On vs. Off Page SEO... Who Wins?

[Thomas Michal]

I know everyone will have their own opinion on this but I am now getting heavy into seo and am wondering which is more important in your mind and why, thnx.

[Mike Anthony]

They are not fighting

[CityCliq]

I think a productive way to think about this is in terms of fucntionality.

Onsite SEO is a framework, the nuts and bolts that make your site visible to search engines. This is your metadata, img alt text, h1s, good content, etc.

Offsite SEO is how you gain the reputation that gets you relevance (staying power) with search engines. Backlinks, mentions by reputable sites, etc.

You need to be monitoring and nurturing both regularly.

[Tom Goodwin]

Originally Posted by Thomas Michal

I know everyone will have their own opinion on this but I am now getting heavy into seo and am wondering which is more important in your mind and why, thnx.

It is not that simple.

On-page optimization can be pretty much maxed out (or at least close to it...you could keep on adding internal interconnected pages which would help but the added benefit would be minimal).

Off-page optimization has no upper limit. It can go on forever.

Let's say you have Site A with great on-page SEO, and Site B, that contains the keyword but has pretty crappy on-page SEO.

With the same off-page SEO, Site A will clearly win. But, if Site B continually adds more and better backlinks than Site A, at some point Site B will pass Site A. In fact, no matter how good Site A's on-page SEO is (let's call it "perfect"), it cannot prevent Site B from passing it in Google if Site B continues to improve its backlinks above and beyond Site A.


Of course, in the real world, on-page SEO is fairly easy, in that you can do an "OK" on-page SEO job pretty quickly. Not great, not perfect, but "OK", and likely better than the majority of other slobs out there. So, even if one focused more attention on off-page SEO, it is so easy to do at least an "OK" job of on-page SEO that anyone who doesn't do at least that is missing the ball.

Tom

[shulink]

They are both very important. You should do both. Content is the most important of all. I haven't do any off page SEO on one of my sites, but still getting a lot of traffic from Google just by writing a lot of content.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin

Off-page optimization has no upper limit. It can go on forever.

Let's say you have Site A with great on-page SEO, and Site B, that contains the keyword but has pretty crappy on-page SEO.

With the same off-page SEO, Site A will clearly win. But, if Site B continually adds more and better backlinks than Site A, at some point Site B will pass Site A.

That would be true if you do not see good content as part of on page SEO. However its false since you really can't do that. There are sites all over the web that become known for great content and that leads to people linking to them.

Warrior Forums is a GREAT example but since its community based that point might be missed. There are a TON of blogs that get links within their niches nonstop because of good content. The SERPs are FILLED with first place pages that are there on the power of content and people linking to them. So - no - long term a site that includes great content and becomes known for it is not going to automatically be outstripped its going to get links. That content is happening on the page. I might understand what you mean in terms of what we refer to as optimization but its misleading because content is on page and it does affect SEO.

Thats why any question or answer that pits on page against off page is way off. They are not fighting. They go hand in hand.

[Tom Goodwin]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I might understand what you mean in terms of what we refer to as optimization but its misleading because content is on page and it does affect SEO.

I understand what you are saying with respect to it being on-page, and can no doubt affect SEO (although IMHO, not that much in the very short term as it takes time to build up that sort of "vibe"..or unless you have good $$ in ad spend), my point was based upon what what I believe is the most common usage of the term on-page SEO. Then again, if you do something on-page, to attract backlinks, should that properly be considered on-page SEO, or is it off-page SEO as the intent is to drive the backlinks/off-page SEO, and the effect is to drive the backlinks/off-page SEO.

Tom

[bonusdays]

Which is more important? Off-page hands down!

I can create a simple HTML page with nothing but a picture on it and do NO on-page optimization and still outrank any and all pages that have great on-page optimization.

If I do a superior job of off-page I can overwhelm ANYTHING you do on-page.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin

I understand what you are saying with respect to it being on-page, and can no doubt affect SEO (although IMHO, not that much in the very short term as it takes time to build up that sort of "vibe"..

I agree COMPLETELY. The if I build it they will come is not workable in most cases. In the beginning and in the short term of any new or unestablished site you are going to have to get out there and prime the pump and promote your site.

My only point to what you wrote was the long term projections. Google and pure White hatters have not come up with a reasonable way for a new site's content to get noticed. Not anything that can work in any consistent basis regardless of high quality.

[yukon]

Originally Posted by bonusdays

Which is more important? Off-page hands down!

I can create a simple HTML page with nothing but a picture on it and do NO on-page optimization and still outrank any and all pages that have great on-page optimization.

If I do a superior job of off-page I can overwhelm ANYTHING you do on-page.

So, you can create a simple html page with only an image & no keywords?

No Title-keyword, no inurl:keyword

Keywords are on-page seo!

Can you show me a page that ranks for only an image (nothing else), you can have all the backlinks you need? I just want to see the page.

[Tom Goodwin]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I agree COMPLETELY. The if I build it they will come is not workable in most cases. In the beginning and in the short term of any new or unestablished site you are going to have to get out there and prime the pump and promote your site.

My only point to what you wrote was the long term projections. Google and pure White hatters have not come up with a reasonable way for a new site's content to get noticed. Not anything that can work in any consistent basis regardless of high quality.

I'm good with that. In terms of the short term, I also think it is a bit more than just getting noticed. With the value that Google places on anchor text links (or just having a decent percentage of matching anchor links), if you are going the natural route, in addition to getting noticed, you have to get in a good amount of solid anchor text links. If my mother had a blog (she doesn't), and she found an interesting article on getting rid of fleas on dogs, she would likely just link to it with no anchor, or if an anchor, with something like "interesting article" as the anchor. sure, link juice helps, but you gotta get in the right anchor text link once in awhile The longer tail keyword the harder it would seem, of course those tend to rank easier so perhaps that is off-setting.

[Tom Goodwin]

Originally Posted by yukon

So, you can create a simple html page with only an image & no keywords?

No Title-keyword, no inurl:keyword

Keywords are on-page seo!

Can you show me a page that ranks for only an image (nothing else), you can have all the backlinks you need? I just want to see the page.

New contest?

[webmaster.9839]

Both are important but i will give some extra votes to offpage because its time taking

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by bonusdays

I can create a simple HTML page with nothing but a picture on it and do NO on-page optimization and still outrank any and all pages that have great on-page optimization.

.

Nice bluster but it isn't real world especially the part about "any and all pages". Frankly I'd call your bluff - You can't do it in any truly competitive niche without buying a ton load of high quality links and even if you did your page wouldn't hold in that position

I pick the keyword and you do it. I'll then admit you are an SEO guru

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin

New contest?

I'll put up some of the prize money.

[abnation]

Both are equally important...
You can view it this way though: Can you achieve a top position with content alone? Nope (many examples here). Can you achieve a top position with clever off-site SEO alone. Yep (again, many examples here).

It gets a lot easier if both are worked together, into a coherent system!

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by abnation

Can you achieve a top position with clever off-site SEO alone. Yep (again, many examples here).

Again please show us one.

No keyword on the page, in the title or anywhere else. You said there are many examples. I'm calling it - show one.

I'm getting the sense that alot of people don't know what on page SEO really is. We spend so much time talking about backlinks they think thats all there is.

[Tom Goodwin]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Again please show us one.

No keyword on the page, in the title or anywhere else. You said there are many examples. I'm calling it - show one..

Keyword: click here

#1 Adobe


Google




The term:
"click here" appears 0 times
"click" appears 1 time as part of the word "clicking"
"here" appears 0 times

[nPromote]

Its basically 20% onpage and 80% off page. both are equally important. but above all what any search engine really admires is, the content updation.. if you are updating your site regularly, then you do have an edge over some one who is only doing off-page optimization

[abnation]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Again please show us one.

No keyword on the page, in the title or anywhere else. You said there are many examples. I'm calling it - show one.

I'm getting the sense that alot of people don't know what on page SEO really is. We spend so much time talking about backlinks they think thats all there is.

Hey Mike,

who's talking about that? I didn't mean that literally. Of course there will be some keywords in the title... I was clearly talking about off-site SEO out-weighting on-site SEO and vice-versa. I can give you examples of crappy content (all those MFA sites) outranking better optimized pages, with better internal link structure and anything else that goes with on-site SEO, purely by backlink count.

[theseoguys]

Tom....you just stole my example! Ask Adobe if they optimized for click here. Zero zilch nada. Their site might be built right as far as search engine friendly. But nothing on page whatsoever for that term has been optimized. Likeiwse, keyword density. Doesn't mean a thing, unless you are keyword stuffing which could hurt you. Another reason I love that example for keyword density arguements. Therefore, off page wins every time, hands down.

[Tom Goodwin]

Oh the power of anchor text backlinks

Originally Posted by theseoguys

Tom....you just stole my example! Ask Adobe if they optimized for click here. Zero zilch nada. Their site might be built right as far as search engine friendly. But nothing on page whatsoever for that term has been optimized. Likeiwse, keyword density. Doesn't mean a thing, unless you are keyword stuffing which could hurt you. Another reason I love that example for keyword density arguements. Therefore, off page wins every time, hands down.

[Linknirvana]

For me both on page and off page optimization.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin

Keyword: click here

#1 Adobe

Tom we all know about that one. Everyone who does any SEO learns that probably in the first month of learning. I took him at what he said " here" meaning at Warriors.

Yep (again, many examples here).

I almost posted that same example here to show a point.

and its this

The "click here" example has been used to deceive more people than anything else in SEO. It has no relationship to what anyone here can do. Nada. Adobe got that because of an INSANELY high amount of very high PR backlinks that you can't buy in a million years. I mean that literally. because of the prevalence of PDFs that link can be found on HIGH PR pages in government sites, thousands of Universities, Millions of business sites, even the white house's sites on and on and on.

No one here even with millions of dollars could duplicate that. Its a tremendously deceptive example that has zero relationship to anyone In Internet marketing. In fact it shows how important on page SEO is because you can see what it takes to get ranking for a term without on page SEO.

We need to stop pushing this nonsense that fools people like theseoguys into claiming that that proves that Links beats on page "every time" hands down. That example is an exclusion people can't match.

[SoundsGood]

Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin

Off-page optimization has no upper limit. It can go on forever.

What's the truly best way to learn about off-page optimization?

I'm pretty strong with on-page optimization, but I could use some learnin' when it comes to off-page.

Thanks.

[Tom Goodwin]

That's fine Mike, but you shouldn't be saying that it can't be done. I shouldn't say no one can Deadlift 900 pounds if 1 person can.

Time to get on ranking one of my pages on one of my "authority" sites with no keyword on the page :-) Maybe I can see if I can get a page to rank for "Mike Anthony" :-)

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Tom we all know about that one. Everyone who does any SEO learns that probably in the first month of learning. I took him at what he said " here" meaning at Warriors.

I almost posted that same example here to show a point.

and its this

The "click here" example has been used to deceive more people than anything else in SEO. It has no relationship to what anyone here can do. Nada. Adobe got that because of an INSANELY high amount of very high PR backlinks that you can't buy in a million years. I mean that literally. because of the prevalence of PDFs that link can be found on HIGH PR pages in government sites, thousands of Universities, Millions of business sites, even the white house's sites on and on and on.

No one here even with millions of dollars could duplicate that. Its a tremendously deceptive example that has zero relationship to anyone In Internet marketing. In fact it shows how important on page SEO is because you can see what it takes to get ranking for a term without on page SEO.

We need to stop pushing this nonsense that fools people like theseoguys into claiming that that proves that Links beats on page "every time" hands down. That example is an exclusion people can't match.

[facetheace]

if you only do on-page seo and have good, regularly updated content, you can def get a top ranking on long tail keywords

[jointaldc]

off page, but you should always still focus on both

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin

That's fine Mike, but you shouldn't be saying that it can't be done. I shouldn't say no one can Deadlift 900 pounds if 1 person can.

Tom please dont start with the lying again whenever you get stuck on an point you can't rebut. I said in context no one here can do it not that it can't be done by a major corporation. Like I said that whole "click here" thing is elementary SEO school stuff. Everyone knows it. I stated people here. IF you can contradict that then fine great. I'd like to see you run some xrummer on click here and bounce adobe out of its number one spot. Get to it. LOL.


Look the only people who try and blow up backlinks over onpage SEO are people heavily invested in promoting backlinking. they are always the ones that come trotting behind the "click here" example. Real SEOs would never pick one over another to emphasize The funnier thing about it is that it really isn't even a competitive term. LOL. Who wants to rank for "click here".

Sorry but the whole one against the other is just plain stupid. and the example of click here is just as silly. You might as well say that Neil Armstrong got to the moon so you can get their with a kite. No Imer has the rocket power to make the example a reality in their own business and only an idiot would try . So the point sticks and stands.

[theseoguys]

I agree Mike that it is an extreme example and could probably never again be replicated. Look at the other sites on page 1 with the same search term; quicktime, java, paypal, real player (does anyone still even use that?), winzip etc... All this example points out, is that Anchor text with inbound links, with a wide variety of quality, and quantity of those links, probably reveals the most important factor in the Google algorithm. Period.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by theseoguys

I quicktime, java, paypal, real player (does anyone still even use that?), winzip etc... All this example points out, is that Anchor text with inbound links, with a wide variety of quality, and quantity of those links, probably reveals the most important factor in the Google algorithm. Period.

What in the world are you talking about? Your period is broken

Several of those have the keyword click on the page and you just plain skipped over the number two site conveniently because it didn't suit your point. Clickhere.com comes directly after Adobe and is optimized for the term. So after the extraordinary example of Adobe that no one here could possibly match comes what - AN ON PAGE OPTIMIZED result. But you left that clean off your list? Why?

look The whole most important factor issue is nonsense. It has no practical use or importance. Its like looking at a mathematical equations (which Google's algorithm is) and wondering what part is more important. Take this example

6+ 4 = 10

which one is more is important in order to get to TEN the 6 or the 4?

What the? LOL umm don't you need both in that equation?

Now which insane person is going to try and rank a site with backlinks without putting in the keywords on their page? What freaking for?

So THERE IS NO MORE IMPORTANT. ONE DOES NOT WIN OVER THE OTHER

You use both all the time that you want to rank a site. the only possible use of having to choose is to tell newbies to concentrate one over the other and so often thats what they do because of these positions. Then They ask "why is my site not ranking. I've backlinked it with so many backlinks" and then you look on their page and they have done almost no on page .

Sheesh. Its like the twilight zone in here sometimes

[yukon]

The only bare bones (on-page seo) page I can think of, would be something like this site here "www . gainweight . org"

This site ranks #2 for "gain weight", the site has 2 pages indexed in Google SERP, an Index page & a privacy page.

Still I see a lot of on-page seo for this index page.

[theseoguys]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

What in the world are you talking about? Your period is broken

Several of those have the keyword click on the page and you just plain skipped over the number two site conveniently because it didn't suit your point. Clickhere.com comes directly after Adobe and is optimized for the term. So after the extraordinary example of Adobe that no one here could possibly match comes what - AN ON PAGE OPTIMIZED result. But you left that clean off your list? Why?

Well, to start with Google.ca never showed clickere.com. I was merely giving examples of sites, that have been around for years, that accidently ranked do to the nature of the phrase click here, because of the plugin or 3rd party nature of the software that was required at the time. The only site I left off was some currency conversion site.

We can skew the results any way we want, both of us to show our point. All I was trying to point out, is that a high volume of inbound links from qualitative and quantitative sources, using anchor text, seem to be one of the primary factors in ranking. And for the example used, there is no other evidence, to suggest otherwise.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by theseoguys

.

We can skew the results any way we want, both of us to show our point..

LOL you leave out clickhere.com and that several of the sites you mentioned have "click " on their page and you think I am skewing the results?


Absolutely hilarious. Ride on man. ride on.

[theseoguys]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

LOL you leave out clickhere.com and that several of the sites you mentioned have "click " on their page and you think I am skewing the results?

As I said...from MY source, google.CA, clickhere.com was NOT on the first page. I searched, glance, recorded, and posted. I left out one. Refer to the previous post on the purpose of the example. I am supposed to know that clickhere.com is relevant because it doesn't show in the rankings? Pardon my ignorance.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by theseoguys

As I said...from MY source, google.CA, clickhere.com was NOT on the first page. I searched, glance, recorded, and posted. I left out one. Refer to the previous post on the purpose of the example. I am supposed to know that clickhere.com is relevant because it doesn't show in the rankings? Pardon my ignorance.

even on the CA google site you skipped the second and third result that clearly have the word click in bold looking right at you. Just citing the facts man. Just the facts.

anyway now that we are on the same page (Search engine wise) can you see its not quite as cut and dry as you indicated?

[4morereferrals]

I know everyone will have their own opinion on this but I am now getting heavy into seo and am wondering which is more important in your mind and why, thnx.

Just as a reminder to Sybil who loves to derail the subject ...

Its very simple to test what google feels is more important.

Make 2 blogs on 2 different hosting accounts.

Blog 1 = On Page SEO for the test keywords - to the max and no Backlinks built.

Blog 2 = minimalist content - backlinked to the hilt - no keywords on the page - no On Page Optimzation whatso-ever.


To make things fair on the TLD issue ... use some subdomains on a couple .info tld's

keyword-phrase.com-getmorefree.info

keyword-phrase.com-for-more-free.info


Lets see who ranks the fastest for the longest?

[4morereferrals]

look The whole most important factor issue is nonsense. It has no practical use or importance. Its like looking at a mathematical equations (which Google's algorithm is) and wondering what part is more important. Take this example

6+ 4 = 10

Again another convenient 1/2 truth when you want it to apply to your side of the argument. But we are to believe that HIGH PR page links are vastly more important to the total ranking equation ... ya - Twilight Zone.

On Page + Links + Relevancy??? + PR of said Links Pages + X + Y ... items 1-200 = SERPS via googles algo ...

Not sure youre making sense to many but yourself. One is more important to the recipe for success when and if it suits your mood?

[ToyBox]

both are important but I have seen off page do some amazing things. So I will put my vote for off > on but a good combination of both is highly recommended. Someone who focuses on both can achieve their goals more efficiently.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

Its very simple to test what google feels is more important.

Steve what can I say? This is just such Baaaaasic stuff steve. SEO is both on page and off not one against the other.

I love the foolishness you support. it only confirms you are a wannabe SEO leading people astray for your own gains. What REAL SEO would ever argue that SEO is not BOTH on page and OFF. In no sensible world could you possibly decide to pit one against the other but then theres your world my friend. Theres yours. LOL

It hardly bothers me that you choose to jump in and claim that one wins over another like theres any practical implication for doing so or a battle between them. Too silly . Who in their right mind would have a page and not optimize both on page and off? Anybody out there?

Lets face it this is sooo basic there can only be one reason to trump one part of a two part equation against each other - because you can't bottle and sell on page SEO but you can backlinks. Simple

I even like the Sybil name calling because it heralds how unprofessional and childish you are. Much like your positions. All grins . Once again your argue against the obvious truth. Not one over the other but both as part of the same equation and algorithm. Perhaps one day you will become a real SEO.

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

Not sure youre making sense to many but yourself. One is more important to the recipe for success when and if it suits your mood?

Now now don't start the lying again. tsk tsk. In no mood anywhere on Warriors have I ever said that off page trumps on page. No fibbing there laddie. SEO is both . Look it up

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by ToyBox

. Someone who focuses on both can achieve their goals more efficiently.

Of course Toybox. You shouldn't even bother having to choose. Its a false nonsense choice.

its like trying to say you have to choose between water and food and then you have some people jump and say

"Well yaw. I say its water dude because you can live, ya know longer with water and that proves my point uh-huh Water Rules Yah.

LOL. Its like a Saturday Night Live sketch of a half drunk sororrity discussion (just missing the beer to pour over the heads)

You need both to be healthy and live not one or the other . I mean name me one practical application of not doing both or choosing one over the other?

I mean Duh Dude

[4morereferrals]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Steve what can I say? This is just such Baaaaasic stuff steve. SEO is both on page and off not one against the other

I love the foolishness you support. it only confirms you are a wannabe SEO leading people astray for your own gains. Who would ever argue that SEO is not BOTH on page and OFF. In no sensible world could you possibly decide to pit one against the other but then theres your world my friend. Theres yours. LOL

It hardly bothers me that you choose to jump in and claim that one wins over another like theres any practical implication for doing so or a battle between them. Too silly . Who in their right mind would have a page and not optimize both on page and off

Lets face it this is sooo basic there can only be one reason to trump one part of a two part equation against each other - because you can't bottle and sell on page SEO but you can backlinks. Simple

I even like the Sybil name calling because it heralds how unprofessional and childish you are. Much like your positions. All grins . Once again your argue against the obvious truth. Not one over the other but both as part of the same equation and algorithm. Perhaps one day you will become a real SEO.

Mike,

thanks for epitomizing "professionalism" in sooooo many of your posts.

The question by the OP was NOT - "should I do one type of SEO or the other" - but ... "which is most important".

I didnt feel inclined to lecture at the poor fellow as you do - on the sins of one without the other - i merely pointed out that he could "test" - on his own, and here's how he could draw some of his own conclusions - where he wanted to spend his SEO time.

Forgive me for staying focused on the actual questioned asked - and not trying to change the topic to meet the Mike Anthony GURO of SEO agenda, or lecture the OP why it's foolish to even discuss such matters [ especially those that dont fit nicely into Mike Anthony's Advanced SEO handbook ]

Surely a hot shot SEO such as yourself has far greater things to do for all those Major Corporations beating down your door to have you handle their SEO than bickering with all us SEO Newbie Peasants online in a forum?

PS - thanks for pouring your heart n soul into your ever post here on warrior for us all .. we are all learning sooo much. WOW - what an advanced education in SEO we're all getting. Staggering really ... NOT!

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

Mike,

agenda, or lecture the OP why it's foolish
!

Oh I wasn't calling the OP foolish.

He said point blank that he was just getting heavy into SEO. It s the people that instead of giving him a good picture of how SEO is both AND not one over the other that did him a great disservice.

Its all about the OP

And let the record reflect that the OP is not named Sybil. You directed your first post and definitely the second #38 squarely at her or him whoever that might be . No historical revisionism.

Surely a hot shot SEO such as yourself has far greater things to do for all those Major Corporations beating down your door to have you handle their SEO than bickering with all us SEO Newbie Peasants online in a forum?

I love the people. they are my kinsmen. I live to serve.

[4morereferrals]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Oh I wasn't calling the OP foolish.

He said point blank that he was just getting heavy into SEO. It s the people that instead of giving him a good picture of how SEO is both AND not one over the other that did him a great disservice.

Its all about the OP

And let the record reflect that the OP is not named Sybil. You directed your thread squarely at her or him whoever that might be . No historical revisionism.


I love the people. they are my kinsmen. I live to "self" serve.

Epic fail #1k ?

FYI - fixed the last line of your prior post for ya.

As a point of clarification Sybil ... I quoted the OP's actual question - and posted it with a quip about you "Sybil" changing the topic, subject, focus et al ... thru yet another of your online personas [ that post it was from the self proclaimed - SEO GURU ]

Let the record reflect ... LOL [ another classic ] ... I need to draw a schematic for the schizophrenic to follow along. The pace at which you change persona's topics and get befuddled by your own BS is rather comical Mikey ... know - we arent laughing "with" you.

Let us all know when GEICO and Progressive blow up you inbox - surely its any day now.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

Let us all know when GEICO and Progressive blow up you inbox - surely its any day now.

keeping on topic and ignoring the 12 year old temper tantrum (i've dealt with kids before so its pretty easy). Those two are great examples of on page content SEO (No I haven't worked with them. Just admire their work). In the second level tier SEO on page SEO becomes all about content means of getting links. With Geico and Progressive you can't really distinguish the on page separate from the off page because its their quote system that gets them tremendous backlinks. Similar kinds of scripts work for plenty people.

In fact thats the real lesson to be learned from "click here". Adobe has mad PR and links because they created content (a program) and shared it for free from that page (on page). Unfortunately people are led to believe that such a thing is impossible for smaller players but many forums for the cost of vbulletin and even free PHPbb have achieved the same technique of using on page content to get off page results blurring the lines to zero width. You are presently using one. WF doesn't need to worry about of page. Its their content on page that takes care of all that now.

If you listen to the big and little backlink evangelists then you will always focus away from your page and consequently never get high PR backlinks just the beginner profile stuff that can't help you in many niches. There is a HUGE lucrative market in keeping you beholden to getting and propping up their relative weakness. By all means start out with those but as you go forward learn to leverage content on your page and yes content OFF your page to do good SEO.

In SERPs after SERPs You can see results that go beyond PR N/A and zero links. Don't make sellers pull the wool over your eyes. Its not off page versus on page . The lines blur when you really get deeper into SEO.

Me I'll keep hammering away at telling people the other and deeper side of SEO -no matter how angry it makes a whole bunch of them. The more they attack the more I will. they just haven't figured that out yet.

[debra]

Just for the sake of argument: Both of them work.

Actually the one that will give you your edge depends on your competition.

I can get on 1st postion with on-page seo just as well and easy as with off-page seo. It's the competition that will tilt the bucket one way or the other when your trying to grab his position.

One does just as well as the other: Together they will conquer the web.

[aricjoy]

I have read this all of the stuff and would like to say you that I really like this all of the stuff as well as also this topic that much and according to me a professional off-page SEO will be able to employ their own resources to control how search engines view your website and thereby control your ranking. Most off-page SEO techniques done well will result in very high ROI and high ranking in Google.

[Aira Bongco]

In my opinion, both onpage and off-page SEO are essential for getting your site to #1. I agree with debra here.

You will need onpage SEO so you can rank easily for keywords with very low competition.

You will also need off-page SEO for highly competitive keywords.

It is that simple.

And for the record, onpage SEO pertains to the tweaking of certain aspects of the site like the title, meta tags (which do not apply now), bold tags, italic tags, keyword density andd others.

Writing good content is NOT considered as a part of on-page SEO. What is considered as onpage SEO is writing keyword-rich content thus considering the keyword density aspect.

Though good content can attract backlinks (which is off-page SEO), it is NOT onpage SEO.

I hope I am not that confusing.

Aira

[TechGuy1]

Well in my opinion and from seo prospects on page and off page have equal importance. In order to achieve good rankings for a web site need on page and off page simultaneously

[LangeTroels]

Originally Posted by airabongco

In my opinion, both onpage and off-page SEO are essential for getting your site to #1. I agree with debra here.

You will need onpage SEO so you can rank easily for keywords with very low competition.

You will also need off-page SEO for highly competitive keywords.

It is that simple.

And for the record, onpage SEO pertains to the tweaking of certain aspects of the site like the title, meta tags (which do not apply now), bold tags, italic tags, keyword density andd others.

Writing good content is NOT considered as a part of on-page SEO. What is considered as onpage SEO is writing keyword-rich content thus considering the keyword density aspect.

Though good content can attract backlinks (which is off-page SEO), it is NOT onpage SEO.

I hope I am not that confusing.

Aira

In my opinion you can write good content that is also keyword rich..