Below is what happened in search today, as reported on Search Engine Land and from other places across the web. From Search Engine Land: The History Of Google Places, All On One Page Maybe it’s my bias as a longtime fan/practitioner of local search and SEO. Or maybe it’s because…



Please visit Search Engine Land for the full article.

Search Engine Land: News & Info About SEO, PPC, SEM, Search Engines & Search Marketing

Maybe it’s my bias as a longtime fan/practitioner of local search and SEO. Or maybe it’s because I’m mentioned as one of the sources/contributors. But more likely it’s just that this is an important search reference document, and that’s why I think that anyone…



Please visit Search Engine Land for the full article.

Search Engine Land: News & Info About SEO, PPC, SEM, Search Engines & Search Marketing

Posted by jrcooper

This post was originally in YouMoz, and was promoted to the main blog because it provides great value and interest to our community. The author’s views are entirely his or her own and may not reflect the views of SEOmoz, Inc.

Despite what most SEOs will tell you, it’s not easy to create outstanding content that people will want to link to. So many “SEOs” make it seem like there’s a key on your keyboard that magically turns what you just wrote into something link worthy. In reality, it’s never that simple.

I'm not one to keep throwing mud at the wall until it sticks. You can continuously tell someone to go create exceptional content, or you can actually show them an example. Because, being the sensible person I am, I'd rather choose the second option, here are 10 fantastic examples of link bait and what makes them so spectacular.

Note: PA stands for Page Authority, LRD stands for linking root domains, and TL stands for total links. Also, I didn't include .gov, .edu, or any other pieces of link bait from SEOmoz besides the first one below. The same goes for .edu and .gov sites.

1. SEOmoz’s Search Ranking Factors – PA: 91. LRD: 2,727. TL: 17,750.

What is it?

This is an article on the different search ranking factors by your very own SEOmoz. With yearly updates, 132 contributors, and roughly 20 pages of content on one URL, this gives information on what search engines are measuring in order to rank websites. If you call yourself an SEO and you haven't read this, then I suggest you quietly open this up, read it twice, and hope no one noticed.

Why was it so successful?

This link bait was highly successful because of the visualizations, depth of content, the trust of the contributors involved, and the website it was hosted on (SEOmoz is very influential in the SEO community). While the content is great, there's also a far greater reason for all of the links: SEOmoz didn’t do the promotion; the contributors did. In the future, this should be your go to example for creating a collaborative study.

2. Xkcd's Radiation Dose Chart – PA: 88. LRD: 988. TL: 5,863.

What is it?

This is a chart about the radiation a person absorbs from various sources. This is a great way to visualize how much radiation poisoning you can get from things like airplane flights, x-rays, and CT scans.

Why was it successful?

Being able to visualize something that's hard to grasp is one of your best friends when creating link bait. By using tiny blocks to put together just how many "siverts" are in these different sources of radiation, this chart makes this concept very easy to understand. The key takeaway here is that if you can get people to understand your content, and actually read it all, the likelihood of them sharing and linking to it increases dramatically.

3. Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch – PA: 86. LRD: 631. TL: 9,149.

What is it?

If you ever need a guide on what seafood to choose based on where you live or travel, this is your go to place. You can choose to download eight different regional guides, with two of them also available in Spanish.

Why was it so successful?

The main reason this was so successful was because of the outright awesome information these guides provide. They’re updated regularly (most recently July 2011) and they’re free for anyone that wants them. It also doesn’t hurt to have a top notch interactive map to help you choose the guide best for you.

4. SEOBook’s 101 Link Popularity Tips – PA: 84. LRD: 723. TL: 2,843.

What is it?

Created by Aaron Wall & Andy Hagans, this is a list of 101 different link building strategies, and even though it’s over five years old, it still provides some of the best link building tips on the Web. To add a little humor, the last 30 tips are bad ways to build links.

Why was it successful?

Everyone loves lists. It’s that simple. It got traction in the right community, it’s easy to read, and it’s on a subject that people want to know about.

5. Mark Nottingham’s RSS Tutorial – PA: 83. LRD: 540. TL: 7,033.

What is it?

Published in 2005, this was and still is the go to resource to find out more about why your blog should be utilizing an RSS feed. It gives detailed analysis and can be translated to Brazilian and Portuguese (see links at the bottom).

Why was it successful?

When this was published, the post gave in-depth information on a relatively unexplored subject that people wanted to know about. It also provides ready-to-go snippets of code, making the content very actionable. On another note, one reason for its success that you might have noticed is the design of the website. There's no clutter and it's very easy to read.

6. OKCupid's Politics Test – PA: 82. LRD: 456. TL: 1,274.

What is it?

OKCupid, a free online dating site, put together a test on what your political views are based on what your answers are to each question. This is one of many tests featured on OKCupid's site.

Why was it successful?

People like personalized content, such as tests and quizzes. In this case, people like to see how they scored, and they want to compare their score with their friends (thus, they link to it asking others to do it and share their results). There's also a bit of controversy involved with politics (just a bit?), which never hurts in terms of link juice.

7. Yoast's WordPress SEO Guide – PA: 81. LRD: 701. TL: 2,642.

What is it?

This is an extensive guide to implementing SEO on the WordPress CMS created by Joost de Valk.

Why was it successful?

It's the go-to resource because it has the best information on this subject all in one place. It's as simple as that. The information is instructional and easy to understand, and it's helpful in areas that people want to know about. With a resource like this, people will often cite information in it, and with each citation comes yet another link.

8. SEJ's Social Media Infographic – PA: 81. LRD: 282. TL: 876.

What is it?

This is an infographic by Search Engine Journal on the growth of social media. This is a great visualization on the progress social media has made and what lies in the future according to statistical data.

Why was it successful?

In a nutshell, it's visually appealing. Putting such a great amount of raw data into an easy, understandable visualization is something I'd go out of my way to share. It also helps when it's initially displayed to a large audience (SEJ is a fairly popular SEO site if you didn't already know).

I'd also like to point out that although it may not have the sheer number of links some of the other pieces of link bait have, it's the quality of the links that count. This link bait got links from the Huffington Post, Reuters, and The Next Web.

9. WUIW's Water Conservation Tips – PA: 77. LRD: 347. TL: 1,536.

What is it?

This is a list of 112 different ways to conserve water. The tips are very short and provide quick, actionable information.

Why was it successful?

The first reason is because of each item's brevity. This list is quite easy to read and scan because each tip isn't a paragraph, it's a sentence. Another cool thing they did was highlight one specific tip out of every 10 or so. They enlarged the number, added a picture, and bolded the text. This puts emphasis on the specific item highlighted, and it's a great way to segment the list into something readable. Also, the post is listed in the website's navigation bar, making it easy to locate.

10. Thomson's Evolution of Music – PA: 77. LRD: 80. TL: 955.

What is it?

This is a visualization of how music has traveled over the past 200 years. As you play the timeline, new genres pop up around the world and you can see how they've moved and connected throughout the world.

Why was it successful?

Hmm. How wasn't it? If you aren't blown away, I'm sorry, because if this won't impress you, nothing will. The two main reasons it was successful are the quality of the visualization and the social share buttons on the page. Making it easy to share gets the page in front of more eyes, and more eyes means more links.

Yes, the link metrics show that it's not as successful as some of the ones above, but this is only because of how new this piece of content is.

Conclusion

So, what can we conclude about link bait from these 10 examples?

1. Get influencers involved.
2. Make it easy to understand.
3. Give away free stuff.
4. People love lists.
5. Choose a highly desired topic.
6. People like personalized content.
7. Establish it as the go-to resource.
8. Make it visually appealing.
9. Segment large lists to make them readable.
10. Use social share buttons.

Thanks for reading! Make sure you give this post a thumbs up if you enjoyed it! If you want to find out more about me, check out my link building blog and make sure you follow me on twitter.

Do you like this post? Yes No

SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog

Posted by Paddy_Moogan

I used to spend a lot of my time plowing through Google to find potential link targets for client websites. I still do this a lot but I've changed my approach a lot of the last 12-18 months to try and become a bit more efficient. I've changed my approach so that the first point of call when looking for link targets is lists.

Lists are awesome for link building because someone else has already done some of the hard work for you. If you can find good quality, curated lists of websites, then you can be reasonably sure that you have found sites that are good ones to get links from. You still want to run your own analysis and due diligence, but the end output is probably going to be a higher majority of quality sites than you would have gotten from pulling lists straight from Google SERPs.

I like to put link building techniques into processes which makes them easier to follow and easier to scale if you need to automate parts of it. The process I use can be broken down into the following -

1. Find your lists
2. Scrape together your master list
3. Filter and prioritise

I'll go through each of these in more detail to explain the steps for each one.

1. Find your Lists

There are multiple ways of doing this and there are probably more places to find them than you think. To make things a bit clearer, let's think about these "types" of lists, they are roughly in order of personal preference -

• Curated lists found on other websites
• Top x type lists found on other websites
• Public Twitter lists
• Good quality directories

There are more, but just these ones alone with give you enough link targets to keep you busy for a long time!

Curated lists found on other websites

For me, these are the best types of lists to find. They are hand curated which means that the quality of the list should be pretty good, usually they have also been curated by a subject matter expert who knows the sites in their industry well. I always try and find these first because they tend to give me the higher quality sites – albeit in low quantities.

My main method for finding these sites actually starts off very simple, it will be something like -

It really does start off that simple.

This can give me lots to get started with, just this search alone gave me a list of seven blogs curated by The Times, a list of ten law blogs from Cision and a list of employment law blogs curated by a professional lawyer. This was only taking a few from page 1 of the search results too, there were many, many more.

You can of course vary the types of searches you do, then you can go a bit deeper with some advanced search queries. Here is a quick example -

This search gave me some great results including this list from the Inner Temple and this curated list from a law firm.

Here are a few more that you can use -

• "list of * blogs" "uk law"
• "list of * websites" "uk law"
• list of uk law blogs inurl:resources

Garrett French also lists his method for link building with lists and some advanced queries on Citation Labs.

When I've found very high quality sites, I also tend to keep a note of them in my Chrome Bookmarks so I can easily find them again in the future -

You could use anything you want to do this really, for example you could use something like Evernote and attach the list to a project. At Distilled we also keep a record of link targets in Buzzstream which means they are easy to find again in the future for follow up or other projects.

Top x type lists found on other websites

This is a personal favourite, the quality can sometimes be a little dubious, but overall you will find pretty good quality websites. The great thing about these ones too is that they tend to be refreshed every year so lots of these lists exist.

Similar to curated lists, finding these can start off with something simple -

These returned lots of great results, one of which I'd class as a curated list from The Telegraph.

You can of course go a bit more advanced again and use some of the following -

• top * food blogs
• best * food blogs
• best food blogs inurl:links

There are so many of these it's unreal. I'd like to think they were slow down as people get bored, but quite frankly, they still work well for things like link bait!

Public Twitter lists

You need to do a bit of extra work to pull the websites out of these ones, but it's worth the extra effort and much of this can be automated. You can actually find these a number of ways. One of my favourites is this advanced query in Google -

Once you have found a list, you want to click on the "following" tab which brings up the people on the list rather than their tweets -

This brings you to a URL such as this one which (if you wanted!) you could scrape the usernames of the list members from. You could then scrape their profiles using something like Google Docs with Xpath and pull out their websites if they have them.

To help you with this task, I knocked together a very quick and dirty scraper in Google Docs which you can get a copy of here. It's not that robust but will do the job on up to 50 usernames quickly and easily. Make sure you are logged into your Google Account then click "Make a Copy" from the File menu.

Another easy way is to use something like Listorious which has a nice clean interface and pulls back Twitter lists based on your keywords -

As I said, there are loads of ways to find these lists. I tend to find that just searching for my keywords in Twitter search and finding influential people often leads me to lists of some sort. 

Good quality directories

I had to mention the D word at some point . Being honest, I don't use this one that much but it can be useful in some very niche industries where there may not be that many lists created by individuals. 

Luckily, it's super easy and quick to find a list of sites in some of the better directories. My first point of call is usually Dmoz. I try to ignore the fact that many categories these days are controlled by SEOs! You can find some really good niche sites on Dmoz, for example did you know there was an association of tea drinkers with a directory of member blogs? I found this via Dmoz!

There are a few other directories out there which are decent quality, but you'll probably find you get a lot more commercial and lower quality sites in the lists and will have to do some filtering later. 

A few more directories I'd take look at -

• Best of the Web Blogs
• Yahoo! Directory

Please don't dismiss the Yahoo! Directory without taking a look, there are some decent sites on there, for example on this list of photography blogs, which is quite extensive.

RIght, so now we have a number of places we can find lists. Next up is to collate these into our own master list so we can filter and sort to find our final list of link targets.

2. Scrape together your master list

Hopefully I don't lose too many of you now, I'm not going to ask you to build your own tools to do this. Whilst we are big believers in hacking together your own tools for various SEO jobs, there are some very simple plugins that can do this job for you. Having said that, if you can build your own scraper to pull in link targets – go for it!

Here are a couple of ways of pulling link targets from a page very quickly without building a tool.

Multi-links for Firefox

I love this plugin. It's a very handy tool for loads of stuff. In this case, we're going to use it to pull the URLs of the link targets in our lists into a spreadsheet. 

Lets use one of the examples I linked to above, say you wanted to pull the URLs of the websites in this list on The Telegraph -

Using Multi-links, you simply right click just above the first link, then drag the cursor down so all the links you want are within the red lines -

Keep pressing the right click button, then press the left click, then select "Copy URLs" -

You can then just paste it into your spreadsheet. Much quicker than going to each site and copying the URL! 

Extra Tip – this tool also allows you to open highlighted links in other tabs which can be very useful for link prospecting. However be careful, if you do not want this, make sure you keep hold of the right mouse button! If you release it, all tabs will open at the same time. Opening loads of tabs in Firefox at the same time can slow it down a lot – I've done it with over a hundred links before and crashed it.

If you are looking for something similar that works in Chrome, take a look at Linkclump.

Scrape similar plugin for Chrome

This nice little plugin takes away a lot of the hassle of learning things like Xpath and allows you to grab elements of a page which are similar to each other – such as links.

Lets use the same example as above and scrape the links from The Telegraph again. I simply right click on one of the links in the list and click on "Scrape Similar". I get the following list which looks accurate to me -

I can then export to Google Docs in the bottom right corner, easy!

For a more detailed look on using this plugin for link building, go and read Justin's post which gives a great step by step guide.

3. Filter and prioritise

At this point we should have a spreadsheet of link targets, which we have gathered pretty quickly using some simple search queries and a few plugins or tools. Now we need to filter, sort and prioritise. Chances are that you have ended up with a pretty big list of potential link targets, so you need someway of knowing where to start to give you a good return.

I know some of you will prefer to use Excel at this point, some will prefer Google Docs. So I'm going to cover both and show you how to quickly prioritise your link targets using some simple tools.

Filtering using Excel

This became a lot easier recently with the discovery of these SEO tools for Excel by Niels Bosma. There are loads of features you can use which are for onpage SEO analysis which you should definitely take a look at. For the purposes of this post, I've taken the following screenshot of metrics for link building which you can get -

For those of you who have never seen it before, here is a very quick snapshot of just a few of the other elements you can gather with the plugin -

Richard Baxter did a great post on the plugin and all the different features you can use, it's well worth a read over on SEOgadget.

Once you've gathered these metrics, you can start to filter and sort by whichever metrics matter to you. I tend to look for large numbers of social shares and then look at PageRank as a rough indicator. Whilst PageRank isn't perfect, it's still useful for filtering large sets of data.

Filtering using Google Docs

As much as I love SEO tools for Excel, I think I still prefer using Google Docs for gathering metrics on the fly. There are loads of posts for hacking together Google Docs to do various things (all with free downloads of the tools themselves) so I'd advise you go and take a look at those.

For this type of work, I tend to use a Google Doc which looks like this -

You can add loads more into here if you wanted, but I want to keep it simple for now. I like being able to pull Domain Authority straight into my spreadsheet which you can do with the free version of the SEOmoz API key.

Again, once you've got all your metrics, you can filter, sort and prioritise based on your key metrics. Then it's a case of starting to contact each site and giving them a good reason to link to you!

Final Important Step

Go and do something with this list! Importantly, ask yourself the following -

What reason can I give these people to link to me?

or

Why should these people give a sh*t about my site?

If you can answer these questions confidently, you have your hook ready to go and do your outreach.

That's about it for this post, I'd love to hear your feedback and comments below or feel free to tweet me if you have any questions or feedback.

Do you like this post? Yes No

SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog

Posted by randfish

Welcome to our first Whiteboard Friday of the new year. It's 2012 and we're going to kick it off by examining the intricacies that revolve around anchor text. Although, this may seem like a very basic topic, we are going to cover some lesser known aspects of anchor text that is sure to satisfy even our more advanced SEOs. Enjoy and don't forget to leave your comments below!

Video Transcription

Howdy, SEOmoz fans. Welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. Happy New Year. This is the first Whiteboard Friday of 2012, and today we're talking about anchor text, which could seem like a basic topic. But, in fact, there are a lot of intricacies that we should cover. Let's get right to them.

What I have drawn here is a web page, and it says, "I just found this great website on Portuguese cooks. You should check it out." Now, this, this text in blue with the underline, that links somewhere, and that link points to another page. Let's say it's a page over here, a very nice page on Portuguese cooks. It has some pictures on it. I don't know what it's got.

What it's saying to the engines is not only eye this page and this website, I'm voting for this other page over here, and I want to pass over some PageRank and link juice. I want to pass over trust. I want to pass over the domain diversity, whatever the signals, the keyword agnostics signals are, but I also want to say that I particularly like this web page about Portuguese cooks. That's what I think you, search engine, should interpret and take away from it.

Of course, this anchor text with the keyword embedded in it becomes a very strong signal to search engines, and as we all know, this is one of the strongest signals that Google and Bing interpret, Bing maybe even stronger than Google. Because of this, lots of people go down a path of trying to acquire links that say the precise keyword that they want.

Of course, this is a challenge because most natural links on the Web don't generally do this. They will say things like your brand name. They might say something about your site. They might use your personal name, if they're linking to a blog or something. But it's rare, it's uncommon that they might say "Audi 87 engine parts for sale" or "best deals on holiday gifts." These types of anchor texts, the things that people search for, longer phrases, in particular, are very hard to get as natural links, and this is one of the biggest reasons that gray and black hat SEO exist because manipulating the search engines by acquiring lots of links that have these keyword matches pointing to your page can, in fact, do a great job of ranking you up, at least temporarily until the engines catch up and do something bad to you or to the people linking to you.

What I want to cover is some intricacies around this, some details that you may or may not know about anchor text, and those include: Number one, multiple anchors from the same page "do not" provide more value. What I mean by this is if this page said I just found this great website on Portuguese cooks, you should check it out and a bunch of other text, and then it said Portuguese cooks again and linked over to this page, not helpful. It does not add additional value. There is no reason that you should be going, "Oh man, I wish I could get four anchor text match links from this web page." No, that's not going to help you.

Multiple web pages will help you, but if they're from the same domain, that's not nearly as valuable as if they're from different domains. That leads us to the next thing, diversity of anchor text, diversity of the source. The root domain source of the anchor text links provides the strongest benefit, meaning if you can get lots and lots of websites, not just individual web pages but different unique web domains, linking to you saying "Portuguese cooks," chances are good this web page will do very well.

Number three, the fluctuating anchor text. This is something that people talk about all the time. They don't just talk about diversity of the link location across different domains, but they talk about diversity of anchor text itself, meaning, "Oh, I should have one that says Portuguese cooks and one that says Portuguese cooking and one that says cooks from Portugal. I'm going to vary up the anchor text a lot."

I'm a little skeptical about this, not because it's not potentially useful, and it should be a natural thing if you're going out and doing white hat types of link building and inbound marketing. But because the primary reason I think most SEOs do this is so as to not trigger pattern matching problems in the engines, meaning if every website that's linking to me says Portuguese cooks, that's suspicious, highly suspicious. That suspiciousness is the feature that people are trying to prevent.

So, I'm not so sure whether this fluctuation is all that important unless you're doing manipulative types of link building, in which case SEOmoz is not all that helpful for you. So, you're probably not watching this video.

Number four, the first anchor text in the HTML of a page is what Google counts, Bing as well. This was discovered on SEOmoz a couple of years ago. We ran some tests about it. We published the results. There was a lot of skepticism. I think Debra Mastaler from Alliance-Link wrote about it and said, "Hey, Matt Cutts, would you please confirm this?" And he did. He came out and said, "Yeah, that's how we interpret it".

So, basically, here's what's going on. If you see a web page and it says this website is awesome, it features highlights of great Portuguese cooks, now look, these two links are both pointing to the same page. I don't know why my handwriting is so terrible in 2012. I hope that repairs itself soon. That means not that the website is going to get credit for the anchor text website and the anchor text Portuguese cooks, but rather they are going to consider the anchor text website and ignore Portuguese cooks.

It's very frustrating, and something that you should think about when you're doing internal linking and you say, "Oh, yeah, we should optimize this link." If it's already in your menu, if it's already at the top of the page somewhere in a side bar and that's higher up in the HTML code, then that is what the engine is going to count. So, do be aware of that and same goes for anything that you're earning externally. If you've got the optimized anchor text for your website in the footer of the blog post where it talks about the author, Rand Fishkin is the CEO of SEOmoz, an SEO tools company, but I've already link to SEOmoz's home page somewhere in the blog post above, that "SEO tools company," that's not going to help anything. That's going to be discounted by the engines.

Number five, internal anchor text, meaning anchor text that comes from your own site, your own pages, it does help. It helps a tiny bit. You can see a little bit of benefit from that. I wouldn't focus on it too much because tiny is a small amount. That's probably the most obvious statement I've ever made on Whiteboard Friday. But nevertheless, tiny, small amount, therefore don't focus too much energy on this. Link naturally, internally. Link in such a way that people think your site is good, and, yeah, if you can work in your anchor text, great.

External anchor text is where it really helps, meaning websites that are not your own linking to you. That's where you really get value from anchor text, and you do need to worry about this a little bit. There should be some manual efforts, some efforts, whether that's guest posting and blogging, whether that's sponsoring an event, whether that's getting your biography featured or something like that, getting a badge embedded somewhere or a graphic embedded somewhere that links back to you in a certain way, you do need that anchor text link match. So, working on at least a little of that external anchor text is definitely worthwhile.

Number six, if a link uses an image, like this, so check out this awesome site on Portuguese cooks, and then here's a little screen shot of the Portuguese cooks website, and this is linking over. I tried to illustrate that in blue. This does not have any anchor text. It's an image. So what could the anchor text possibly be?

The answer is they use the Alt attribute. The engines use the Alt attribute that becomes the anchor text usually, not always. If there is no Alt attribute, sometimes they'll use something like the surrounding text, and you can sort of see and feel that association. Sometimes, they'll use page titles. Sometimes, they won't use anything, but they'll have weaker signals from those other areas of the page, that kind of thing.

If you are embedding images and you're linking back to yourself or you're getting links from somewhere or you're linking out to someone, you want to help them out, use good Alt attributes that describe the page that you're linking to. This is a great best practice just in general for screen readers and usability reasons. It's also good for search engines.

Then finally, number seven, no surprise, surrounding text can matter as well. Just as in this example where we said, "Hey, Portuguese cooks is mentioned right before the image," the engines may be using surrounding text of an anchor, particularly where the anchor itself doesn't have much value or context.

If something says, "Click here, you'll find some great information about Portuguese cooks," the engines might sort of glance around the page and look at the sentence, parse the paragraph, try and understand, "Hey, what do you think they're talking about here? What seems relevant?" This is one of the reasons why you can see that people who have earned not necessarily great anchor text can rank very well for keywords because it's often talked about. That topic is talked about when their website is talked about, and it becomes a brand association thing. It becomes a contextual association thing. This is a helpful thing to think about if you are earning links and you can't control the anchor text. Maybe, at least, you can get them to mention what you do somewhere near the link.

All right, everyone. I hope this edition of Whiteboard Friday has been helpful. I look forward to discussing more details about anchor text in the comments and hope to see you again all next week for another edition of Whiteboard Friday.

Happy New Year! Take care.

Video transcription by Speechpad.com

Do you like this post? Yes No

SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog

Posted by Cyrus Shepard

Google's Superior SEO Strategy

Notice anything odd about your Google+ profile? Does it rank incredibly well in Google’s search results for your own name?

Colleagues note that their G+ profile now outranks other online identities that they’ve worked for years on. My own Google+ profile, just 5 months old, ranks #2 for my name. It now ranks higher than both my Twitter and Facebook profiles, even though I use those services far more often.

Profiles aren’t the only thing ranking. Individual Google+ posts frequently appear in search results as well.

Ranking for people’s names is one of the Holy Grails of search, like Amazon ranking for every book in print. With 7 billion people in the world, ranking on the first page for even a small portion of these is lucrative territory.

As search and social focus more on the individual, the war over names has begun.

How has Google won so much real estate on their own search pages in such a short period of time? Do they cheat? No, not really – more on this later. Google wins by employing really smart Search Engine Optimization techniques – the same SEO practices available to any online business.

For Facebook especially, this is a sensitive issue. Facebook actively prevents Google from crawling most of its content, allowing big G to access “Fan” pages, but limiting information from regular profiles. Now that Google+ has entered the social game, this policy puts Facebook results at risk of dropping in rankings and losing search real estate.

I often work with websites and startups wanting to build SEO features into their platform. If I were to build a social media service for SEO domination from scratch, I would build it exactly like Google+.

Here's the takeaway: Use SEO to your competitive advantage, no matter your niche.

1. Incentivize Inbound Links

Not long ago, Google started displaying author photos in its search results. In order to display a photo, Google asks authors to add links from their webpages to their Google+ profile. This creates potentially millions of high quality links from the world’s most influential online publishers, all pointing to multiple Google+ profiles.

Twitter and Facebook both benefit from similar links, but never before has a social media service offered such an incentive.

Google's SEO Tactic: Require Authors to Link to their Google+ Profile

2. Internal Linking

One thing noted about Google+ when it was released was just how easy it was to be in lots of circles, or add lots of people to your own. People who struggled on Twitter for years to build up 1000 followers, suddenly found themselves in 2000 or 3000 Google+ circles, seemingly overnight.

Google’s strategy to connect everyone on the planet also makes for good internal linking. Following more than 1000 people may not create a practical social experience, but it creates a great SEO opportunity. The more your content is shared in other people’s streams and profiles, then the more your content is crawled, indexed, and deemed important by search engines.

Google's SEO Tactic: Encourage Large Circles Counts

3. Lots of Indexable Content

My public Google+ profile contains a wealth of information, all visible to search engines, including:

• Biographical Information
• Full Text of Public Posts
• Photos
• Links to people who have added me to their circles
• Everything I have ever +1’d

Compare that to my Twitter account – limited to 160 characters of biographical information, or my Facebook profile, which reads like an auto-generated pamphlet.

Consider how a search engine sees these pages. Take a look at the source code of any Google+ profile or use a tool SEO-browser (a search robot simulator) to see how many words appear on each profile.

• Facebook – 275 Words

• Twitter – 491 Words

• Google+ – 2621 Words

Google structures content to provide a wealth of information for search engines, to index and serve in search results.

Google's SEO Tactic: Search Engine Friendly Profiles

4. On-Page Optimization

Google+ makes it easy to share posts from others – a feature much like retweeting on Twitter or reblogging on Tumblr. These Google+ posts frequently show up in search results as their own entries.

As the title tag is one of the most important aspects of on-page optimization, Google wisely choose longer, more descriptive title tags. Compare these to the shorter title tags offered by Facebook and Twitter, which often run no longer than three unique words.

Here’s the title tag to 3 different posts, all by Rand Fishkin. Each of these posts is indexed by Google.

• Facebook – Yesterday, I…
• Twitter – Twitter / @randfish: Running test of Google+’s …
• Google+ – Rand Fishkin – Google+ – Shocking how many of the folks featured in this post form…

Which do you think ranks better for a query with “Rand Fishkin” in the search?

Google's SEO Tactic: Descriptive Title Tags

5. User Generated Content

Every post I’ve ever written on Google+ has been public. As a result, every post has been crawled and indexed by Google search. The privacy settings on the profiles are simple, intuitive and encourage openness.

The big green button screams, “Pick me! Pick me!”

Most Twitter posts are public by default, although unless a tweet becomes famous the 140 character limit prevents most tweets from reaching the definition of “rich” content. Facebook, in contrast, only shares posts from fan pages with Google, and not posts from regular profiles.

Google's SEO Tactic: Encourage Public Sharing

6. Show Google+ Author Profiles in Search Results

The first 5 items on this list represent SEO tactics that anyone can use, but in a way #6 belongs to Google alone. By linking to Google+ profiles in search results, they create an advantage that no other social media service can duplicate.

Is Google “cheating” by favoring it’s own property? Some say yes, but on the other hand, is there a more relevant result? To me, it makes more sense to connect my author profile with the website that actually hosts the content, such as my profile on SEOmoz.

This demonstrates the power of rich snippets. Since Google introduced author photos in search results, webmasters have scrambled to get their mug included – the idea being that rich snippets of all kinds increase click-through rates. The question is, are we increasing the CTR of our own website, or Google+?

Google's SEO Tactic: Creative Rich Snippets

What Can You Do?

Except for #6 above, most of these techniques are available to any online business. Google has found a way to create large amounts of search engine friendly content, and do it at scale.

The lack of diversity this creates in Google's search results is troubling to some. Google risks turning into McGoogle, where every result and every page looks the same. With any luck, more companies will adopt strong SEO strategies to raise themselves in search.

Now that the adoption of Google+ has hit 62 million users and growing, expect to see far more Google+ in your search results soon.

Do you like this post? Yes No

SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog

Posted by randfish

Near the end of December 2011, we ran a survey on this blog asking consultants and agencies of all sizes and geographies to contribute their pricing models and cost structures. I'm pleased to share the results of that survey in the hopes that it will give everyone in the search industry a better idea of the range of fees and the services provided.

Obviously, this data is imperfect – SEOmoz is not a professional data surveying firm and our only tool was a basic list of questions on SurveyMonkey. That said, I'd be surprised if a professional surveyor found dramatically different data – there was enough participation to receive a trustworthy sample size and firms provided their personal/contact information (many of which I recognized while digging through the responses, but obviously will not be sharing identities publicly), which means we likely did not receive intentionally manipulative/misleading information. The data is provided below in three formats – first, some personal, high level takeaways from the survey, next an infographic from the great folks at AYTM Market Research and finally, a dump of the responses in CSV and Excel formats (without any personally identifiable info).

(via AYTM's infographic)

Do note that while 600+ responses were received, we've elected to share data only from those regions with 10+ responses (490 total), which include:

• United States – 287 respondents
• United Kingdom – 76 respondents
• Canada – 34 respondents
• Australia/New Zealand – 28 respondents
• Germany/France/Italy/Netherlands – 34 respondents
• India – 31 respondents

Many countries had 1-3 respondents and while we certainly appreciate those contributions, it's our feeling that sharing this data could actually be misleading/non-productive as a single firm/consultant could dramatically skew the results. All the information in this blog post, the infographic and the Excel data dump are split into those 6 regions.

Top 9 Takeaways

These are my personal takeaways from the data:

1. Hourly SEO Costs Vary Across Countries, but $76-$200/hour is Most Common
   With the exception of India (the only developing region that was well-represented in our survey), hourly costs of $76-$200 (representing three responses) covered 50%+ of all firms. It was highest in Australia/New Zealand at 62%, followed by 58.1% in the US and 56% in Canada. Granted, this is a wide range, but it provides the answer to a frequently-asked question from those seeking SEO services for the first time.
   _
2. By-the-Project Pricing is Popular and Most Commonly $1,000-$7,500
   70.1% of respondents said they offer project-based pricing (the most common pricing system selected in the survey). 43% of consultancies were represented by the four price ranges: $1,001-$1,500, $1,501-$2,500, $2501-$5,000 and $5,001-$7,500. Obviously, there's a wide variety of prices here, not surprising given that the types of projects offered may be quite diverse. 
   _
3. Monthly Retainer Pricing Has the Widest Distribution
   While both hourly and by-the-project rates do have a wide range of pricing, monthly retainers are certainly the most distributed of the price questions asked in our survey. The two most common were $251-$500/month (13.8%) and $2,501-$5,000/month (11.3%).
   _
4. The Death of Hands-On SEO Has Been Greatly Exaggerated
   There's been plenty of hand-wringing over the past few years from both bloggers and SEO clients complaining that consulting firms don't provide enough "hands-on" help. Yet, in the survey, 88.5% of respondents said they offer "hands-on SEO changes to sites" and 79.1% provide "hands-on link building." Clearly, hands-on help is still very popular.
   _
5. Inbound/Organic > Pure SEO
   Pure "SEO" consultants/agencies may be fading as broader "inbound marketing" services firms (offering SEO, social, content, conversion, analytics, etc) rise. The data showed 150 respondents (25%) saying they were primarily focused on SEO while a slightly greater number, 160 (26.7%), offered a broader range.
   _
6. Web Design/Development Agencies do a Lot of SEO
   The third most popular type of respondent was a web design/development agency offering SEO services. In the UK, these types of firms were better represented than either SEO-focused providers or broader inbound/organic firms.
   _
7. Employees:Clients/Month Ratio is Between 1-2
   The screenshot below takes advantage of SurveyMonkey's crosstab feature, which enabled me to look at the number of monthly active clients broken down by the quantity of employees a consulting firm has (you can only choose 5 responses at once, but the data's still revealing). 
   
   _
8. Vast Majority of Consultants Service Small-Medium Businesses
   This may seem mathematically obvious, but it's not always top of mind at many of the marketing conferences I've attended, nor the blogosphere in general. A disproportionate amount of attention is often focused on top brands, but in the world of consulting, most firms service relatively small businesses. Even those who do serve larger businesses (perhaps aspirationally) often offer services to small and medium businesses. 41% of respondents offer consulting to small, hyperlocal businesses, e.g. the restaurant around the corner.
   _
9. Though Project-Based Pricing is Most Popular, the Majority of Consultancies Also Offer Monthly Retainers and Hourly Rates
   Early in my SEO career, project-based pricing seemed relatively rare (though quantifying this is hard since no formal surveys I'm aware of collected this info). Today, it was the top response, offered by 70% of the participating firms. Monthly retainer pricing was next, offered by 60%, followed closely by hourly rates (55%).

I'm certain others perusing the data will find other interesting takeaways (hope to read some of those in the comments).

Infographic from AYTM

Many thanks to the team at AYTM for putting together the following graphic representing the data in the survey across the 6 regions with more than 10 respondents. The image below shows a sample of their work and links to a larger version here on Moz:

Feel free to use/embed the larger, linked-to version, but please do provide credit back to AYTM and this post (nofollows are fine – just want to make sure folks are getting the right data source)

Data Dump Files

I've made two files available from the survey data for those interested in looking at the raw figures in more depth:

1. Excel file with responses broken out by the 6 regions – download
2. Unfiltered summary of responses to all questions – download

The individual results contain personally identifiable information, and even without the emails/company names, the details of location, services,  pricing, etc. could be used to determine an individual consulting firm's identity. Given that we promised anonymity when launching the survey, I felt that providing this data, while valuable, wasn't appropriate. If you have specific filters you'd like to see applied, please let us know in the comments and we'll try to make that happen.

Many thanks to everyone who participated in this survey. In the next few months, SEOmoz will be launching a redux of our 2010 Industry Survey, which will hopefully provide even more detailed information across all parts of the search, social and inbound marketing fields. Stay tuned!

Do you like this post? Yes No

SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog

SEO Book.com

SEO Book.com

SEO Book.com