and skills. Not a question of right or wrong.

Now, we don't know what exact industry we are actually talking about here but we all know that some industries are virtually blocked by very "black hat" sites. Other inustries only have a few shady listings - and some none. In the first case I would say: Either play the game or walk away. If you don't like the mud-fight find another place to camp - or in other words: Go for keywords that are not as "poluted" :)

[Jill Whalen]

Perhaps we have a different definition of spam?

As long as what you're doing isn't deceptive, it's not spam, imo. Buying ads isn't deceptive as far as I know. Cloaking is.

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

Perhaps we have a different definition of spam?

Most certainly do! :)

It's a question of what you want to do to reach your goals - neither linkbombing or cloaking is officially "accepted" as clean SEO by any engine ... and honestly, so what? You chose to do your stuff and I'll do mine and we should.

To re-phrase your own statement:

"If Google chooses to give higher rankings to the site that do XX, then perhaps they need to readjust their algorithm, no? "

I agree to that :D

[Kal]

Stacy - I feel your pain! After having similar experiences to Stacy and Chris over the years, I wrote this article (http://www.high-search-engine-ranking.com/Before-Launching-Your-SEO-Campaign.htm) about what SEOs need to do before commencing any new campaign for a client. Of course some clients will never "get it". So it really helps to have a water-tight contract just in case you are challenged legally. Hope this helps :)

[Jill Whalen]

It's a question of what you want to do to reach your goals - neither linkbombing or cloaking is officially "accepted" as clean SEO by any engine ...

I don't believe any search engine has a problem with any site that buys ads on other sites.

[Mel]

Buying many links with the same keyphrase, as you suggest, is also known as Google bombing...

I think you may have your definitions mixed up Mikkel, Google bombing is the practice of pointing a great many unrelated links to a page in order for it to rank on a very unlikely and irrelevant term.

I find the idea that if you advertise with the many of the same keywords it's spammy but if you mix them up a bit its not rather amusing.

Advertising on web pages is not unethical and has been going on since before Google existed. If some people choose to advertise and some choose to sell advertising space on thier pages that is thier business. If Google have set up their algorithm so that this may result in higher rankings on the advertising terms then its Google who should change not the internet.

"Active linkpop manipulation" is a nice buzzword and is a very technical dark sounding word, but if you are not going to involve yourself in the manipulation of links in one way or another, then you had better not target any high traffic keywords.

[Black_Knight]

I don't believe any search engine has a problem with any site that buys ads on other sites.
Tell that to all the SearchKing portal partners.

Or maybe to those who were in the Hallway Links Cooperative.

Or BuddyLinks perhaps.

[Mikkel deMib Svendsen]

Exactly!

The fact is there is no clear border, no black or white. There is a real risk in ANY kind of SEO or linkbuilding.

In my experience it is the goals more than the techniques used that gets you banned. Thats why, even search engines tend to accept more "aggresive" SEO in some verticals and not in others.

Even though this complicates the matter, this is what I think you have to tell your clients. Trying to paind them a nice, pure black and white picture just dosn't match the real life as I see it :)

[Mel]

Tell that to all the SearchKing portal partners.

Or maybe to those who were in the Hallway Links Cooperative.

Or BuddyLinks perhaps.

IMO these are extreme examples and not at all indicative of the great majority of people who buy ads on sites like these and are not punished in any way.

[Black_Knight]

Agreed entirely that those are extreme examples, Mel, which is why I could recall them without a moment's thought. With some research I could probably have named 300 rather than 3 and bored us all.

But the quote I was answering did state any engine and any site, which then must include the extremes.

[Chris Boggs]

Stacy - I feel your pain! After having similar experiences to Stacy and Chris over the years, I wrote this article (http://www.high-search-engine-ranking.com/Before-Launching-Your-SEO-Campaign.htm) about what SEOs need to do before commencing any new campaign for a client. Of course some clients will never "get it". So it really helps to have a water-tight contract just in case you are challenged legally. Hope this helps :)

14) What are 20 search keywords or phrases that I think my/my client’s target markets will use to find the site in the search engines?

Excellent 101 stuff kal...good list of questions that should certainly be asked. However, I would say that the information gleaned from your #14 above should be then included within a contract to make it as you put "water tight."

Even though there probably is no "rank" in your list, I would say that #14 should be #1 when deciding whether to go ahead with a contract. The problem is that if you spend the time to clearly reach an agreement of what keywords to target, you have already put yourself "in the hole" if they don't sign. A Catch22 it seems??

[Chris Boggs]

is it just me, or did this thread go way off topic into the familiar white/black/grey discussion?? :rolleyes:

[stacywms]

Holy moly, everyone -- I didn't mean to start a debate on black hat vs. white hat tactics! Thanks to everyone who has responded. Liked your article, Kalena. I keep getting hung up on what a few other people mentioned (first page of thread) -- how can you write a contract and specify which search terms you're targeting...if you don't want to spend a ton of time doing search term research before having a signed contract so you know you'll get paid for your efforts....? Not sure there's an easy answer to that.

Anyway, thanks everyone -- see y'all in NY.

[St0n3y]

We had similar problems (opportunities for solutions!). Instead of putting keywords into the contract we have the keywords listed in our reporting suite where the client can view them upon logging in. Of course, we *could* change them if we were trying to be deceptive, however the client has spreadsheets where we did the original research and which they approved. We keep all such documents and emails in case there is ever an issue.

There never has been.