Beanstalk's SEO News Blog

I will be heading to Seattle to speak at the 2008 SMX Advanced. This will be the closest to home I've had to opportunity to speak at an official SEO event. It would be nice if the organizers who decide to host one of of our home town of Victoria, BC, Canada but for some reason I find that unlikely. :)

I'll be speaking to SEO's and SEO company owners of how we can position our firms to best ride out the recession and economic downturn. It's an important subject for all of us I'm happy to share some of the efforts we'll be turning to and tactics we'll be using to help insure that we safely navigate and grow through this turbulent time.

For those of you not familiar with SMX Advanced I would highly recommend attending. I was there simply as an attendee last year and it's worth every dollar. You can find out more about the even on the official website at http://searchmarketingexpo.com/advanced/.

I hope to see you there and would invite you to hunt me down and say hi if you get a chance though as this event - there will be lots to do and only two days to do it in.

Labels: smx advanced

This morning I had brought to my attention (by Daryl Quenet, Beanstalk's Director Of Optimization Services) a trademark application for - of all things - the term "SEO". Jason Gambert has filed for the trademark. After his initial applications were declined he's managed to wear down the fine folks at the trademark office and it's passed the initial stages.

As part of the application Jason has referred to SEO as a process not a service. He claims to want to establish standards and anyone who doesn't meet those standards cannot use the term SEO to refer to them. And who will dictate these standards? Why none other than Jason Gambert himself. Why do I have a hunch there will be a paid review fee to insure that your processes (not services) meet his "stringent" requirements (of course, this is just a guess).

Now one thing that REALLY irks me (well - one among many) can be encompassed by the question, "Who is Jason Gambert?" Before this issue arose I'd never heard of him, a number of other SEO community members had never heard of him so I have to ask, who the heck (the word I'll use in a blog post and save more colorful terms for later) is he to appear out of nowhere and claim to know the standards we should all live up to? While the term SEO is so obviously a generic one that my main objection is that he shouldn't be able to trademark it in the first place, my next opposition would be that Jason Gambert himself is not in a position of authority in the industry to set standards at all.

While I'd still object is it was Rand Fishkin, Danny Sullivan or the like - at least I'd be able to sleep knowing that the standards themselves would be legitimate ones. But Jason Gambert? I don't think I'm going to try to build my business processes around tactics from some guy I don't know and have never heard of.

But I digress. This is a HUGE issue. If you're at all involved in the SEO or Internet communities you NEED to file a complaint.

Sarah Bird, legal counsel for SEOmoz was the first to file a formal complaint. You can read theirs at http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?qs=91183449. You can also read an awesome summary of the issue, the history, etc. on the SEOmoz site here. It was a huge pleasure to have Sarah on the show to discuss this important issue. Now the work is up to you ...

To file your opposition to this act (and you certainly should) you can do so on the Trademark Office site at http://estta.uspto.gov/filing-type.jsp. If you need more time you can also simply file for an extension that will give you 30 days to complete the process.

It important that you do one of the two today at it's the last day to file.

On a slightly different note. Should this not work and should Jason Gambert actually get the trademark we're going to have to ready ourselves for battle. it's going to be important that the SEO community (I CAN still use that term for now) rallies together in defense of any companies charged by Jason. Beanstalk will commit to a $1000 donation to the first company taken to court in the event that Gambert actually get the right to do so to help cover the legal fees. I'd challenge other major SEO companies to do the same. We'll need to make it so expensive to fight these ridiculous battles against anyone involved that it's not worth it.

Now go get filing.

Labels: applied seo, christmas rand seomoz neil patel, danny sullivan, jason gambert, rand fishkin, sarah bird, trademark

Sometimes it takes a few days before I can test new features the engines offer. Such is the case with Google's new benchmarking tool. I got my notification of it's launch back on the 9th but unfortunately it was last night before I could actually do anything about it (darn those "pesky" clients for keep us so busy here :) Then - when I went to look into what other's thought of it I discovered that there are those out there (likely the same ones who use Google Analytics as their primary analytics tool) who've know about it for about a month.

So there we go, that'll teach me for using ClickTracks and relying on notifications from Google about new products. :)

Once I finally had a chance to login, let Google use my anonymous stats, and peek at the benchmarking data I have to say that while the date they are accessing is still VERY limited - you can definitely tell how powerful this information will be when more website data is included.

Basically what they're doing is allowing users to specify their industries, share their data anonymously with Google who will gather together people from the same industry, combine their data and present it to you as the benchmark average for your industry. VERY kewl.

I was going to put up some screenshots and then I thought, gee - do I really want my competitors coming to my blog and peeking on my traffic stats? Heck, it took enough thought just to decide to check that box that allowed Google to share my stats in a non-individualized way. :) So instead I'll send you to Andy Beal's blog where he shares some if you'd like a peek.

OR

You could just login to your Google Analytics account and see it for yourself. It's definitely worth the time - or at least, when more people start sharing, it will be.

Labels: andy beal, google, google analytics, google benchmarking

In today's episode of Webcology on WebmasterRadio.fm Jim Hedger and I discusses a couple recent events at Google. Namely the release of their Q1 earnings (SURPRISE - they're up over last quarter) and Yahoo! using Google's paid ads instead of their own. Rather than re-hash "old news" (OK - it was earlier today but you can listen to it all by downloading the podcast here) I'm going to cover a new issues - Google's latest update.

Recently there's been much news about a massive shift on Google named the "Dewey Update". The update itself caused much chaos as SEO's around the world reported huge swings in rankings. The forums have been abuzz and the update, unlike most, took place over weeks with some sites changing positions wildly 3 and even 4 times in a day. The update appeared to have settled late last week with only minor tremors affecting the rankings in what one might conclude to be a new way of adjusting rankings on Google's end - a more fluid approach to rankings.

Tonight however there's been another significant shift however there's a pretty major difference - this one is much more in tune with the updates prior to Dewey which took place on an almost weekly basis,usually starting on Thursday or Friday evening.

A major difference between what we're seeing now and what we saw with Dewey in that the effects and changes appear far more logical whew one can look at the results across numerous sites. The changes seem to take into account adjustments made to the sites and increases in backlinks rather than massive adjustments to the ranking system affecting what can only be described as almost random factors (I'm sure they weren't actually random however it was impossible to get a lock on what was being tested with the changes occurring too often for any proper analysis).

Obviously as an SEO I'm very happy to see this return to stability and as a searcher I appreciate that what I see today is likely going to be similar to what I will see tomorrow. Helps instill in me faith that the results I'm being presented with are actually relevant. Or maybe I prefer it as it reduces the frantic calls from clients asking why they dropped positions from where they were 2 hours earlier and my only reply being, "well - check it again in a couple hours". ;)

Labels: google, google update, jim hedger, webmaster radio

Step Nine of our 10-step series on SEO is out today. Step nine covers conversion optimization and was written by Rock Tobin, Director of Research at Enquiro Research. Rick is responsible for a lot of the great work and studies that have come out of Enquiro and is regarded as an authority on conversion optimization and study.

Rick will also be joining us on WebmasterRadio.fm at 2PM EST today along with Enquiro CEO Gord Hotchkiss to discuss the article and conversion optimization in general. Be sure to tune in or download the podcast off the Webcology show page.

Labels: conversion optimization, enquiro, gord hotchkiss, rick tobin, seo article

Well it took a heck of a long night and too little sleep but today's article on statistics analysis came out today in combination with our weekly radio show on Webmaster Radio. The article covers the basics of what you should use to gather and analyze your stats and what you should be looking for. It's a great leader to next week's show and article. The article will be written by Rick Tobin from Enquiro and will focus on conversion optimization though we'll also be touching on stats and the unique insight their Eyetracker data can provide.

This article is recommended as great information for those unfamiliar with their statistics and what to look for and ang a good refresher for those who have a solid grasp of their stats but could use a reminder of what they should be looking for or that they should be looking for something outside of the visitor counts.

You can read the article (only about 2300 words) on the beanstalk site here.

Labels: enquiro, statistics analysisstats, webmaster radio

In what can only be considered a devastating leak of information from Google HQ in Mountain View, a confirmed but as yet publicly anonymous executive from Google has leaked papers detailing some of the key fundamentals to Google's link value calculation system. The announcement by Google earlier today details some of the contents of this information as they work hard to minimize the effect that this will have on their algorithm as SEO's around the world scramble get their hands on it. The news, first leaked by SEO-guru Danny Sullivan on Search Engine Land, comes as a shock of sorts and leaves SEO's scratching their heads figuring out what to do. There has been startled reaction from the community but first - let's cover a few of the key points (we'll provide a link to more thorough information below).

The leaked information confirmed and illuminated the following information:

• The PageRank we see in the green bar has no bearing on how a site will rank. This information is generated internally based on user expectations and not as a ranking factor.
• The weighing of factors occurs in the following order: Google's internal PageRank, position on page, number of links on the page, anchor text, relevancy. I found it VERY interesting that trust is not yet a calculation on link worth though this may be an omission in the information provided.
• Reciprocal linking is detectable and while it is not penalized, no value is given for the links. A limitation outlined in this is the Google apparently has little ability to to detect legitimate linking sites that happen to link to each other.
• Paid links are not detectable. There is currently no architecture for the automatic detection of paid links. Google relies on reporting by SEO's and webmasters.
• There's a lot more in there - this is just what I've gleaned at the time of this writing. There's a link below to the documents themselves.
  

I had a chance to have a very brief chat with Matt Cutts (quality control guru from Google) who has told us he will be responding on his blog once more information on the leak becomes available (and I'm sure when he's given the OK by the Gods of Google to talk). His response to this leak was, "... this is obviously an issue we are going to have to deal with quickly. We expect SEO's to take quick advantage of this information and a strategy is being developed to deal with this and make adjustments to the algorithm shortly." You can monitor Matt's comments on his blog and a big thanks to him for taking a moment out of his understandably hectic schedule to answer a couple questions for me.

On the other side of the coin sit the SEO's. While we're all obviously reading all the information we can on the leak - we do so with some concern. In an email from Rand Fishkin from SEOmoz he noted, "You might think this is a great opportunity for SEO's but it's not - in fact this is one of the worst things that could happen. All the information we're all reading will be invalid by the time we could employ the tactics and we're about to head into a period of significant instability in regards to Google's rankings . Not only do we have to fear for the rankings we've worked hard to attain over the years - we also have to deal with rankings that will be in a constant state of flux over the next few months. Clients are NOT going to be happy." Good call Rand and you can monitor his comments on the subject on their blog at http://www.seomoz.org/blog.

This is obviously an issue you're going to want to research this issue - there's a lot more about this and links to the documents on the cnet site at http://www.news.com/8301-13577_3-9907571-36.html. Well, the article is actually about Google's April Fool's Day joke but we think ours was fun too. :) Enjoy the day. ;)

Labels: april fools day, danny sullivan, google, google update, link building, rand fishkin, seomoz