DISC Inc

long-tail keyword

# Many people link to social sites from their blogs and websites, and they rarely put 'nofollow' on their sites. Most social sites, on the other hand, started putting by default 'nofollow' on all external links. Consequence? For example, bookmark your new site 'example123.com' at 'stumbleupon.com'. If you google for 'example123′, stumbleupon.com page about it (with no content but the link and title) will be on top, while your site (with actual content) that you searched for will be below. Imagine what effect this PageRank capitalization has when you search for things other than your domain name! # Each site and blog owner is contributing to this unknowingly and voluntarily. Do any of these look familiar? social bookmarks Most blogs and sites have at least few of these on almost every single page. Not a single one of these buttons has 'nofollow', meaning that people give a very good chunk of their site's importance to these social sites (hint: importance that you give to these buttons is importance taken away from other internal links on your site). Most of social sites however, do have 'nofollow' on a link pointing back to peoples sites after users link to them for being good. Conclusion, people give them a lot of credit on almost every page, while these sites give nothing in return. (Two 'good' sites among these, that I know of, are Digg that does not have 'nofollow', and Slashdot that tries to identify real spam and puts 'nofollow' on those links only. There are probably few more.) # This can be easily prevented, and PageRank can be re-distributed, in no time! Solution is very simple. 'Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.' If you have a WordPress blog (as millions of internet users do), download plugins Antisocial and Nofollow Reciprocity. First one puts 'nofollow' on above buttons, second puts 'nofollow' on all external links pointing to 'bad' sites. If you are using some other blogging app

The Disconnect in PPC vs. SEO Spending Posted by randfish on Tue (10/21/08) at 12:21 AM Paid Search Ads There's a big disconnect in the way marketing dollars are allocated to search engine focused campaigns. Let me highlight: Not surprisingly, search advertising should continue to be the largest category, growing from $9.1 billion in 2007 to $20.9 billion in 2013. - Source: C|Net News, June 30, 2008 OK. So companies in the US spent $10 billion last year on paid search ads, and even more this year. How about SEO? SEO: $1.3 billion (11%) - Source: SEMPO data via Massimo Burgio, SMX Madrid 2008 According to SEMPO's data, it's 11% for SEO and 87% for PPC (with another 1.4% for SEM technologies and s turn to Enquiro: Organic Ranking Visibility (shown in a percentage of participants looking at a listing in this location) Rank 1 - 100% Rank 2 - 100% Rank 3 - 100% Rank 4 - 85% Rank 5 - 60% Rank 6 - 50% Rank 7 - 50% Rank 8 - 30% Rank 9 - 30% Rank 10 - 20% Side sponsored ad visibility (shown in percentage of participants looking at an ad in this location) 1 - 50% 2 - 40% 3 - 30% 4 - 20% 5 - 10% 6 - 10% 7 - 10% 8 - 10% Fascinating. So visibility is considerably higher for the organic results. What about clicks? Thanks to Comscore, we can see that clicks on paid search results has gone down over time, and is now ~22%. Conclusions: SEO drives 75%+ of all search traffic, yet garners less than 15% of marketing budgets for SEM campaigns. PPC receives less than 25% of all search traffic, yet earns 80%+ of SEM campaign budgets. Questions: * Why does paid search earn so many more marketing dollar

Well - the result is clear. From these 4 pages Google managed to pick the page with valid css and valid html as the preffered page to include in it's index! Ok, it might be a bit early to see if the four pages in the test eventually appear in Google but on first glance it appears Google spidered the pages, examined them, applied duplicate content filters as expected, and selected one to include in search engine results. It just happens that Google seems to prefer the page with valid code as laid down by the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium). The W3C was started in 1994 to lead the Web to its full potential by developing common protocols that promote its evolution and ensure its interoperability. What is the W3C? * W3C Stands for the World Wide Web Consortium * W3C was created in October 1994 * W3C was created by Tim Berners-Lee * W3C was created by the Inventor of the Web * W3C is organized as a Member Organization * W3C is working to Standardize the Web * W3C creates and maintains WWW Standards * W3C Standards are called W3C Recommendations How The W3C Started The World Wide Web (WWW) began as a project at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), where Tim Berners-Lee developed a vision of the World Wide Web. Tim Berners-Lee - the inventor of the World Wide Web - is now the Director of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). W3C was created in 1994 as a collaboration between the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), with support from the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) and the European Commission. W3C Standardising the Web W3C is working to make the Web accessible to all users (despite differences in culture, education, ability, resources, and physical limitations). W3C also coordinates its work with many other standards organizations such as the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Wireless Application Protocols (WAP) Forum an

Google; You can put 50 words in your title tag, we'll read it Blurb by Shaun Anderson Note - This is a test, testing Title Tags in Google. Consider also Google Title Tag Best Practice. We recently tested "how many keywords will Google read in the title tag / element?" using our simple seo mythbuster test (number 2 in the series). And here's the results, which are quite surprising. First - here's the test title tag we tried to get Google to swallow. And it did. All of it. Even though it was a bit spammy; HoboA HoboB HoboC HoboD HoboE HoboF HoboG HoboH HoboI HoboJ HoboK HoboL HoboM HoboN HoboO HoboP HoboQ HoboR HoboS HoboT HoboU HoboV HoboW HoboX HoboY Hob10 Hob20 Hob30 Hob40 Hob50 Hob60 Hob70 Hob80 Hob90 Hob11 Hob12 Hob13 Hob14 Hob15 Hob16 Hob17 Hob18 Hob19 Hob1a Hob1b Hob1c Hob1d Hob1e Hob1f Hob1g Hob1h Using a keyword search - hoboA Hob1h - we were surprised to see Google returned our page. We also tested it using - Hob1g Hob1h - the keywords right at the end of the title - and again our page was returned. So that's 51 words, and 255 characters without spaces, 305 characters with spaces, at least! It seems clear Google will read just about anything these days! ************** Update: Qwerty pointed out an interesting fact about the intitle: site operator in Google. Google results with the intitle: command…..results as expected. But next in the sequence returns the following, unexpected result….. Google results with the intitle: command So what does this tell us? Google seems to stop at the 12th word on this page at least when returning results using the intitle: site operator. Another interesting observation. Thanks Qwerty. ************** We're obviously not sure what benefit a title tag with this many keywords in it has for your page, in terms of keyword density / dilution, and "clickability" in the search engine results pages (serps). 50+ words is certainly not best practice! When creating your title tag bear in