SEO marketing co. recommendations

[westsidecellular]

Does anyone have a recommendation for one of the BEST SEO companies?

Please offer suggestions...I am using a company now and it is like pulling teeth to get what I paid for.

[David Wallace]

Welcome westsidecellular!

This is a new forum and I am not sure how policy will play out on this but my general assumption is that we are not going to specifically recommend or bad mouth specific companies here, especially in the realm of SEO.

There are a lot of SEO companies out there, some good and some bad. Best thing to do IMO is to take in account what you don't like about your current SEO and make sure your next one doesn't have the same practices, whatever those may be.

[cline]

You may find SEOconsultants.com (http://www.seoconsultants.com/) a useful place to look. No guarantees on the quality of whom they list, but they do have a screening process, and they do turn down most applications

[bhartzer]

I would also take a look at www.sempo.org and www.dfwsem.org for a list of Search Engine Marketing firms.

[Anthony Parsons]

Go Shopping...

Thats what the engines, forums, ads etc are for. Find lots of SEO's / SEM's, ask them all questions, read their sites, get quotes and compare values. Ask if they know this person, etc etc. Shop like you would normally.

Just make sure they are reputable and not some sham to scam your money and leave you high and dry.

Have a quick read of Googles advice for finding an SEO:

http://www.google.com/webmasters/seo.html

[David Wallace]

I would also take a look at www.sempo.org and www.dfwsem.org for a list of Search Engine Marketing firms.
Nothing against SEMPO but they do not screen members that are listed there by any criteria and they don't intend to as that is not their purpose.

Therefore "buyer beware!" Just because a company is listed there does not mean they are a good SEO. In fact, I know of a few that are listed there that are major spammers. Don't ask me who cause I ain't tellin'!

Like Anthony said, shop. One should first learn the basics of SEO so they know what to look for (and what to watch out for). Then one can make an educated decision when they finally decide on a SEO vendor.

[seobook]

Nothing against SEMPO but they do not screen members that are listed there by any criteria and they don't intend to as that is not their purpose.

Therefore "buyer beware!" Just because a company is listed there does not mean they are a good SEO. In fact, I know of a few that are listed there that are major spammers. Don't ask me who cause I ain't tellin'!


I think that SEO consultants may filter out some of the best SEO's too, so I would not look to them as a definitive resource for the subject matter. They are just one additional outlet for suggestions.

What people should do is actually contact customers who hired a firm and talk with them. That is the only real way to know.

Seeing good content or a good forum post can help, but the best indication of future performance is probably going to be what current or past clients think about you.

[Hungryfish]

What is good for some may not meet the criteria for others. Again you may want to look at "Forum Roll", all of these are very reputable areas to consider for researching "threads" that pertain to your area of SEO need. If you are looking to hire. Some of these folks are very respected in this field. As far as directories for SEO firms ,SEO Pro's and SEO consultants have a pretty good idea as to who the more "Ethical" ones are.. FYI...Be cautious from hiring out of newsgroups.

[seobook]

FYI...Be cautious from hiring out of newsgroups.
newsgroups = shady

[St0n3y]

And be sure to do a lot of comparisons. Its very difficult to compare "apples to apples" in this industry, but you can get a good sense of each is offering and where they differ from others.

[pleeker]

Nothing against SEMPO but they do not screen members that are listed there by any criteria and they don't intend to as that is not their purpose.

Very true. This issue came up during development of the SEMPO site. I was fortunate to write the "How To Choose an SEO/SEM Company" for the Articles/Resources section, and made sure to take into account SEMPO's position on the matter:

"Some methods are more aggressive than others, and many search engines and SEMPO members (including this author) frown on these tactics as being too risky at best, and unethical at worst."

And then went on to say that, in the end, it's the business owner's duty to understand the options available to him/her and to decide how much risk s/he is willing to take on.

[rustybrick]

Thought this thread at Cre8asite Forums named So What Does SEMPO Mean To You? (http://www.cre8asiteforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=7143) would fit well here.

It brought on the clarification of SEMPO's screening process of members.

[seobook]

"Some methods are more aggressive than others, and many search engines and SEMPO members (including this author) frown on these tactics as being too risky at best, and unethical at worst."

What makes SEO unethical? If I am working to support a company with sweat shops (even within the search engine guidelines), then yes that is absolutely unethical.

If I am helping a smaller business get by and create a functional business model where there might not have otherwise been one (even if it ignores some "best practice" guidelines) then I really do not see that as being in anyway unethical.

When people were calling me or sending me emails saying they were crying because Google's changing algorithm was going to ruin their business Google really didn't care.

If techniques are effective and the client understands risk vs reward then how is something too risky?

I am not saying that I cloak and I am one of the more conservative SEO's I know. In my opinion ethics is typically an awful concept to attach to SEO.

ROI and risk vs reward are good ideas to measure SEO by. Business ethics are important so that you do the best for your client, but those ethics usually have nothing to do with search engine guidelines (except for where they overlap with common sense).

[pleeker]

What makes SEO unethical?

I never said SEO is unethical. I said some people have the opinion that certain methods are unethical. Quite a difference.

If I am helping a smaller business get by and create a functional business model where there might not have otherwise been one (even if it ignores some "best practice" guidelines) then I really do not see that as being in anyway unethical.

Great. You're certainly entitled to an opinion, just as others are entitled to our opinions.

If techniques are effective and the client understands risk vs reward then how is something too risky?

You can show me the proper techniques for bungee jumping and explain the risk vs. reward, but I'll still consider it risky. :)

[seobook]

I never said SEO is unethical. I said some people have the opinion that certain methods are unethical. Quite a difference.

Earlier you said many vice some. Quite a difference :)

You can show me the proper techniques for bungee jumping and explain the risk vs. reward, but I'll still consider it risky. :)

Yes and bungie jumping would be at best invigorating, refreshing, and exciting vice being at best "risky."

[St0n3y]

I agree that "ethics" is generally a poor term to attache to seo methods. What would be unethical is to endanger a client's site by some of these methods without telling them. But if the client is on board and aware of the risk its not unethical. In reality, how can it be since what is not allowed at Google may be allowed at Yahoo. Ethics are not something that can be re-defined from one company to another, that is just simply rules of conduct.

[pleeker]

What would be unethical is to endanger a client's site by some of these methods without telling them.

And judging from the dozens, nay hundreds, of threads to be found on various SEO boards from business owners crying about what their SEO company did to the site without explaining what they did and the risks involved ... I would say it's perfectly fine to attach ethics to SEO. :)

Like I said, the business owner needs to know what's going on and be willing to accept the risks.

[St0n3y]

But the difference is ethics is attached to actions between the SEO and the client, not the methods the SEO uses.

[pleeker]

But the difference is ethics is attached to actions between the SEO and the client, not the methods the SEO uses.

If you're a believer that the means always justify the ends and there's no right or wrong when it comes to SEO, that's cool. We disagree. Life goes on.

[St0n3y]

I never said I believe that. In fact I strongly believe in following the rules laid out by the search engines and I make sure our optimization strategies do so. I was merely trying to define what ethics are and how they are applied. Ethics are a constant, while rules change place to place.

[Incubator]

Hello,

Would'nt ethics really only apply if the industry was all fair to begin with ?

Quote from article link below:

"There are those who would say that 'ethics' is just a cloaked form of hypocrisy."


http://www.searchengineblog.com/interviews/interview_ralph_tegtmeier.htm


Interesting point of view

Cheers

Wayne

[St0n3y]

There is also the issue of search engines not following the same rules they place on all everybody else. Google uses DMOZ directory. Wouldn't that count as duplicate content?

[Incubator]

I agree with you. DMOZ as an entity by itself can carry alot of weight, but a 3-6 month weight for inclusion is ridiculous. They should either step up to the plate or sell out to an organization that will run it accordingly

cheers

Wc