For many people, a manifesto is something to think about. For some people it defines a way of life. For a very few people it may become an object to be feared, disputed, and opposed. Like art, a good manifesto evokes some sort of reaction in people. You need to shape your own manifesto if you want to know who is paying attention to you.
- When you create a Web site, build a site you want to read and use. If it’s not useful to you, it’s not worth creating.
- Instead of thinking about where you can get links, ask yourself how you can make your linking more useful to others.
- Dropping links in forums tells other people you don’t know enough about search engine optimization to be doing it. Using software to drop links in forums tells other people you don’t care how much you fail at search engine optimization.
- If you’re going to create content in volume, create it to last. Which would you prefer: to make $1000 in a month or $12,000 per year?
- If you think you need more links, the first thing you should do is create the content that provides those links. The second thing you should do is force yourself to NOT tell people how you got your links.
- If you’re using Yahoo! Site Explorer to do link research you’re telling people you don’t know enough about search engine optimization to do link research. If you install an SEO toolbar in your Mozilla browser to check Yahoo! links for you, you’re telling people you’re too lazy to learn how to do link research right.
- There is nothing wrong with snapshot SEO analysis unless that is the only kind or the majority of analysis you do.
- There is nothing wrong with creating large volumes of content as long as it’s unique, informative, and useful.
- Blackhat spammers burn out the usefulness of about 10% of all SEO tips, tricks, and techniques that are openly or semi-openly shared on blogs and forums in about 12 months. White hat SEOs, newbies, and SEO gurus burn out the other 90% in 6 months or less.
- It takes about 2 years for a very useful aspect of search engine optimization theory to become accepted by mainstream SEOs and their followings.
- Keywords in domain names don’t matter. Keywords in URLs do.
- Every time an SEO community leader tells you to ignore the keywrods meta tag, just ignore them and go back to adding relevant content that Ask and Yahoo! still index to your pages until Ask and Yahoo! stop indexing the keywords meta tag.
- PageRank doesn’t have anything to do with relevance. Google uses PageRank to decide which pages will be displayed as the most relevant to a query regardless of where the most relevant pages actually are to be found.
- “Aged domain” has joined the list of ambiguous SEO expressions like “relevant link”, “authority site”, and “SEO friendly” that mean nothing and provide no value to a discussion.
- If you believe firmly that the age of a Web site or domain can matter, how do you explain why it matters to yourself? If you cannot offer yourself a rationale, who else do you think will believe you?
- I did not say that aged domains don’t matter.
- If all you had to work with was links and content, what would you do with your search engine optimization?
- If you want to buy an aged domain, are you hoping to leverage existing link value? Are you buying that domain on a blog or forum used by blackhat spammers who milk every domain for as much as they can get from it? Do you look at the domain as a fixer-upper with potential long-term brand value? Are you ready to invest more time and money into building value in that aged domain than you feel would be required for a previously unused domain?
- The real value of an aged domain lies in its future, not its past.
- Every link counts in your backlink analysis, but not every link counts in search engine results.
- You cannot determine which links count for search engines, but you can decide which links matter to you.
- You build linking pages, you find linking partners, you use linking resources. If you blur the distinctions for yourself, don’t be surprised if other people get confused too.
- Anyone who says that search engine optimization is all about links doesn’t know enough about search engine optimization to be talking about it.
This isn’t link bait. I just needed a little time to collect my thoughts so I could get on with my day. Thank you for indulging me.
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
diegonza 02.20.08 at 3:10 pm
Please explain “Keywords in domain names don’t matter. Keywords in URLs do” Is not the same? I’m a begginer and I find very useful all the information in this blog.
Michael Martinez 02.20.08 at 4:05 pm
Diego, if your keyword is example and you want to boost your relevance a little bit you can use either http://www.example.com/ or http://www.someothersite.info/example.html and get the same kind of benefit.
There is no advantage in using keywords in domain names that you cannot utilize simply by naming sub-directories (folders) or page file names with the keywords.
In other words,
example.com
somedomain.com/example/
anotherdomain.com/example.html
All have one occurrence of “example” in their URLs. None of them really has an advantage over the others because of their name.
jexley 02.20.08 at 5:38 pm
“Blackhat spammers burn out the usefulness of about 10% of all SEO tips, tricks, and techniques that are openly or semi-openly shared on blogs and forums in about 12 months. White hat SEOs, newbies, and SEO gurus burn out the other 90% in 6 months or less.”
HA. Brilliant. Bloody brilliant.
bwelford 02.22.08 at 1:06 pm
I really enjoyed that, Michael, and agreed with almost all of it. Perhaps I can add a final item, which I think you well exemplify. To thine own self, be true.
skinner 02.23.08 at 6:54 am
Michael, I love this. I was nodding my head all the way through, and I couldn’t agree with you more. I also love your style. Refreshing in our online community.
JonnyScott 03.09.08 at 4:54 am
Hi M,
“Keywords in domain names don’t matter. Keywords in URLs do.”
“There is no advantage in using keywords in domain names that you cannot utilize simply by naming sub-directories (folders) or page file names with the keywords.”
I possibly do not agree with this but I understanding your motivation in the message you deliver.
I do like you believe that a URL is an identifier, a string and a sequence that translates to a DocID. BUT I believe that there is a pattern exists and that an engineer can and did pick out years ago from all that juicy data a rule- “if the keyword is in the domain and other flags are set OK, likely that site has relevance for that keyword” + more so than if it features in a folder/filename instead. Keyword in the domain is like a faux domain level parameter, keyword in a filename is different – try considering that achieve kw coverage in a URL past the .TLD/ is much easier too achieve. I don’t believe that its one or other, indeed its additive and the domain is the “meatier chunk!”
As Google turns the dial on KW presence/prominence within the domain please future proof – aim on your brand but maybe try and including a synonym of your “big words”… Help drive the changes by avoiding keyword heavy domains and diffuse this as a mark of relevance over time… KARMA BABY
You must log in to post a comment.