Did-It's President Takes ANOTHER Shot at SEO

[storyspinner]

It seems that Did-It's President is taking another shot at SEO. This time though he's Answering His Critics. According to him, apparently SEO is near death.

I blogged about it on Search Marketing Gurus and Search Engine Journal has a lengthy article.

So, is this guy for real??

I mean really, this just makes my head shake and my nails tap against my desk at a high rate of speed. Has he ever heard of Quality Score, and what about all these companies hiring "In-House" professionals because of the importance of SEO?

edit: Here's the link to the previous discussion about the first article.

[ExposureTim]

He's right about one thing, SEO isn't rocket science. I don't know who he's quoting as having said that it is. I don't recall any SEO claiming that.

If he takes our objections to his articles as claims we feel SEO is rocket science, he has missed the point of even his own prior article.

The heart of the matter (his original statement) really is whether SEO should be an ongoing function or not. The answer to that question is that it depends on the task, client goals, and competition, among many other things.

The problem that many of us have with his persistent claim is that it is a blanket statement and in that light his claim is completely wrong.

One size fits one, in this industry, and in most cases set-it-and-forget-it isn't applicable. To state that businesses can get good SEO as a one-shot deal is just false. It's as false as it would be to say posting a PPC-style ad to any search engine's ad network is something that you can just do once and walk away from.

(False, on both accords, because competition changes, ad/natural algorithms are updated or quality-checked, etc and thus ROI of initial efforts change and need adjustment or further manipulation.)

Is it possible to get it all right upon performing initial efforts thereby having an ever-lasting effect on the client's business? Sure, for a small few with little to no competition, established websites and offline market leadership. But for most sites that don't have a minuscule niche, local angle, or market share dominance the above is not possible in this ever-changing field.

And I wish he'd be stopped, by DMNews' editors, from being allowed to say so in the online edition of a journalistic entity that otherwise has integrity and professionalism in how it reports on the industry.

Tim Dineen

[mcanerin]

Heck, even rocket science isn't "rocket science", used in the way the phrase is apparently intended.

If you break anything down to it's smallest parts, it's easy. That doesn't mean it's worthless.

Also, the analogy he used about doctors is, IMO, flawed. Anyone can put on a band-aid. That doesn't make you a doctor. Further, there is a reason why people pay more for a brain surgeon than a general practitioner.

Finally, SEO *is* an event. Unfortunately, as soon as that event (number one ranking, for example) happens, all the other sites target you. Not to mention the search engine tweaking it's algo. Then you have to work towards another "event". And another, and another, etc.

The only time you don't have to do this is when there is no real competition - and competing with no competition is easy - it's like bidding on keywords when no one else is - it's an event. Set it up once, and forget it. Child's play.

But part of SEO and PPC being an "industry" assumes that there is competition. Not factoring in competition and changes in circumstances into his argument is the fatal flaw, IMO.

SEO (and PPC) will die when people stop competing with each other on the web - not before.

Ian

[Mel66]

Originally Posted by mcanerin

SEO (and PPC) will die when people stop competing with each other on the web - not before.

Exactly, Ian - just like other types of advertising and marketing will die when people stop competing with each other, period. Sounds pretty crazy when you put it like that, doesn't it? Yet, really, what is SEO, PPC, and other SEM but *marketing?* People choose to do SEM because it fills a need they have - driving visitors to their web site for some reason. Advertising, marketing, and PR for that matter do the same thing - create awareness, interest, desire and ultimately action (the old AIDA) that helps them in some way.

I find it amusing that SEO is somehow seen differently from other types of marketing, as if the old rules don't apply. Sure, it has its own set of rules, and not every advertising agency or exec can be a successful SEO (far from it!), but the goals are the same once you strip off all the technicalities.

Advertising certainly isn't "set it and forget it" and neither is SEM. Even if your business is totally static and never changes (which is rare if not unheard of), the market itself changes and you have to keep up if you want to survive.

Melissa

[David Wallace]

His analogy of a doctor and health care can go both ways.

What about preventive health care? Yes people go to the doctor when they are ill, hurt or have a disease but what about regular check-ups? Mammograms, pap smears, checking prostrate, physicals, etc. Then there are regular teeth cleanings by dentists. Shall I go on?

Yes some of the things we see doctors for are one time incidents but most people will see a doctor from time to time throughout their lives. SEO can act the same way which is why it is an ongoing task for most sites.

In my opinion, Dave should just be quiet on this issue as he obviously demonstrates his lack of knowledge on the subject of SEO and continues to shed himself in a bad light.

[huebdoo]

What the article does show is how much work we in the industry have to do to educate (internally and externally) on what SEO is

I spend more time creating documentation on the various terms like SEM / SEO, CPC, CPM - on and on and on....

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing ... and not to pile on the guy but I believe that is what is happening here.

Everyone is allowed to share there opinion - and that’s all it is... an opinion. Just because he is a CEO of a company that plays marginally in the market makes him a professional in the industry. Our CEO isn’t able to speak to half the stuff we do as a company, but he doesn’t have too... he has the responsibility to make us profitable and increase revenues for shareholders.

We (as an industry) IMO need to clean up our act and standardize terminology and try to break down the minutia of the work we do... SEO (like mentioned before) can be as simple as a Title tag and as complex as a link baiting campaign using executables and PAD files distributed out to the web.

Its a pretty huge palette to lump into one small blog entry.

[MarkEllison]

Very simple. SEO hurts his earnings. He dislikes it.

Great company though..

[storyspinner]

Originally Posted by David Wallace

In my opinion, Dave should just be quiet on this issue as he obviously demonstrates his lack of knowledge on the subject of SEO and continues to shed himself in a bad light.

couldn't have phrased that better myself!

[ExposureTim]

OK, this is completely coincidental, but I just came across this website seotoday.com and the Did-It President is at the top of that site (from late 2005) completely contradicting his more recent SEO claims.

BUT, a statement he made there was more ludicrous that the one we are discussing.

First, at that time just 13 months ago, he wrote:

SEO is more important than ever was before

and

SEO has gained a tremendous amount of importance for the top-brand companies

and

So your SEO needs to be absolutely, positively stellar

The other statement he made there was:

organic search is dead. Finished. It finally happened. Everyone can go home.

He's discussing the emergence of Yahoo!’s Search Subscriptions, which I haven't heard of since. Please read the original opinion piece to be sure I haven't taken these quotes too much out of context.

He's apparently got a history of trying to stir up controversy.

[St0n3y]

Ignorance is bliss!

[Black_Knight]

Early results from this year's survey show that organic search engine optimization (SEO) continues to be the most popular form of SEM by a narrow margin. Of corporate advertisers sampled to date, 83 percent report organic SEO is their top choice, while paid placement follows at 80 percent. In the 2005 survey, 80 percent of respondents placed organic SEO first in their SEM program.

Source: Clickz reporting of SEMPO's annual search market survey, (bolding added for emphasis).

In that article, Kevin Lee added the comment: "Online spending is reaching record levels. Smart senior management is seeing that search engine marketing is no longer a minority player. It is an essential part of being a successful online business".

That's Kevin Lee, executive chairman of Did-It and a member of SEMPO's board of directors. I guess the 'top brass' at Did-it don't talk to each other much.

But then, if I were Kevin, I probably wouldn't want to talk to David either.

David apparently forgot all about the New Model of SEO Aware client, companies who are investing heavily in taking in full-time SEO staff and resources. He suggested that all these companies hiring in-house SEO specialists are idiots for taking in full-time employees to do what he thinks is a one-time fix. He expects people to believe that stupidity, because he is apparently that stupid himself when it comes to SEO. After all, this is the guy who believes, according to his latest post, that promoting a business is akin to treating acne. Yup, really.

Source: My own more lengthy take on Charlatanism in SEM

[mtb167]

One way or another, I'm sure the post has made some great linkbait!

Perhaps that was the intention all along.

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

He's apparently got a history of trying to stir up controversy.

I was gonna say something about this. Then I scrolled down:

One way or another, I'm sure the post has made some great linkbait!

and had to realize somebody had already written something along the lines here :-(. lol