Google engineer Matt Cutts on how-to-rank-well in searches

[NancyHill]

YouTube - Google's Matt Cutts | How to Get Better...

A great, short interview with Google engineer Matt Cutts on how-to-rank-well in searches.

I think it's always interesting to hear the facts straight from the source.

[InternetMarketingIQ]

I trust about 60% of what comes out of his mouth.

[halfpoint]

Originally Posted by NancyHill

I think it's always interesting to hear the facts straight from the source.

It is, if the source has a reason to tell the truth.

Think about it - The business of Google is based on being able to deliver the most relevant results to their visitors.

What would Google possibly gain from telling people how to effectively "game" their search engine?

It's like a bank having a sign up saying, "Dear Robbers, the keys to the vault are hidden over here!"

Rather than listening to Mr Cutts, I prefer to listen to results. Funnily enough, a lot of things Mr Cutts says do not work actually work incredibly well.

[nicholl08]

Originally Posted by InternetMarketingIQ

I trust about 60% of what comes out of his mouth.

I trust about 20%

[bigcat1967]

Rather than listening to Mr Cutts, I prefer to listen to results. Funnily enough, a lot of things Mr Cutts says do not work actually work incredibly well.

I agree with that - not w/ Cutts. He was fooling us with the noFollow attributes and then we found out that googlebot was following the NF links anyway.

[Vasquez11]

pretty neat, thanks for the video

[Daniel McGonagle]

I agree with Pat Jackson, InternetMarketingIQ and the others who do NOT rely on spokespeople for their SEO truths...

You could write the worlds best 1000-word post, on-page-SEO it to the hilt, bookmark it, tweet it syndicate it to Facebook and ping.fm and still not see the #1 ranking you are looking for.

Real world realistic results matter and how you get those results is the TRUTH!

[Mike Anthony]

Bleh. You guys protest too much. Theres nothing wrong with listening to Google when they talk about their search engine. The only problem comes into play when they start telling YOU what YOU should do.

I always want to break out in laughter when Matt talks about how to get backlinks. This video has probably the worse example ever. A plummer ranking by participating on stumbled upon. Thats pretty hit or miss.

But on the subject of how their search engines work they have been pretty reliable with the occassional expected misdirection at times,

They said they don't follow nofollow and they don't
They said you need backlinks and you do.
They said they use LSI and I've proven that they do
They say title tags and meta descriptions can have an impact and they do

Theres no big conspiracy as long as you don't expect them to tell the whole truth and nothing but.

So in fact the only big thing that most people can point to is link spam. Their algorithm doesn't do half of what they claim but then they just about admitted as much when they recently announced they were working on new algorithms to correct that.

If tomorrow Matt Cutts came out and said that forum backlinking was a great way of getting backlinks we'd be all over that as proof that its a good backlinking strategy. Those of us who sell services, ebooks or other backlinking products would all put the quote into our sales page. The only real thing IMers have against Google is their stand on spam. Valid point because they are pretty hypocritical with some of those stands but it doesn't make them totally unreliable in everything else.

Thats just an emotional conclusion that is quite illogical.

[harvz111]

the usual basic stuff, i guess there are facts on what he said

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Daniel McGonagle

You could write the worlds best 1000-word post, on-page-SEO it to the hilt, bookmark it, tweet it syndicate it to Facebook and ping.fm and still not see the #1 ranking you are looking for.

Real world realistic results matter and how you get those results is the TRUTH!

Well certainly if it isn't backed up by actual results who would go for it? However in all my time doing SEO I don't recall Google EVER indicating that any of those things would give you top ranking. In fact I have never heard Google claim anything to do with the number one result for a search term. Thats the nature of big corporations

Look my biggest problem with Google is not that they lie. I think they are pretty consistent. Like any company they are not going to headline that they don't do everything they want to do well. They pretty much give you the company line of how they would like for the search engine to work and then try to get it there. When Matt says build great content and get noticed guess what? He isn't lying. Thats how it works in his corporate world. State farm can get natural backlinks. So can CNN. So can all the pretty boys (so to speak). Thats his world and PLENTY Of sites
rank like that.

Does Google care that Big companies with marketing departments can generate enough buzz to get thousands of natural backlinks automatically more than the little guy can? Of course not.

[jazbo]

Matt will always just state those basics. The problem is you could do exactly what he advocates until the day you leave this earthly existence and still not get any traffic.

Listen to Matty boy but remember, he is Google's batfink.....

[limochicago]

It is really interesting and useful. I also fallow Matt Cutts interviews in youtube.

[kkchoon]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

They said they don't follow nofollow and they don't
They said you need backlinks and you do.
They said they use LSI and I've proven that they do
They say title tags and meta descriptions can have an impact and they do

Yes, I agree!

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

If tomorrow Matt Cutts came out and said that forum backlinking was a great way of getting backlinks we'd be all over that as proof that its a good backlinking strategy. Those of us who sell services, ebooks or other backlinking products would all put the quote into our sales page. The only real thing IMers have against Google is their stand on spam. Valid point because they are pretty hypocritical with some of those stands but it doesn't make them totally unreliable in everything else.

Google won't tell you any kind of techniques that would potentially used by marketer or webmaster to abuse their result!

What Matt Cutts will always confirm is - the pure white hat method! Even we follow 100% pure white hat techniques, there are still good chances we being filtered by Google.

Always test the result and outcome, if Matt tell you something, most probably is right, but they won't give you the whole picture!

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by kkchoon

, most probably is right, but they won't give you the whole picture!

That sums up my position better than I wrote it. As for white Hat I really can't blame them. Some times you have to step back and look at the wider picture not just your own interests. Do you really want every search result dominated by xrumer runs?

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

That sums up my position better than I wrote it. As for white Hat I really can't blame them. Some times you have to step back and look at the wider picture not just your own interests. Do you really want every search result dominated by xrumer runs?

If we all relied on "white hat link building", we'd be on page seventy-eleven for every keyword.

And, you'd not be selling a list/submission app in your signature.

10K profiles or a list selling 25 links or 200 links with easy submission app. It's all the same, in principle, Mike. The only difference is quantity.

So please, for the love of everything good and right, get off your high horse of "White hat is the way to go and everything else is just ____ (fill-in-the-blank with the diatribe of the day)".

Warmly,

Brandi

[azmom07]

thanks for sharing this.

[WarriorJ]

Well I don't trust all of what matt cutts say... For one his department deal with taking out websites, not ranking them.

[bigcat1967]

They said they don't follow nofollow and they don't

Wait a sec - it's a fact that googlebot still follows the NF attribute. So when Cutts is talking about how they don't follow - the dude is telling a fib.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by digidoodles

If we all relied on "white hat link building", we'd be on page seventy-eleven for every keyword.

And, you'd not be selling a list/submission app in your signature.

Of course I would be because if you took the time to actually read I've already point blank stated that in the beginning you need an equalizer. You aren't getting me in any duplicity digi. My position has been consistent and stated several times. The ultimate goal of any long term webmaster is to have a site that gets natural links AFTER it has used self backlinking to get noticed. Thats just commone sense to those who know SEO. The power of a High authority site actually referring to you in an article and not in comments (split by scores of posters) is obvious but locking yourself off with limited thinking is your choice. and no 10,000 by a bot does not equate to 100. If you don't understand the relationship of quantity to abuse then you probably think email spam was outlawed because the local plummer sent 40 people an email. It was the mass nature of email spam that brought down direct email advertising.

So of course I would sell step one and two. That doesn't mean I can't talk about step three no matter how it might offend you especially since if all you can do is drop links you will forever be looking over your shoulder for


A) the INEVITABLE change that wipes out a ton load of your backlinks
B) .The next guy that buys xrumer in your niche.

As for the whole horse and diatribe thing. Don't be silly. Theres nothing good or right about getting all upset because you can't look around at the wider world of SEO. Because i can see the value of both grey hat (in the beginning) and white hat down the road doesn't mean I think everything is fill in the blank that isn't white hat. Engage some logic before you come in swinging. I'd be ripping my own product.

Every time someone posts something from Google a bunch of people always get upset because they know Google isn't out for their techniques and they can't imagine how to incorporate some white hat into their strategy.No need to get upset with others over your own lack of imagination.

Me? I'll curse the bear and do some thing he doesn't like but If have to deal with him for years to come I'm going to learn to give him some honey too so I can get what I want even when he's looking. Grey hat AND white hat = Basic ordinary common sense.

but hey whatever works for you. Its kind of funny that you think that no one would be anywhere with white hat link building. Ton loads of people have built hubs that people link to naturally. Check the serps sometimes. Grey hat is good but you are sucking the kool aid too hard if you think thats all there is or can be.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by bigcat1967

Wait a sec - it's a fact that googlebot still follows the NF attribute. So when Cutts is talking about how they don't follow - the dude is telling a fib.

Good if its a fact then you can point us all to the evidence. Link please.

[turbohips]

Any documented proof that xrumer really works? I've heard about it hear and there but then nobody can show proof. I'm interested in purchasing if it does do everything that it claims. Then back linking would be so much easier.

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Of course I would be because if you took the time to actually read I've already point blank stated that in the beginning you need an equalizer. You aren't getting me in any duplicity digi. My position has been consistent and stated several times. The ultimate goal of any long term webmaster is to have a site that gets natural links AFTER it has used self backlinking to get noticed. Thats just commone sense to those who know SEO. The power of a High authority site actually referring to you in an article and not in comments (split by scores of posters) is obvious but locking yourself off with limited thinking is your choice. and no 10,000 by a bot does not equate to 100. If you don't understand the relationship of quantity to abuse then you probably think email spam was outlawed because the local plummer sent 40 people an email. It was the mass nature of email spam that brought down direct email advertising.

So of course I would sell step one and two. That doesn't mean I can't talk about step three no matter how it might offend you especially since if all you can do is drop links you will forever be looking over your shoulder for


A) the INEVITABLE change that wipes out a ton load of your backlinks
B) .The next guy that buys xrumer in your niche.

As for the whole horse and diatribe thing. Don't be silly. Theres nothing good or right about getting all upset because you can't look around at the wider world of SEO. Because i can see the value of both grey hat (in the beginning) and white hat down the road doesn't mean I think everything is fill in the blank that isn't white hat. Engage some logic before you come in swinging. I'd be ripping my own product.

Every time someone posts something from Google a bunch of people always get upset because they know Google isn't out for their techniques and they can't imagine how to incorporate some white hat into their strategy.No need to get upset with others over your own lack of imagination.

Me? I'll curse the bear and do some thing he doesn't like but If have to deal with him for years to come I'm going to learn to give him some honey too so I can get what I want even when he's looking. Grey hat AND white hat = Basic ordinary common sense.

but hey whatever works for you. Its kind of funny that you think that no one would be anywhere with white hat link building. Ton loads of people have built hubs that people link to naturally. Check the serps sometimes. Grey hat is good but you are sucking the kool aid too hard if you think thats all there is or can be.

Mike, I'd love to continue to engage you.. and my old self probably would have. But, as I've gotten older, I've decided that I am going to try and only have productive or fun conversations. And, the continuation of this one, would be neither.

I'll close with something you can relate to, being a male, perhaps (I couldn't resist):

Two gals go to a plastic surgeon for boob jobs.

One wants to look "natural". She goes for the C cup.

The other wants to grab the attention of men (whether good or bad, she just wants the publicity.) She goes for the FF cup.

After their surgeries, the C cup gal and FF run into one another and begin discussing their surgeries and their choices. C cup contends that she's natural because, after all, FF cups really are an anomaly in nature and any kind of attention from those would be short-lived, because everyone knows they are fake and artificial and really of no use and eventually people will stop paying attention to Ms. FF. C cup contends she looks natural and guys always like a natural gal.

Two years later, C cup gal and FF cup gal run into each other at another bar and C cup gal notices that FF cup gal is still getting all kinds of attention, even though she kind of looks freakish. C cup gal wants that same kind of attention and she figures she has a couple of choices if she wants that same attention:

1. Go full barrel to FF's.
2. Stay away from where Ms. FF plays and go for the "smaller" crowds.

Wanting to retain her natural appearance, she opts for #2, always knowing there's more attention waiting for her, should she change her mind.

Moral of the story: Sometimes your cup has to overflow in order to really know what you have or to get what you want.

Warmly,

Brandi

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by turbohips

Any documented proof that xrumer really works? I've heard about it hear and there but then nobody can show proof. I'm interested in purchasing if it does do everything that it claims. Then back linking would be so much easier.

Tons of us have documented proof that it works. But, I'm not about to show you to prove a point. Buy a service that sells Xrumer and try it for yourself.

Humor me:

What's the difference in building 100 links with xrumer or 100 links by hand?

What's the difference in building 10K links with xrumer or 10K links by hand?

Therein lies your answer, my friend. Therein lies your answer.

Warmly,

Brandi

[WarriorJ]

Originally Posted by turbohips

Any documented proof that xrumer really works? I've heard about it hear and there but then nobody can show proof. I'm interested in purchasing if it does do everything that it claims. Then back linking would be so much easier.

Yeah xrumer does work for those who know how to use it. Xrumer is just a tool like hammer. Whether you build or destroy your house/website depends on how you use it.

[turbohips]

Brandi,
Again no doubt it works but I'd like to see the results first hand. Someone just PM'ed me with their affiliate link and a sample site but I wasn't impressed as it only had 700 links showing up. Not what I had figured this software was limited to. Perhaps someone with a better example would push me over the edge.
Bruce

[paulgl]

One thing people need to think about.

Is Matt Cutts the only google person in the world?

Is google a small company?

How many of you have gone into a chain store, asked some
questions, then realized you need to ask more people before
you can get all or even the right answer?

Google is a huge, huge operation, and it's search engine cannot
possibly be controlled or figured out by one person. Impossible.

Depending on which way the wind is blowing, who knows?

Take what he says, go hmmmmmm, chew on it, and move on.

Too many people drink the whole glass of Matt Cutts kool aid.

I say do a sniff test first. Sometimes it may not work out exactly
as said.

Paul

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by turbohips

Brandi,
Again no doubt it works but I'd like to see the results first hand. Someone just PM'ed me with their affiliate link and a sample site but I wasn't impressed as it only had 700 links showing up. Not what I had figured this software was limited to. Perhaps someone with a better example would push me over the edge.
Bruce

No better first hand evidence than to try it yourself.

$49/ 10K run.

That should satisfy your curiosity.

And even if it only resulted in 700 links indexed, that's 700 links in a matter of moments.

I'd do that in a heartbeat.

Warmly,

Brandi

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by digidoodles

Mike, I'd love to continue to engage you.. and my old self probably would have. But, as I've gotten older, I've decided that I am going to try and only have productive or fun conversations. And, the continuation of this one, would be neither.

I'll close with something you can relate to, being a male, perhaps (I couldn't resist):

Two gals go to a plastic surgeon for boob jobs.

Yeah I know what you mean. As I've gotten older I instinctively know when a reply is going to have zero value. That happened right as I read you were about to go into a story about boob jobs so I just stopped reading.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by digidoodles

What's the difference in building 100 links with xrumer or 100 links by hand?

What's the difference in building 10K links with xrumer or 10K links by hand?

Therein lies your answer, my friend. Therein lies your answer.

Yep. and that answer is pretty obvious. You can't build 10,000 links by hand in a short period. You have to automate it and whenever you do no matter what you kid yourself the following things are the result

A) you leave a large footprint.
B) link spam becomes obvious to your competitors who can and will in many niches report you.
C) you increase the pressure on webmasters to lock down their site because just a few hundred people using those tools can simulate the same amount of activity that 10,000 or more manual submitters would
D) you end up leaving a greater percentage of your backlinks in lower quality areas on page

So yeah therein lies the answer. You couldn't have put it better. Huge difference.

Theres been plenty of people that have come on these boards and reported their site disappeared from rankings for months at a time after doing it as well. So we can't leave their testimony out if all that can be appealed to is anecdotal evidence. So it works for some and not for others.

I have no doubt that in some niches it works quite well my point that was missed is that NOBODY outside of marketers would want to use a search engine that had all searches dominated by xrumer runs. Google has every right to go after it and the large footprint makes it easy.

Plus its a short sighted strategy because if theres enough savvy webmasters in your niche they either

up the ante and build thousands of more links and you spark a mass spam linking "arms race"

or

They report you to Google precisely as Google just asked them to last month and your site takes a tumble.

Meanwhile we can all play ostrich. The more people using those tools the faster the day will come when those links are entirely discounted. Thats exactly what happened with email spam. Marketers had to abuse it with server side tools that could blast thousands of emails per minute but some people can't learn from history so go for it.

Only problem is the xrumer evangelists will probably end up ruining it for all of us. even if you use tools like that the rational thing to do would be to keep it on the down low not actively inspire more and more marketers to use them until search engines HAVE to do something about backlinking locations that the tools exploit..

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Yeah I know what you mean. As I've gotten older I instinctively know when a reply is going to have zero value. That happened right as I read you were about to go into a story about boob jobs so I just stopped reading.

Great! At least we know what to say to get you to shut up

Warmly,

Brandi

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by digidoodles

Great! At least we know what to say to get you to shut up

Warmly,

Brandi

When did that happen?

[Vasquez11]

I dont get why this had to turn into a HUGE discussion?

The guy was simply stating a few things to get better SEO. Why is everyone bashing on him for?

This video isnt labled "HOW TO GET HIGH RANKING IN 24/HOURS" It's labled How to get better visibility.

Anyways, its a GOOD VIDEO for what it really is.

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

When did that happen?

BOOB JOB BOOB JOB BOOB JOB

Warmly,

Brandi

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by Vasquez11

I dont get why this had to turn into a HUGE discussion?

The guy was simply stating a few things to get better SEO. Why is everyone bashing on him for?

This video isnt labled "HOW TO GET HIGH RANKING IN 24/HOURS" It's labled How to get better visibility.

Anyways, its a GOOD VIDEO for what it really is.

We're not bashing him.

We're simply offering some advice: don't take what Matt says as gospel.

Listen to him and test. You can't argue with what works for you and for others. And if it's opposite of MC then, who's right?

Warmly,

Brandi

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by digidoodles

BOOB JOB BOOB JOB BOOB JOB

Warmly,

Brandi

and when did the growing older thing happen again?

[digidoodles]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

and when did the growing older thing happen again?

I said FUN or productive.

Not everything fun is productive. And not everything productive is fun

We have 10 kids total. I may have grown older. But I'll never grow up

Warmly,

Brandi

[GeorgR.]

Google "revealing" how to rank well..an oxymoron. Let me guess, he simple says "make pages for users, not for search engines"? Right?