Wednesday, August 27, 2014

excellent-seo-article-from-jlh-marketing-microsoft-google

At the root of this situation is a concept very irksome to me. SocialChorus was reportedly contacted by Matt Cutts about their strategy of getting bloggers to write about brands but not requiring nofollows on any related coverage. According to Google, if you are being compensated in any way for writing a story, you should use “nofollow” on any links to the site being covered. Not doing this runs afoul of their guidelines. Stay with me here, because this is ridiculous. If you reach out to a blogger and give them a free trial of your product, and they choose to write a story about how much they loved that product, they’re supposed to know to add a nofollow link to the link they place back to your site so that others can buy the product that they tried and loved. And if they disclose they received the product for free, but that the review is not influenced in any way? According to Google, that’s paid linking and it’s bad. - See more at: http://jlh-marketing.com/marketing-101-microsoft-google/#sthash.RATTivuZ.dpuf
At the root of this situation is a concept very irksome to me. SocialChorus was reportedly contacted by Matt Cutts about their strategy of getting bloggers to write about brands but not requiring nofollows on any related coverage. According to Google, if you are being compensated in any way for writing a story, you should use “nofollow” on any links to the site being covered. Not doing this runs afoul of their guidelines. Stay with me here, because this is ridiculous. If you reach out to a blogger and give them a free trial of your product, and they choose to write a story about how much they loved that product, they’re supposed to know to add a nofollow link to the link they place back to your site so that others can buy the product that they tried and loved. And if they disclose they received the product for free, but that the review is not influenced in any way? According to Google, that’s paid linking and it’s bad. - See more at: http://jlh-marketing.com/marketing-101-microsoft-google/#sthash.RATTivuZ.dpuf
Below is a very good article that I suggest you read.


At the root of this situation is a concept very irksome to me. SocialChorus was reportedly contacted by Matt Cutts about their strategy of getting bloggers to write about brands but not requiring nofollows on any related coverage. According to Google, if you are being compensated in any way for writing a story, you should use “nofollow” on any links to the site being covered. Not doing this runs afoul of their guidelines. Stay with me here, because this is ridiculous. If you reach out to a blogger and give them a free trial of your product, and they choose to write a story about how much they loved that product, they’re supposed to know to add a nofollow link to the link they place back to your site so that others can buy the product that they tried and loved. And if they disclose they received the product for free, but that the review is not influenced in any way? According to Google, that’s paid linking and it’s bad. - See more at: http://jlh-marketing.com/marketing-101-microsoft-google/#sthash.RATTivuZ.dpuf

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

moz-link-echoes-link-ghosts-NOT-correct

The Moz Blog whiteboard video about link echoes and link ghosts is 100% different and completely opposite to any test results I have ever seen. When I say "not correct" I mean different to any test results I have ever seen.
I like Rand and he is super intelligent however I think he is totally wrong about this.


I have worked on about 30+ cases this year where a website was #1 and good backlinks were removed and I have done extensive testing on this topic.  In fact I have created a database of great backlinks that Google likes and I have made a site #1, then taken the links away and pointed them to a different site and the first site drops like a rock and the new site with the good backlinks went to #1.  This only took 6 weeks to happen.
Of course I only do this for testing purposes and we follow all Google guidelines.
100% of the time when great backlinks are removed within 2-8 weeks the rankings drop like a rock.
E.g. #1 goes to #35 because they lost the good backlinks.

All I can say is I have not seen one single case of Link ghosts ever, and I have done hundreds of tests on this topic. It is very odd to me because I am certain Rand Fishkin is one of the top 10 best SEO experts in the world.  So it seems really weird to me that my test results are completely opposite to Rand's test results. The only explanation I can think of (it is a long shot) is somehow Rand's tests leaked and Google found out about them.
It is a known fact and Google has confirmed they like to play ranking games and confuse SEO's if they can. The more a SEO expert criticizes Google the more unfair mystery penalizes you may receive.


Why Website Owners Should be Very Angry at Google

Update: 8-15-14
From Comments:
What a mess. I don't understand Google's stance of 'just clean it up when they're done'. Why should a site owner have to clean it up? How many good links will be hidden in that disavow file with 20,000 others and mistakenly get removed? Who has time to sort through 20,000+ links when they're trying to run a business?

The article I wrote below is accurate and now we see the SEO industry and Google receiving another black-eye, the only winner is the "evil spammers".
I wish senior Google executives would consider this and make some policy changes to improve the terrible situation we are currently dealing with.

This perception is an issue in an already ‘black-eyed’ industry.


Below was written on 5-3-14
Google has caused a huge problem by creating a new industry called Negative SEO.
Most web site owners do not even know what a good backlink is, or what a bad backlink is, they have no idea whatsoever.  This is made even worse by the fact that Google is not very good at deciding what a natural link is and what is an unnatural link.  Google will penalize a website and not even tell web site owners which backlinks they do not like, Google asks the web site owner to guess.  Hello Google ... your policy is ridiculous and is just making the situation worse.
Frankly, we see Google make many mistakes penalizing innocent web sites and letting terrible spam web sites go free and clear.  Today Matt Cutts put out a video about how obvious most paid links are, so why can't Google do a better job then?  I could email Google all day long with obvious paid links and Google misses many thousands of them, yet they need to go and penalize innocent sites.  Perhaps if Matt Cutts could clone himself Google would do better, or how about firing any Google employee that penalizes an innocent website?  This seems fair to me, Google's incompetent employee ruins an innocent website owner's business life and Google terminates that defective employee.  You know and eye for an eye.

Now many website owners are afraid to give out any links as they think Google will make a mistake and unfairly penalize them, or they are emailing other web site owners that gave them a merit based natural backlink that Google likes asking to have it removed.
This is very frustrating to the few people like me that really understand what is happening.  Most people are clueless and so confused by Google they do not know what to do.

I do not understand why website owners are not so angry at Google that they are not trying to start some protest activities against Google.

I have talked and emailed with many website owners who are victims of SEO Sabotage. Please understand that this can happen to anyone, all that has to occur is a competitor of yours hires a company like this:

http://negativeseoguy.com


I have also seen cases where an ex SEO company did this to a website owner in order to punish the website owner for firing the SEO company, and I have seen cases where both a competitor and an ex SEO company committed SEO sabotage against a website.  And silly Google still tries to claim this is not even possible ... bullshit

Monday, August 18, 2014

Yelp is Useless and their Review Filters Stink

Update 8-18-14
Yelp still has the same serious problems and defects I mentioned below, the part that is really frustrating is how arrogant Yelp is.  Even if you send them proof that they can not tell a fake review from a real review they will still not fix any of their defects.  Yelp remains a useless website, and their review filters are worse today than they were a year ago. Please click on the following link to see another example of how terrible Yelp is.

Please look at some real HTP Company Reviews, that Yelp does not show at all.


Thursday, August 14, 2014

how-to-tell-if-google-penalized-your-website-taken-out-of-google-index

How does a webmaster know if Google has penalized their website?  Nowadays Google has many different types of penalties.

So I want to start out with the most serious penalty and explain how you can detect this level of penalty.  Then over time I will explain different types of penalties, and if it is really a penalty or not.   Sometimes it could be another site stealing your content and Google indexing (put into Google results) the stolen content and not properly indexing the original content owner.

So let's use some real world examples to explain how this works.

1. MyBlogGuest.com was penalized by Google several months ago.  They are still penalized, and how do I know this for certain?
Because if you do a Google search for myblogguest.com they do not show up in the Google search results at all.  Also if you check the Google cache you see this:


MyBlogGuest.com shows a PR4, however it is not as it is taken completely out of Google.
Google will also send a message about the penalty to this site Google Webmaster Tools.
So if the site is not in the Google cache and not in the Google index then it has no PageRank no matter what the little green bar shows, it used to have PageRank before Google penalized it.
The reason you want to perform both tests is that sometimes Google does not show the site in the Google cache, when it really is.  So if it is not showing in the Google cache and the site is showing in the Google search results when you do a search like xyz.com then the site is safe and okay.

Example #2:
EliteConnections.com

When we run the exact same two tests on this site we see the exact same results as example #1.
This is the most severe penalty Google can give you, and it may take 1-2 years before Google takes it off, if ever.
We also know that Google sent an email to the owner of this site via Google Webmaster Tools (GWT).


Now let's look at example #3, of course it cannot be the same or SEO would be too easy.
hiphopmobiletones.com

This site is not in the Google cache and not showing in the Google results.
However no message was sent by Google to the website owner's webmaster tools.

Why?
Because Google made a mistake and please do not be surprised, Google makes many thousands of mistakes daily.
This site is a victim of having its content stolen and Google indexed the site that violated copyright laws, and the real owner and creator of the original content is screwed and his site is not in Google at all. 

The site stealing all the content (scrapping) is in Israel and the name of the site is
SimilarSites.com

You can write this guy and he will take your stolen content down.  My question is why has Google not penalized this evil doer's site after it has been reported multiple times for over two months.  Yet Google has done nothing ...


Friday, August 08, 2014

online-password-manager-increases-SEO-productivity

Using a good simple online password manager will help your productivity and this also applies to Search Engine Optimization (SEO) and marketing in general.

Everyone I talk with has 10, 20, 50+ different logins and passwords.  E.g. Websites, GoDaddy, Gmail, Banks, Google Adwords, PayPal, Bill Payments, Fidelity, SEO tools, etc.

Nowadays you should have a complex password that is different for each account you login to.

Password managers store all your passwords in an encrypted database that only you can access to prevent them from being stolen. For even greater identity protection, Online Password Manager stores your passwords in a secure password vault in the cloud. Even if your computer is hacked or you accidentally download malware, scammers will not be able to get to your passwords because they are not on your computer.
How does one manage this and check their logins and passwords from from any device from anywhere in the world?

The answer is:

www.OnlinePasswordManager.org 

We also own www.OnlinePasswordManager.com and it forwards to the .org