Translate:
Latest SEO Articles: Speaking At:
    Speaking at SMX London 2013
Follow Us:
Follow beanstalkseo on Twitter
Hear Us On:
Webmaster Radio
Blog Partner Of:
WebProNews Blog Partner
Helping Out:
Carbon balanced.
Archives
  • RSS

    XMLRSS

    Beanstalk's SEO News Blog

    At Beanstalk Search Engine Optimization we know that knowledge is power. That's the reason we started this SEO blog. We know that the better informed our visitors are, the better the decisions they will make for their websites and their online businesses. We hope you enjoy your stay and find the SEO news contained within this blog useful.


    May 4, 2012

    May the Fourth Be With You / Star Wars Appreciation Day and the SEO Connection

    dave-seo rebel

    The Star Wars saga continues to grow in popularity with the increasing May the Fourth be with You/Star Wars Appreciation Day. This unofficial day of recognition for anything Star Wars has grown from a meager recognition but has been given a ‘faster than the Millennium Falcon making the Kessel run in less than twelve parsecs’ boost in popularity mainly due to SEO’s.

    Search Engine Land has put together a great blog article about the role that SEOs have had in the rise in popularity of Star Wars Day. The growth in popularity of the internet meme that propagated the Star Wars Day phenomenon, speaks to the multitudes of youngling Padawans that grew up with the Star Wars movies (the original episodes 4,5,6…not episodes 1,2,3).

    I take great personal pride that the first movie I watched in a theatre was Star Wars. I was immediately hooked. From the fly through opening text, to Chewbacca’s growl at the end of the award ceremony! Needless to say I dressed up as Luke Skywalker that year for Halloween. Buy why should we stop there? I think an internet community, we can encourage the spread of Star Wars Day phenomena and have people dress up for the May the Fourth date next year in appropriate star wars garb! Who’s with me? (pics to follow next year :-) . Maybe a flash mob of stormtroopers and/or Jedi?

    In very much the same way, Beanstalk SEO is akin to the Rebel Alliance. We are a last bastion of white-hat SEOs trying to work within the confines of the Google Empirerebel while staving off a constant barrage from the black-hat forces of scum and villany seeking to bring ruin to our peaceful Alderaan of search results. (ok, the metaphor was a stretch, but just go with it…)

    Remember: Don’t give into hate. Do not turn to the Dark Side as Vader did. Complete your training and become an effective SEO Jedi worthy of a seat on the White-Hat SEO Jedi Council. Many Bothans died to bring you this message….

    Have fun with this soundboard from starwars.com

    SEO news blog post by @ 3:55 pm


     

    June 6, 2011

    Gaming Facebook and the Social Web

    The emergence of social media and its manipulation for SEO is certainly not new concept. An article detailing “What Social Signals Do Google and Bing Really Count?” from Danny Sullivan on December 1st, 2010 helped to clarify the specific signals that affected ones rankings.

    At this point in the game, Facebook rules the social web. Many SEOs are so driven to get “Likes” from Facebook that they are dismissing common sense by employing black hat practices in order to acquire better rankings from Google; particularly post-Panda.

    Michael Gray stated in a June 2 blog post that: “Getting Facebook fans and Facebook likes may have even eclipsed link-buying as the new black hat way of gaming the system.”

    Though Facebook does have specific rules and guidelines regarding linking schemes, Gray goes on to compare the ability to game the Facebook system to the old west and suggests that you: “…take advantage of the lawless wild west atmosphere while it exists, but realize it’s a short term loophole, so fake it till you make it.”

    I certainly can appreciate the loophole that Gray is showing us and that fact that he did add the caveat, but I suggest using extreme caution. I am sure that everyone is tired of hearing about the Panda update from Google, but I can’t help but see a dangerous correlation here.

    Before Panda, the Google SERPs were gamed due to lack of policing and quality control standards. This led to a complete inundation of the SERPS with webspam and completely wreaked havoc on the search results. Google rolled out an aggressive counter measure in order to combat this problem in the form of several major algorithm updates this year.

    The Panda update did more than just target those (aside from some collateral damage) who were gaming the system with scraped content and black hat techniques; it forced a fundamental paradigm shift to a more organic web.

    While Google does not own Facebook, they do set the standards by which we all have to play. The fact of the matter is that they are actively engaged in attacking black hat practices…more now than ever before. There is no reason to believe that this will not continue and carry over in to the “social web.”

    As an SEOs, it is common (and sometimes a necessity) to look for the easy way to garner rankings and to use them to benefit our clients, but it seems an inevitability that Google (or Facebook, etc) will catch up and aggressively penalize those employing these black hat techniques to game Facebook (and it turn the SERPs).

    Before participating in anything that Facebook or Google may deem to be unsavory, you should recall what happened to companies like Overstock, Forbes and JC Penny when it was found they were using such techniques to game rankings earlier this year.

    Remember that anything black hat is short-term gain, but very high-risk. You may get a quick boost in rankings, but it will be short lived and you WILL be penalized at some point. The safer approach is to only engage in white hat organic practices. This will ultimately result in a better web experience for all by creating a more web-friendly, user friendly internet.

    Dave’s Note:
    As I had to back on June 2nd I feel the need to point out and apologize for the gross oversight on the part of my staff for their failure to properly illustrate the most important news (and Kyle – you’re post was about gaming … that should have been your tip).

    If a picture is worth a thousand words then a video is worth a million so I’ll leave it to the pros and promise our readers that this oversight will not occur again …

    SEO news blog post by @ 7:21 pm


     

    February 24, 2011

    Google Spanks Overstock.com

    In the ongoing battle to acquire the highly coveted number 1 spot in the Google Search Rankings, some companies resort to using unsavoury tactics and grey-hat or even black hat techniques link building techniques.

    In the wake of the recent Google algorithm update, several notable companies have been caught employing some of the same slippery tactics. Recently, both JC Penny and Forbes had their ranking penalized for resorting to improper link building or link exchange practices.

    It was reported today in an article from the Wall Street Journal that Overstock.com is the latest online retail giant to be penalized for utilizing link exchanges and violated Google’s policies in an effort to effectively game the Google SERPs (Search Engine Results Pages).

    Overstock.com is based in Salt Lake City and was founded in 1999 . Overstock is known for discount merchandise and had approximately 10 million unique visitors last month, according to comScore.

    Overstock allegedly offered 10% discounts to teachers and student in exchange for links on highly searched phrases such as "futon" and "vaccum cleaners" and asked them to embed links in their college and university .edu websites.

    The Google PageRank system gives better ranking in the search engine result for pages that are heavily linked to from external sources and to links coming from certain domains (such as an .edu) as these carry more weight than others.

    Patrick Byrne, Overstock’s chief executive, told the Wall Street Journal:

    "Google has made clear they believe these links should not factor into their search algorithm. We understand Google’s position and have made the appropriate changes to remain within Google’s guidelines."

    The practice of exchanging links for a discount clearly violates the Google’s Guidelines. Google has always been very clear that they can and do penalize sites for websites that participate in practices that are intended to manipulate Goggle’s PageRank algorithm.

    Until recently, links to Overstock pages were among the top three results highly searched specific keywords in Google’s search results. Links to Overstock for those same searches have now dropped to between number 40 and 70 in the Google SERPs.

    The “take away” from this post is to always be sure that your SEO company only employes white-hat link buiding strategies and practices.

    SEO news blog post by @ 8:13 pm


     

    April 27, 2009

    Cloaking?

    I received an interesting email regarding an often used technique for hiding content. I could describe it but you can see what’s what at http://www.hireacamera.com/. Just click the “Resources” link at the button and watch the text appear.

    Now, I consider this to be cloaking but I want to know what others think. As we don’t allow commenting on our blog (unfortunately I just don’t have the time to moderate posts) I’ve started a thread at http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=1323546 with a poll. Let me know what you think. :)

    SEO news blog post by @ 1:55 pm

    Categories: Uncategorized
    Tags: ,

     

    November 20, 2008

    Cutts On Google

    Matt Cutts did a great interview with Mike MacDonald from WebPronews. The discussed Google in 2009 and answered a lot of questions that I know I’ve heard from a number of clients and confirmed a few things I believed to be true (mainly Matt’s comments on sub-domains near the end).

    The video covers personalization (will it kill search results and SEO). The future of SEO and how we need to expand into other areas including usability and conversion optimization, Flash and video ranking and sub-domain and how they can be used and black hat SEO. Matt answers the often-asked question: do sub-domains work better than files in a site and when?

    I won’t repeat everything from the video – that would be redundant. It’s a 10 minute video and worth every minute of your time. Enjoy …

    SEO news blog post by @ 2:30 pm


     

    September 23, 2008

    Google Shuffle?

    When I launch my browser (Firefox) it starts with 4 tabs. The first three are the major engines with “seo services” in the query just so I can keep close tabs on how we’re doing. The 4th is another Google datacenter with the same information. Yes, I’m that obsessed. It also gives me a close watch on what’s going on at Google – I can constantly see any time a minor adjustment is underway.

    When I walked in the door this morning, our Director of SEO Services Daryl Quenet asked me if I’d seen the results and who was up today. He was getting a different set of results than I had gotten just a short while earlier. After searching other phrases it became pretty clear – there’s a minor update underway. If fact, we have one client that in the duration of a call was in position 3, then 22, then 13 and then 6 (and it was about a 5 minute call).

    In the results for the competition for “seo services” I’ve admittedly been a bit disheartened with who we’re competing against lately. As I’ve noted previously on our blog, there was once a time when we were up against WeBuildPages for the #1 spot. That isn’t the case anymore and unfortunately, a lot of the sites now beating WeBuild have what I would consider to be “less that ideal” link strategies. To me, I’d almost rather be #2 in a solid competition against worthy opponents than #1 in a competition against sites that have sloughs of footer links and blogrolls. Basically, I’d rather be up against “real” linking strategies.

    Unfortunately, it appears that the newer algorithm (and it’s been this way for a while now) is favoring link strategies that go exactly against the best practices. I’m not going to name names here (you can check the backlinks of our competitors (and us too if you like) to find out who’s doing what – on maybe spend your time researching your own industry) but here’s some of what we’re seeing get results that they shouldn’t be:

    Paid Links:
    Ugh. There are numerous competitors out there who have bought links and are reaping the benefits. No matter what Matt and crew might say over at chez Google – they’re just not as good at devaluing them as we’re being told. One of the sites I was looking into has many paid links in obvious locations on irrelevant sites and is doing quite well with them. Now, I’m not saying go out and get yourself some paid links – it’s always a risky venture but this is definitely the area of biggest annoyance to me as we have no paid links simply because we’re not willing to risk our rankings and to watch sites climb into the top 10 with them, even after being reported, is annoying to those of us that have secured legitimate links with great effort and is hurting those that they beat out.

    Links On Client Sites:
    Alright, admittedly this is a tactic that I don’t love but I can’t really argue it. We tend not to put links on client sites. I personally find it to be in poor form to charge a client and then take a link from them HOWEVER there is a legitimate claim that this is advertising and giving credit where it’s due.

    Regardless of what side of the equation you’re on in that debate though, should these really count as backlinks? They’re not links given by the site owner as a vote, they’re default links put there by the party that will benefit. Google needs to find a way to discount these links much better than they are right now.

    Run Of Site Links:
    This is an easy one. If a link appears on every page of a site – it shouldn’t count. If it’s there for traffic, great but I can’t think of a single reason why a run-of-site link, any run-of-site link, should be legitimately counted as a vote. Even if the link is to a parent company – the link is not so much a vote as a disclaimer and should be treated as such.

    Widgets:
    This one might come right after paid links in my list of annoying links that shouldn’t, but do, seem to be working right now. One of the sites I’ve found has that majority of their links coming from a counter that links with an image to their site. From what I can see, they don’t even offer the counter on their site and thus – they likely (though not necessarily) have paid to have their link put in by the counter creator as a “sponsor”.

    In this case we have a paid link combined with a low quality, non-anchor text link (though the images to have alt tags) that it effective. This obviously shouldn’t be the case if what we’re trying to count are real, quality, vote-given links.

    And So …
    So what’s the purpose of this rant? Well, I know that people from Google visit our blog, I can see them in our stats and so my hope is that one of them will read this blog, take a look at how they’re counting backlinks and give credit where it’s due – to links worked for and earned by either providing valuable information, providing a valuable resource, or other such “tactics” that actually reflect a vote from one site to another rather than counting a default link with low value based on Google’s own guidelines and articulated philosophy towards the subject.

    And just to help things along I’m going to give a link to WeBuildPages for SEO services just to give them a boost. Now they just need to get their onsite optimization in place and perhaps we’ll once again be up against companies that should be in the top ten. ;)

    A Warning:
    Now some of you may be thinking, “Hey, these tactics are working so let’s do it !!!” If that’s your mentality then I warn you to do so at your own risk. Google is trying to get a better value system in place for links and eventually they will succeed. If you’re looking to only rank briefly then you might stand a chance but if what you want it to build a quality site that will withstand the ebb-and-flow of the algorithm over time (and I hope you are) then these tactics will eventually get caught and downward your site will tumble.

    We’re starting to see a very little bit of this in some cases (depending on which set of results we’re seeing right now Google settles on) but not enough. My hope is that Google will be able to pick these links up, give them the credit they deserve (none in most cases) and let the true links acquired in mine and other industries count as they should.

    SEO news blog post by @ 12:40 pm


     

    August 2, 2007

    An SEO Game

    I received an email this morning from Gareth Davies from GSINC (great last name by the way Gareth ;) In his email he let me know about a new SEO game that just came online. If you like SEO and/or you like boxing games, you’ll enjoy this one. You’ll battle all the scourges of SEO from the Hidden Text Kid right up to the Spam Lord himself.

    Good luck and may your white hat keep you protected. :)

    You’ll find the game (read: you’ll find the link bait) here.

    SEO news blog post by @ 12:42 pm

    Categories: Uncategorized
    Tags: , ,

     

    Level Triple-A conformance icon, W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
    Copyright© 2004-2013
    Beanstalk Search Engine Optimization, Inc.
    All rights reserved.