Beanstalk's SEO News Blog

I just wanted to make a special notice to all our clients and website visitors that we will be closed tomorrow for the July 1st holiday. It's Canada Day up here in the great white north (which isn't all that white now as we hover around 21 degrees (that's about 70 degrees to those of you south of the border). :)

So to our Canadian friends - Happy Canada Day and to our American friends - we look forward to serving you upon our return.

Labels: canada day

Just wanting to put out a general head's up that there appears to be some massive fluctuations going on in the Google SERPs and from what I can see - at least some form of the algorithm is garbage producing, to say the least, entirely lackluster results.

As we all know - this happens from time-to-time and I can't blame them, they have so many updates that sometimes it's just not going to work out. So - before madly ransacking your results and tearing apart your site based on the current results (never a good idea anyways) just wait a couple days. We'll let you know here also when it appears to be stabilizing.

Also - don't download the new Firefox update just yet. A lot of the extensions aren't working on the new version yet. And sorry to Daryl here for having to be the guinea pig. :)

Labels: firefox, google update

In preparation for today's show on Webmaster Radio I did my obligatory ransacking of the web for SEO news. Of course - I do this on a regular basis but on Thursdays I dedicate a solid couple hours to just this one task as opposed to the "when I get a chance" aspects of most other days.

Today I found a few interesting stories and so rather than report of something we've discovered or putting my spin on some news I'm going to simply list of a number of interesting news stories, perhaps a bit of a summary on why they're important (in my humble opinion) and a link to the radio show where I discussed them in more detail.

First - let's look at Google.

Didn't get to this on the show (week-after-week we run out of time) but they're pushing hard to get broadband into more regions of the world and get fast wireless access to cover more areas.

Of course they're only looking out for us right? Wrong. As Greg Sterling rightfully points out over at Search Engine Land in his post, "Google Wants The Web To Go Faster", Google's motives here are purely driven by self interest. That said, their self interest coincides nicely with the interests on most tech companies and with consumers so it seems that having the budget and interests on Google on our side just might get things rolling in our favor.

And for those of you who might have missed it the first 83 times they said it - here's a video from Matt Cutts (Google Guru) on quality directories vs paid links:


All right - now on to Bing.

Our regular readers will know that I'm getting sick-and-tired of reporting more positive news on Bing. Well today I get a mixed bag which is better than nothing.

On one hand - Bing's share of paid links has increased by 13% since it's launch. Let's remember - this is where search companies make their money so this statistic is HUGE. You can read more about this on WebProNews.

Now the fun part for me - SE Round Table has brought a discussion to light that Microsoft has increased the traffic they're sending in the form of bots looking for suspicious websites. Alright - that sounds good HOWEVER this traffic may well be skewing their referrer stats that all the previous good news is based on. The amount of traffic to some sites is up ten fold since the switch to Bing which is huge for traffic and could well amount to much of the search market share increases being reported.

I haven't looked far into this at this time and so I don't really have a side of the discussion however it's definitely a story to follow. You can read the article and follow a discussion on the subject over at SE Round Table here.

Obviously there's a lot of other news out there. Today I high recommend visiting Search Brains. They're always good but today I was especially impressed with the quality and diversity of news.

Labels: bing, direcory, google, market share, matt cutts

If all three search engines agree ... it must be true right? If that's the case then Beanstalk SEO is composed of the nicest staff and people you'll meet. For our regular blog readers you'll remember that last Friday I decided to run a test when I found that "polite seo" was actually a searched term to see how long it would take us to rank. 3.5 hours later it was ranking top 3 on Google for the phrase, then disappeared and early in the week the page was ranking #1 (woohoo ... WE ROCK ... secured a #1 ranking for a phrase with ~1 search/day :)

Well I just checked today and now we've got #1 on all three engines which means (since they can't all be wrong right?) that Beanstalk SEO is the most polite of SEO firms. That's all for now my good ladies and gentlemen. Please do excuse me whilst I end this blog post though I do hope you don't take it as an insult that I'm not taking more time. I must sleep to serve you in the manner you so richly deserve.

With sincere best wishes and kind regards ...

Labels: polite seo

I've refrained from joining the plethora of mobile web users so far due to the fact that I've never wanted to surf the web on a squished cell phone screen at near dial-up speeds, but online hand held devices are becoming larger and more user friendly all the time with bigger displays, better software, and increased network speeds. Meaning that the time is "now" to catch the wave (and the gravy train) of the mobile web boom.

We're already seeing incredible growth in the number of people using mobile devices to surf the web all around us. I think this is just the foundation for the exponential growth that is going to take place over the next few years and it will be one of the next great booms and revolutions of the internet. Entrepreneurs will find new services for mobile web surfers that we didn't know we needed.

Up until last week I would've probably asked the same question many of you will ask. "Who needs a mobile website?" Who would surf the web on that tiny screen with that clunky interface at those terrible speeds?

That is until I heard that Panago (a pizza shop here in Victoria BC) has their menu on a cell phone friendly webpage and that if I were driving through an unfamiliar town I could find some good grub without even pulling over to find a phonebook. Even better, wouldn't have to go to the restaurant or find a wireless access point for my laptop to even look at a menu? Alright, you've sold me. Now the question is, "Who doesn't need a mobile website?"

Imagine you go into Walmart and have a look around but wonder if Target has the item for cheaper. Well if you're one of the current mobile web surfer geeks who is ahead of the curve you're going to be frustrated that the rest of the world hasn't caught up with the convenience and services that businesses could be offering you online via mobile-friendly websites. But in a short time you'll be able to walk down the isles of one store and on an impulse, pull out your smart phone and compare prices with other nearby stores.

In the near future providing mobile websites and services for your customers will be a must. There will be new conveniences to offer and new expectations from consumers. Businesses that don't keep up with the conveniences may find themselves losing customers to more tech-friendly competitors. Businesses that do should see a lot of extra attention considering it doesn't cost much to build and maintain a mobile website in comparison to daily business operations and advertising expenses.

I imagine this will be the next big .com style boom. The borders of yet another digital land of intrigue and opportunity are in front of us. Welcome, once again, to the Wild West.

Labels: mobile seo, mobile website

I'm going to be honest, in playing with some Firefox extensions for an article I'm writing on, well, Firefox extensions I clicked a link to the search results for "seo" and discovered (to my surprise) that "polite seo" is actually a searched phrase. Now, I don't know if I'm polite by the standards of the Queen (I'm Canadian so that reference some how comes up in the context of our parents' lecture, "Be polite - would you eat that was if the Queen was at the table?")

The answer - of course not however they probably wouldn't have made leftovers either. ;) Sorry - that's not polite either.

Now the point of the story - I decide to run a quick (and polite) SEO test on fruit that hangs that low to see if I could rank a simple blog post for such a phrase with no external link building.

Sincerely I'm hoping that I'm not stepping on any toes and that there isn't someone out there trying desperately to rank for "polite seo" to capture the 30-odd searches/month it gets. The competition seems pretty low and I don't really get who's searching for it. Are there really that many SEO's out there that are so rude that an entire industry may spring up for polite SEO's. I know the domain is registered. Maybe someone will start an organization of polite SEO's. :) Of course - when I went to it I got a very un-polite popup for ClassMates.com so ...

At any rate - I will stop rambling but I will check back to see if this page ranks for "polite seo" anytime in the near future. :)


Note: When checking for this post to be cached I discovered that the page ranks #3 on Google for "polite seo" after just 3.5 hours. Not very competitive I suppose. :)

Labels: polite seo

I love Friday's (and who doesn't). Today there's a bit of news from the SEO realm for you and I'll add a bit of humor at the end just to make the end of your day (or weekend) a bit more entertaining. :)

First let's discuss Bing (oh God not again). Annoyingly - I have more good news for Webmasters from Bing. For why this is annoying you can reference yesterday's post. But here we go anyways.

A few days ago Bing released a PDF for webmasters and publishers on Bing the basically outlines some of the core differences between Bing and those "other engines" (read: Google). If you really searched on Bing you'd figure this stuff out fairly readily however it's a worthwhile read. You can download the PDF from their download center here.

I came across the document when I read Vanessa Fox's analysis of the document on Search Engine Land at http://searchengineland.com/microsofts-search-engine-optimization-advice-for-bing-21152. Both are recommended reading but if you only have time for one - stick with Vanessa'a take.

And now I get to smile a bit as I have some "bad news" on Microsoft. They're bribing Australian users to switch from Firefox back to IE with a contest for $10k. Basically, they have "hidden" some money on the web and are giving tips away on Twitter. The first to find it gets to keep the cash but it won't work if you're using Firefox.

My tip to Microsoft would be to just build a better browser and I'll just switch. You don't need to bribe me. :)

You can read more about the bribery on the Australian site at http://www.microsoft.com/australia/ie8/competition/default.aspx.

And last but not least - the humor I promised you. So turn down your speakers or slap on your headphone (unless your at home in which case feel free to enjoy over your full surround system if you feel so inclined) and enjoy. The following is a clip from comedian Louis CK from his appearance on Conan O'Brien. You've got a very good grasp of this generation Louis. :)

Labels: bing, comedy, firefox, microsoft

Alright - I'm actually starting to get tired of reporting on good news from Bing and there's now a part of my looking forward to slamming them for some stupid mistake they're making but today is not that day. For anyone who's followed the Beanstalk blog you'll know that thus far I've been very impressed with Bing and the first successful attempt Microsoft has made in challenging Google. It's been successful tot he point where Google is actually paying close attention and responding to what's going on.

Rumor has it (as reported in the New York Post article "Fear Grips Google") that "[Google] co-founder Sergey Brin is so rattled by the launch of Microsoft's rival search engine that he has assembled a team of top engineers to work on urgent upgrades to his Web service." Really? Do they fear Bing THAT much? Their sudden launch of their "Explore Google Search" page might indicate that they're playing catchup. As Danny Sullivan points out however - Google is constantly launching new features and tools so this *may* be a coincidence of timing. I agree that they were likely working on it previously however the timing sure is suspicious.

And to make matters "worse" for Google - The folks over at Microsoft earlier today announced the launch of new malware filters that go beyond their "Drive-By-Detection" systems and adds additional detection that Doug Caverly of WebProNews.com refers to as "Ahead-Of-The-Curve" filtering. As security and safety are (and should be) huge concerns and as Google battled this very issue just a few month's back.

To top things off, our friends over at Ask.com (remember them?) is now indexing over 300 million questions and answers from numerous sources to provide what they consider to be a great database that sorts through the generic clutter of the web and get people the answers they need if only they "Ask" (my pun - not theirs so you can blame me for the cheese). I know my eldest son will just love this as he's always using Yahoo! Answers for video game tips (yes - we're all geeks in my house) but he prefers using Ask.com as an engine so I know he'll be happy when I get home and tell him about this launch.

And on the note of clutter on the web, I'm going to end this post with what I consider to be a very humorous ad by none other than Bing (them again?). It plays on this very thing.
(ironically I'll be drawing the video from YouTube - a Google property)

Labels: ask, bing, brin, google, malware

Well it appears that it's Christmas in June Bing. For the second consecutive week it has "stolen" marketshare from the other two major engines. comScore reports that Bing is now at 12.1% market share which is up from the 11.3% they were at last week which was up again from the 9.1% Microsoft had prior to the launch of Bing.

In search penetration (% of users who have used the engine - this number can surpass 100% as users (like yours truly) can use multiple engines) they've seen further gains at 16.7% last week which was up from 13.7% prior to Bing.

So it appears that Microsoft might have finally done something right in the world of search. They've built an engine that is far superior to their previous attempts in both function and results. While they still have algorithmic advancements to be made to bring their system up to the level of results of Google - they are well situated to finally take a shot at the search pie.

Personally - I wish them luck but I've got to say - it feels odd to cheer for Microsoft as the "little guy" (especially given that that have enough to just buy Google). :)

Labels: bing, marketshare, microsoft

Our friends over at Joomla Shack recently gave us a copy of this books second edition printing. I was a bit surprised at how easily it read. The book covers the major points a techie would need to know to quickly introduce himself to Joomla including installation, understanding Joomla's document and menu hierarchy, user hierarchy, its approach to css templates and setting up a test area for yourself with Wamp. (A simple bundle for Windows that sets up Apache, Mysql, and PHP. The software ingredients necessary to run a Joomla website on your own computer for testing and development purposes)

What surprised me was that this book was a very elegant and easy read that I found to be straight forward enough for the average user. But at the same time it covers all the right points to serve as a quick introduction to Joomla for a techie. I will be recommending this book to clients of ours who are Joomla users and would recommend this to anyone out there who is setting up a new Joomla site or anyone who wants a better understanding of the Joomla site they're already running. I'd also recommend this book to any techies who aren't familiar with Joomla or who have gotten confused after installing Joomla and asked "how do I make this thing look like my clients website?".

This book won't slow you down with long winded explanations about quantum physics and how the web came into being. It focuses strictly on the topic at hand and its highlighted sections with the caption "The least you need to know" tell it like it is in as few words as is reasonably possible. Again I'm still quite surprised to find a book that's a good quick overview for techies and manages at the same time to be a potential holy grail for average users who need to manage a Joomla site.

Kudos to Barrie North at Joomla Shack for this fine piece of work.

Labels: barrie north, joomla, Joomlashack

Last week when I was at SMX Advanced I reported on some comments from Matt Cutts on how PageRank sculpting using rel="nofollow" had become a useless endeavor and in fact may well work to your disadvantage. This statement lead to chaos within the SEO community.

At the SEOmoz party I ran into Matt and asked if we could expect some clarification. Well today we got it. I won't bother recapping the point - you'll find Matt's clarification on the subject (with illustrated examples) on his blog at http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/pagerank-sculpting/.

Thanks for the clarification.

Labels: matt cutts, rel=nofollow, smx advanced

Some stats are out on how Bing is doing and so far so good.

As an SEO I'm always interested in how the major three engines are playing against each other. In this case (and finally) a Microsoft attempt at a search engine seems to be working in both the direction of marketshare as well as in the actual results and how they're displayed.

I'm going start by noting that the advances Microsoft has made in the way of their attitude towards search as is reflected in Bing as well as the giant leap forward they've made in their algorithm are both impressive. The results are cleaner, the interface is cleaner, and Microsoft comes across looking ... well ... cleaner. Like maybe they're trying to build a solid engine and not just scrambling in futility to catch up to Google.

Whether just a spike due to curiosity or a reflection of things to come, Bing is taking market share from both Google and Yahoo! which show that at least people are interested in taking a peek. The real loser here is likely to be Yahoo! Google's results are still better but those who are Yahoo! users may well find the results better over at Bing and the homepage and results pages cleaner (common word I seem to be using).

According to StatCounter the market share is:

• Google decreased from 78.68% to 77.94% (-0.74%).
• Yahoo decreased from 11.46% to 10.76% (-0.7%)
• Microsoft (Bing, MSN Search and Live Search) increased from 7.4% to 9% (+1.6%)

This is the first time Microsoft has seen gains in ages.

Also to their credit, the description and sitelinks that appear when you hover over a result are great.

The future of Bing is still an open question and with tens of millions more in marketing dollars to come it's going to be interesting to watch what they do next and how the public reacts.

As another note: they've just launched and have yet to have time to tweak their algorithm much based on the issues they find from user behaviorso I expect that over the next couple months we're going to find significant improvements in their rankings.

I wouldn't say this is any kind of Google-killer BUT I would say that they're positioned to be a very solid player that could well take market share from both engines --- let's just hope they keep up the good work.

I'll be interviewing a couple of the fine folks from Bing next week for my radio show (Webcology on WebmasterRadio.fm on Thursday from 11am to 12 PST). Listen in if you'd like more details or download the podcast afterward.

For more stats on Bing visit Web Pro News.

Labels: bing, market share

Sitting at SMX Advanced listening in on a Q&A Session with none other than Matt Cutts:

PageRank Sculpting - You won't get a penalty BUT it's not as effective at gearing pages to rank and receive PageRank as it used to be. It's better to create a structure that puts the more important pages higher in the hierarchy (this makes sense :)

Nofollow does work to not pass strength however (such as is the case with homepage YouTube links). This is to insure that homepage videos don't rocket up in the results just because they're popular today.

Personal note: PageRank sculpting does work to some degree but might be changed down the road in one direction or another.

An insinuation I've gathered from Matt is the Google is assigning PageRank very quickly (i.e. on a single crawl). The green bar might not change but the strength does.

I'd like to ask Matt how PageRank scumlting work with anchor text pointing. Hopefully I'll get the interview for tomorrow (fingers crossed) as I'm busy gathering other's people's good questions. :)

Bad links to your competitors - Google works hard to discount these links but they try hard not to count them. He couldn't say it wouldn't work however. That's troubling.

Mouseover code - When you use unique mouseover code be sure to use a common technique. SEOmoz got a penalty for a legitimate use of mouseovers due to a technique that Google's systems were not familiar with.

Regarding external links - many links evaporate. They're trying to get a feel for how users woudl navigate. If a link is likely to be clicked - it will pass more PageRank. Matt says, "think logically".

Regarding 301ing penalized domains - the penalty most likely won't pass but the trust won't pass either. One might say that if you're ranking on Yahoo! and MSN but penalized on Google - it may work well to move the site to a new domain and 301 the old site to maintain Yahoo! and MSN and start fresh on Google. One might say but personally I'd recommend - just use solid tactics to begin with - it's easier that way but this might be a tactic for those who've hired poor SEO's in the past who need to rebuild from unethical tactics. \

That said - I haven't tested this so it would be a "try at your own risk". I try not to get sites banned in the first place though we do run a few test sites to time cloaking penalties, etc. so onc one gets detected it might be something to try.

And on that topic - another question I'll be hoping to have an answer for you tomorrow (hoping I get the interview) is whether Google has considered a link reporting function for one's own site wherein if poor tactics have been used - if you could report those links yourself to simply get them not included.

Danny Sullivan asks about paid links - Since Google hates paid link and has advised to use JavaScript as it couldn't be read, what to do now that is can be. The reply - don't use JavaScript - use rel=nofollow or redirect through a blocked page with robots.txt file.

Danny wants to know how long he has to fix it and Matt has assured us he'll blog about it once he gets s solid reply. It's not a bi issue right now however.

Danny asks another question about invalid links (links given that aren't a vote but that aren't paid for) - Danny asks if the popular bloggers getting Android phones for their review should have been asked to rel="nofollow" the links (they weren't).

Matt answers that if there's a genuine review that should have an editorial link it should count. A link just for money should not.

The case of the Android phone, Matt says, was not to get links. Google, he says (rightfully) has enough links. They don't have to buy them. :)

He comments on contests and says you need to say "you don't have to link to me". Danny mockingly notes that you need to be more subtle. Nice one Danny. :) Matt counters noting that basically - you should be doing it from a link baiting practice not buying them. Build something kewl and people will want to link to you.

And that's all for now. And now it's time to try to get through the crowd and get an interview with Matt for Webmaster Radio.

Labels: matt cutts, smx advanced

I sit in a session that's of great interest to me and that's mobile PPC (and mobile in general).

Cindy Crum from Rank-Mobile opens up the session with a general outline of PPC ads, the devices they're built for and how you can create the ads. She notes that there are some tremendous limitations to creating mobile ads in the text allowed (due to limited screen space).

She talks about the higher bid rates due to the fact that users of mobile search rarely visit page two. Whether this is due to better results when searching local, whether the nature of mobile search is different (my guess is that this is it) or people's lack of patience with mobile due to limited screen space and the generally lackluster user experience due to people not optimizing their sites for mobile was not covered but I'll be sure to interview her tomorrow and get to the bottom of that.

Reid Spice from iCrossing was up next talking about mobile generally as well.

He begins by noting that it's not for everyone and that it will only work for some businesses (and the higher cost per click makes it something that needs to be tracked separately and differently).

Reid focused on Android phones and discussed the importance of testing your site on various platforms.

Who Is Mobile For?

According to Reid it's for people running very specific searches for products/services (such as movies or travel).

He notes that 88% of mobile searches are done via the iPhone (which is what yours truly uses). Of course, he does note that the dominance of the iPhone early has led to this and the % will change.

Conversion rates are lower however one has to consider that this may be due in large part to the poor user experience on many sites for mobile. It's harder to interact with a mobile site and so conversions are not as good. That said, if you're a restaurant or the such it may be difficult to track conversion as the customer will generally just walk in and the downside to that is - you don't know where they came from. On the plus side - you just got a customer. :)

Unfortunately this is the case with a lot of mobile searches.

Michael Martin of Internet Marketing Inc. was up next. He discussed mobile apps.

He broke down some of the biggest selling apps including Trism (made $250k from $500 in development). Tap Tap makes $5k/day for a free app via advertising.

The "I am rich" app was just a red ruby that sold for $999.99 and only sold 6. Unbelieveable.

In 2008 users spend $100 on apps. (I've only spent $10 but then - I've only had mine for a few months).

The Trends:

Games have the best long-term retention (I've been playing Word Warp for months).

A free app needs $8.75 CPM which is about 4X above average.

Moving Forward:

By the end of 2009 there will be 18 to 20 Android phones vs 1 iPhone. Service providers include AT&T, T-mobile, Verizon, Rogers & Vodophone.

Android will be huge (in case you didn't read the above statements). :)

Capitalization & Take-Aways:

GPS and location-based mobile social.
Advertising can be done via AdMob (I'll have to check it out), Media an AdWords.

Need to optimize the site to 320x480 resolution.

Branding is great with widgets.

Exposure can be done via App Store, App Wrld & Android Market.

Search Engine Marketing is still importnat (whew :) but this is another great avenue for marketing and branding.

Ed O'Keefe from Marchex was up next.

It's important to add mobile now while it is still "young".

Mobile marketing improves ROI due to the client's immediate desires.

The younger generation is more prone to use mobile. This needs to be understood when determining who should advertise.

Mobile ad spent is disproportionally low when compared with consumer interest with newspapers being higher (based on time spent with the medium).

Cell phones are not viewed as discretionary spending by consumers. Basically this means it will always be spent on and thus makes a good advertising medium.

In a case study they reduced customer acquisition costs. The volume wasn't there but that which did - converted very well.

Now is the time to get in while you can learn on your way rather than wait and go up against those that have already tested strategy down the road.

And Now It's Q&A

Cindy - mobile algorithms are different and thus, optimizing your site for mobile will help you rank organically on mobile browsers (note: you may not see this yet as most sites are not optimized for mobile and so your competitors are at the same disadvantage as you are).

I will be sure to ask Cindy tomorrow in our interview about how to optimize for mobile if you're trying to drop the content down (perhaps to a simple search box from a full content site).

Putting different numbers in apps and on mobile sites will help with tracking.

Providing incentives (such as coupons the display on your phone) will help with tracking for restaurants, etc. (this is my own personal take-away but wasn't spoken to though seemed to be alluded to).

Sudoko is the most click-on for ads at the surrent time (and is a great game to boot). :)

Identify your audence by carrier. A pay-as-you-go audeience is different than a visitor paying for a premium plan.

Labels: mobile seo, smx advanced