How can people offer '1st-page Google SEO services'?

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by ElectronPlumber

So position #6 might get you 4% of the clicks, but you'll see only 1-2% of the sales you would get otherwise. I noticed this before but never had proof until I checked my data for the results I've been seeing in my link building experiment and saw it in action. I get more click throughs per visitor and sales per visitor on the #1 site than I get on the sites currently at position #6 and position #9. Details here: *July 27th UPDATE* Week 22: The Great SEO Link Building Service Experiment of 2011

Mr Electron!

Love your thread there. love testing and real data although when it leads you to conclusions that gurus don't like they and their followers get all upset and launch at you.

anyway I had never considered that angle as well. Great job spotting that. I do know I have seen people say they were on page one and making no money and that stats show why.

Your explanation for lack of conversions seems very plausible too. As well it may also be that the decisive buyers just don't have the time to get down the page. They know what they want, get it and are gone. Window shoppers (google style) meander all over and down the page but not buy anything.

Good stuff. I will drop in on your thread again soon.

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by Melissa82

I have been reading the recent arguments so I do know what you are saying. My feeling is that for $99 I'm going to receive a foundation in the middle of a giant ocean from which I can build my dream home.

Sorry for the attacks you received on this thread. The same three people continuously attack our customers when they recommend us on a thread.

It's their strategy no doubt to try to carve up some recognition for themselves.

I'd repay the favor but not once have I seen any Warriors come on a thread recommending their service.

Classic debaters. Attacking vendors customers through sheer jealousy. Really unbecoming of a Warrior if you stop and think about it.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Classic debaters. Attacking vendors customers through sheer jealousy. Really unbecoming of a Warrior if you stop and think about it.

He has me on ignore and has no idea all i was objecting to was the unfairness of assuming people were jealous who disagrees with someone. I shared raw data about clickthroughs. If raw data is an attack then thats sad and unbecoming a warrior.

[Melissa82]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

and because you dream thats the case you think its fine to join in on characterizing others who you don't know as jealous? Thats nice. let us know know when you rank for any of those terms. Dreams and feelings are a dime a dozen in IM.

My apologies for using such a complex analogy. The emphasis was on "building a foundation" site ranking that can be built upon. There is no "dream" when I am relying on Matt's guarantee. If he fails to deliver on his promise I will then take issue with his service.

I do have to admit though, it does come across as petty and jealous when you slam a service that has delivered on it's guarantee time and time again. Thank you for making everyone aware that the traffic stats you might get being at the bottom of page one can be quite low. For me as I stated before I view this page one ranking as a foundation to work from. You make it sound as though everyone is going to stop backlinking once Matt has completed his guarantee.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Melissa82

I do have to admit though, it does come across as petty and jealous when you slam a service that has delivered on it's guarantee time and time again. .

Perhaps in your simplistic analogy (since you broke down its complexity for me) you can show me where in this thread I slammed a particular service or are you thanking and objecting to the stats at the same time? If not then give me the slamming quote from this thread of Matt's service. that would be even simpler if you could do so. Don't you think?

And no need to apologize. I just didn't think your analogy was good. You do and thats fine.
Here are my posts (to make it easier) before there was a claim about jealousy
#13
#27
#33

kindly point out any attack on Matt's service. I thought this was about services in general but once again a thread has been hijacked to be all about one provider. Sheesh you point out a WELL DOCUMENTED STAT and you apply it to all services and because it doesn't not line up with what a guru is selling there is an incessant whine. I never mentioned Matts service AT ALL. I even referred to services that promise first page ENTIRELY different from his. Was that too complex?

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by Melissa82

My apologies for using such a complex analogy. The emphasis was on "building a foundation" site ranking that can be built upon. There is no "dream" when I am relying on Matt's guarantee. If he fails to deliver on his promise I will then take issue with his service.

I do have to admit though, it does come across as petty and jealous when you slam a service that has delivered on it's guarantee time and time again. Thank you for making everyone aware that the traffic stats you might get being at the bottom of page one can be quite low. For me as I stated before I view this page one ranking as a foundation to work from. You make it sound as though everyone is going to stop backlinking once Matt has completed his guarantee.

You can read more attacks from them on these threads too:

Setting up private blog network - SEO EXPERTS HELP ME!

Private Blog Network

Same people making different attacks using any angle they can.

Kind of disruptive really. Wastes our time having to answer them. I thought keeping our word to Warriors was a good thing.

[Jacob Cuculiza]

I would say that NO ONE can offer #1 page Google results and be 100 % sure to give it! What if 20 companies said yes to the same keyword.

[Melissa82]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Perhaps in your simplistic analogy (since you broke down its complexity for me) you can show me where in this thread I slammed a particular service or are you thanking and objecting to the stats at the same time? If not then give me the slamming quote from this thread of Matt's service. that would be even simpler if you could do so. Don't you think?

And no need to apologize. I just didn't think your analogy was good.

You certainly have a talent for deflecting from the main point of my posts. With that last one my main point was that you make it seem as though Matt's customers will stop backlinking once they reach page one and will therefore receive useless traffic forever. Perhaps suggest some ideas as a follow up to Matt's service that could help people rise higher on the first page. Maybe then I wont view your thoughts as so one sided and petty.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Melissa82

You certainly have a talent for deflecting from the main point of my posts.

I missed where you answered my questions about a quote where I attacked Matt's service. You have been around long enough to know how to do a quote. it can't be that hard to find a quote on a two page thread

What you view , think or feel has no relevance to me. I don' t care what you think is petty. A false accusation is a false accusation. whether you started it or joined in on it. I posted stats applying to click through rates and then the attacks and motive distortions started. says a WHOLE LOT when people get upset over REAL raw data being posted that they don't like.

[Melissa82]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I missed where you answered my questions about a quote where I attacked Matt's service. You have been around long enough to know how to do a quote. it can't be that hard to find a quote on a two page thread

What you view , think or feel has no relevance to me. I don' t care what you think is petty. A false accusation is a false accusation. whether you started it or joined in on it. I posted stats applying to click through rates and then the attacks and motive distortions started. says a WHOLE LOT when people get upset over REAL raw data being posted that they don't like.

Okay I'll play your game - You find where I said you slammed Matt's service in this thread. I said earlier that I've read up on this topic previously. You have made your opposition to Matt and Marc's service quite clear in previous threads.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Melissa82

Okay I'll play your game - You find where I said you slammed Matt's service in this thread.

Which being interpreted means

"You are right mike but I can't be fair enough to admit it - you made no attack in this thread. so the claim of jealousy in this thread was pointless"

You have made your opposition to Matt and Marc's service quite clear in previous threads

You mean when I wrote that the service was good for what it is and the price was reasonable for what it did (or you just missed that post?) or when I said in THIS THREAD -

(but it does have value for some search results.)

since you swear this entire thread is about matt's service in direct opposition to what the OP wrote

or because I objected that Matt stated that all other traditional SEO should be ignored and I disagreed that PR N/As were better than HIGH PR 4,5,6?

How dare Mike disagree with what the whole SEO world disagrees with and knows is false

anyway you just basically admitted that there was no attack in this thread and you basically just inserted it into this thread to trump up your false accusations. My point has been proven and I can dismiss this back and forth. have a good night.

[MikeFriedman]

Originally Posted by Melissa82

Okay I'll play your game - You find where I said you slammed Matt's service in this thread. I said earlier that I've read up on this topic previously. You have made your opposition to Matt and Marc's service quite clear in previous threads.

Actually, I don't think anyone has really slammed Matt's service.

We have argued about comments Matt and Marc have made in regards to saying that a bunch of PR 0 and PR n/a .info sites (their network) have the same kind of ranking power as a network of sites with high PR. Or like when Matt said that quantity of backlinks will always beat quality of backlinks. Any professional SEO would find fault with that kind of statement.

Their network is what it is. They provide mass quantities of low quality backlinks. I say low quality based on the fact that the links are on mostly PR 0 and n/a .info sites and consist of nothing but auto spun unrelated PLR articles. I think they themselves would refer to that as low quality.

[Melissa82]

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Actually, I don't think anyone has really slammed Matt's service.

We have argued about comments Matt and Marc have made in regards to saying that a bunch of PR 0 and PR n/a .info sites (their network) have the same kind of ranking power as a network of sites with high PR. Or like when Matt said that quantity of backlinks will always beat quality of backlinks. Any professional SEO would find fault with that kind of statement.

Their network is what it is. They provide mass quantities of low quality backlinks. I say low quality based on the fact that the links are on mostly PR 0 and n/a .info sites and consist of nothing but auto spun unrelated PLR articles. I think they themselves would refer to that as low quality.

Where I come from what you just said is a slam. Very gently worded but still a slam.

I can see that you two Mikes are of the same mind so I'll address you both. The system Matt is using is working to get people up Google's ladder. The arguments of having very little traffic at the bottom of page one and using low PR .info's to get there are outside of Matt's guarantee. What the individual does once the keyword has ranked is up to him or her. There are lots of good ideas at this point including one of the arguments you make and adding high quality links.

Why not use Matt's results to your advantage somehow. Start with the premise that whatever set up he currently has is working and go from there. If you can't do that then end your slams with "...but for some reason it works!"

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Melissa82

I can see that you two Mikes are of the same mind so I'll address you both......... If you can't do that then end your slams with "...but for some reason it works!"

Sorry (actually not really just an expression) Mellisa but you are exhibiting an exceedingly low amount of intellectual honesty in that reasoning. I have slammed no one and you under the premise of us being of the same mind have tried to bind me to Mike's statements that you consider a slam. Poor form and you ought to be embarrassed. You couldn't find a slam of mine in this thread so you are trying to tie me into what someone else said. Now that is one sided.

As for the rest- I am not you. I have ranked sites number one not just first page. in the process whether you choose to admit it or not I know other ways (that i consider better) and that has been the source of my disagreement "in other threads". Face it. You are not A SEO and you do not understand the issues we disagree on . Plain and simple. But in this thread you found nothing that you are complaining about of me. You just didn't like me stating the stats on click throughs because you FELT like it slanted against your guru and your last attempt to bind me to what someone else expressed is all anyone needs to prove your extreme bias.

[Mike Anthony]

Removed. cannot even be bothered responding further to totally ridiculous arguments and derailing of the thread. Op asked how a NUMBER of different services could offer first page placement and the answer is simple

Its not that hard to rank on the front page for some results. thats why a number of services do it successfully - not just one - no matter how that might hurt some people's feelings.

[Rucco]

Holy Moly. Man I was going to post my review of Matt on the other "private network" thread that I read through the other day, only to find there's another thread of people bashing him like crazy.

Here's the facts from just little ole' me. I don't know Matt. I hired him. I asked for a quick phone call with him, as my market is huge and I was looking to develop a relationship with someone who wanted to be a part of something huge. He denied. No problem. I liked the guy. I liked his attitude, his confidence. So I gave him a chance.

10 campaigns and a few months later, I couldn't be more pleased. Not saying we're top dog for everything, we're not. But I've no doubt we will be. I have never had better customer support from anyone on any WSO aside from Chris Landrum and his Easy wp seo plug in which is awesome. I personally think much of what's offered here is pure crap.

I make NO money from mentioning any of them, and don't care to. My niche brings me far more profit in residual income than likely many of you could dream of. I do not do anything in regards to internet marketing.

Having owned a few successful companies, I can't help but see a common thread churned over and over again. And I see it now here yet again. Some people call it the Walmart effect. Like it or not, it's here and it works.

There's the status quo of an industry, with people sticking to their fundamentals and defending them to the end. "They" have better processes, better tools, therefore they deserve a higher asking price.

Then there's someone who comes up with a different approach, is hugely successful, provides incredible results with less expenses (Therefore they can charge less...i.e. win-win) and gets bashed to next Tuesday. Despite his success and his willingness to even share his approach (which he absolutely doesn't have to) he still gets bombarded with insults. He makes claims that he states are based on "his experience". And then he's attacked because "his experience" is wrong because it's different. Regardless of results or rationality. This place reminds me of Fox news sometimes.

I used to own a high volume lawn mowing company. My crews mowed 45 lawns per DAY. My competition mowed that much per week if they were lucky. I got called a bull****ter, a lowballer, and everything in between. In reality all I did was find a better, far more profitable way. I didn't buy expensive trucks, equipment, gadgets galore like my competitors. I developed great advertising. I bought the bare necessities to get the job done well with the least expense on my part. My customers loved me. And the "other guys" were pissed at me because they wouldn't drop their trailer gate for less than $XXX per lawn. Silly, foolish pride and jealousy cost them a ton of money. I on the other hand sold the company for a beautiful profit and happily got out of the hot Texas sun. The owner has kept the same business model and quadrupled the business.

I really see no difference here. Are there better ways? Maybe. But if a company is getting great results, at a great price with outstanding results should you really spend your time bashing that company? Last I checked that wasn't very profitable. It was only....Jealousy and ego.

I personally don't care what the "Mikes" do. In fact I'll be watching closely to see if you'll somehow be a service that I could use. But in all reality in this case the best man will truly win. That's the one who realizes that business is simple. Just ask Walmart.

Best wishes to everyone!

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Rucco

I personally don't care what the "Mikes" do. In fact I'll be watching closely to see if you'll somehow be a service that I could use.!

Nope you don't ever have to worry about that. what I offer you wouldn't be able to use and its not geared to be used by Anyone that thinks posting data and click through rates is useless or an attack. looking forward to you being top dog one day though. best wishes as well.

[Rucco]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Nope you don't ever have to worry about that. what I offer you wouldn't be able to use.

Mike since you edited your response I shall edit mine. I was truly sincere in stating that if your services could be of use to me I would consider them. If however you see me as no potential client then that's fine too. I don't really understand your edit though regarding posting data and such.

Honestly in all reality guys, life is too damn short for all of this bickering. My best buddy's 11-year old daughter just got diagnosed with cancer I just found out. Got kids? Talk about perspective man. Just all do a great job for the people you're servicing and let the rest take care of itself. I hope all you guys do well as I have.

[Marc_L]

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

The trick is that they don't let you pick just one keyword and they retain the right to refuse a keyword if they choose. Makes it pretty simple.

You don't know what you are talking about. We don't refuse based upon competition we do so when people use keywords that don't relate to their site or if the keywords are in a niche we don't work with.

I cannot recall ever refusing any keyword based solely on competition.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Rucco

Honestly in all reality guys, life is too damn short for all of this bickering. .

then stop bickering. what? you think when you falsely claim people are jealous or envious thats not bickering? Or that if you claim posting click through rates classify as attack that isn't bickering? same thing guy. Sorry to hear about your friends daughter. I hope she pulls through

[MikeFriedman]

Originally Posted by Marc_L

You don't know what you are talking about. We don't refuse based upon competition we do so when people use keywords that don't relate to their site or if the keywords are in a niche we don't work with.

I cannot recall ever refusing any keyword based solely on competition.

Marc, I wasn't referring to your service. And I apologize. With all the back and forth, I should have probably stipulated that in the post. It was a reference to similar services in general.

In fact, there is one in the WSO section right now (and I don't want to go looking for it), that has a whole list of factors to "qualify" a word. It has to have below a certain number of search listings, your website must have the keyword in the title tag and h1 tags, etc. Then on top of that, it still has to be manually reviewed and accepted.

There are a lot of similar services with those kind of stipulations. I was not picking on your service... this time.

Those listings should just say "Give me the easiest keyword you can possibly find in your niche, and I will get you to #10... Guaranteed!"

[Matt Ward]

Originally Posted by ElectronPlumber

The person you likely want at your site, the impulse buyer/clicker, is going to click on the first or second link. The people who bother to look down the page are likely hunting for something out of the norm and likely won't find it at your site either.

That's pretty interesting, and I've never thought about it that way. It would make sense, though.

As for "1st page Google services" - I've had experience with one that I won free here, and it was very negative. From what I'm reading here it seems like a lot of them are taking advantage of people that don't know any better. I'm not referring to any service in particular, but if you're putting all kinds of stipulations on a "page 1" ranking then it's likely that you're using your SEO knowledge and competition-gauging skills to take advantage of the customer that knows next to nothing of SEO. Reading some of the testimonials pretty much proves that, with comments like "A month ago I was #215 and now I'm #30!"

On another note, it seems as though almost every single SEO service WSO that shows "proof" is intentionally trying to mislead the customer. Find one with ranking proof, and I can guarantee it will be something like an exact match domain ranking #3 for a keyword with 100 searches per month.

edit: Here's a "proof" I found from one of the page 1 guaranteed SEO sellers. You will note that this is a keyword with 6 words and that zero searches showing in Google Keyword Tool. What a "deal." I would be embarrassed to be offering an SEO service with proof like this.

[Marc_L]

Originally Posted by MikeFriedman

Marc, I wasn't referring to your service. And I apologize. With all the back and forth, I should have probably stipulated that in the post. It was a reference to similar services in general.

Cool beans, at least we've both made that clear now.

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by mattward

That's pretty interesting, and I've never thought about it that way. It would make sense, though.

As for "1st page Google services" - I've had experience with one that I won free here, and it was very negative. From what I'm reading here it seems like a lot of them are taking advantage of people that don't know any better. I'm not referring to any service in particular, but if you're putting all kinds of stipulations on a "page 1" ranking then it's likely that you're using your SEO knowledge and competition-gauging skills to take advantage of the customer that knows next to nothing of SEO. Reading some of the testimonials pretty much proves that, with comments like "A month ago I was #215 and now I'm #30!"

On another note, it seems as though almost every single SEO service WSO that shows "proof" is intentionally trying to mislead the customer. Find one with ranking proof, and I can guarantee it will be something like an exact match domain ranking #3 for a keyword with 100 searches per month.

edit: Here's a "proof" I found from one of the page 1 guaranteed SEO sellers. You will note that this is a keyword with 6 words and that zero searches showing in Google Keyword Tool. What a "deal." I would be embarrassed to be offering an SEO service with proof like this.

Just because you cannot rank a site onto page one for $99 doesn't mean every one else is as inept as you. Because we have proven again and again that it can be done.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Just because you cannot rank a site onto page one for $99 doesn't mean every one else is as inept as you. Because we have proven again and again that it can be done.

You do realize that had you just ignored it and not tried to insult him no one would have thought that example was yours right? He never identified the seller. Thats the thing with turning every thread about services or networks in this part of the forum into sales and review threads. its not a WSo thread and people can bring up negatives as well.

[MikeFriedman]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

You do realize that had you just ignored it and not tried to insult him no one would have thought that example was yours right? He never identified the seller. Thats the thing with turning every thread about services or networks in this part of the forum into sales and review threads. its not a WSo thread and people can bring up negatives as well.

I just want to know if they left a testimonial about their new page one ranking.

[Matt Ward]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Just because you cannot rank a site onto page one for $99 doesn't mean every one else is as inept as you. Because we have proven again and again that it can be done.

lol

I do very well for myself doing my own SEO on my own sites, thank you very much.

There's no reason for childish personal attacks, especially since I didn't even specifically mention you or your service. I have no idea what you're even talking about, because I didn't say you or anyone couldn't rank a site on page 1. Anyone can rank a BS keyword that doesn't amount to anything, yes.

Comments like yours only make one person look bad, and it isn't me.

And for the record, yes, I was referring to Matt LaClear's service when I was referring to the "bad experience." I wasn't going to go out of my way to name names, but I guess it's fair game when they out themselves.

[Melissa82]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

let us know know when you rank for any of those terms.

I will Mikes. I'll start a new thread!

Hey Matt L, regardless of what keywords your clients want ranked because it was them that chose the words, have you ever calculated what percentage of your clients rank to page one within say three or six months?

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by mattward

lol

I do very well for myself doing my own SEO on my own sites, thank you very much.

There's no reason for childish personal attacks, especially since I didn't even specifically mention you or your service. I have no idea what you're even talking about, because I didn't say you or anyone couldn't rank a site on page 1. Anyone can rank a BS keyword that doesn't amount to anything, yes.

Comments like yours only make one person look bad, and it isn't me.

And for the record, yes, I was referring to Matt LaClear's service when I was referring to the "bad experience." I wasn't going to go out of my way to name names, but I guess it's fair game when they out themselves.

Big surprise. If you are a client or a former client pm your ticket id and I'll check on your campaigns. If not then smell you later.

Edit: Oh wait. I know who you are now. You're the dude I popped with an infraction for coming on to our wso thread raising stink and not backing up your allegations. Still not going to share your ticket ids?

[mattlaclear]

Originally Posted by Melissa82

I will Mikes. I'll start a new thread!

Hey Matt L, regardless of what keywords your clients want ranked because it was them that chose the words, have you ever calculated what percentage of your clients rank to page one within say three or six months?

That's why I think it is funny our competitors think we do not allow for tough keywords. We allow our clients to choose any 5 keywords of their choosing.

I haven't tabulated any type of percentages yet as to what the average times are overall.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by mattward

And for the record, yes, I was referring to Matt LaClear's service when I was referring to the "bad experience." I wasn't going to go out of my way to name names, but I guess it's fair game when they out themselves.

Perfectly fair game. You took pains not to call any names . I was going to say that perhaps that was long ago but I notice on the image that it was just a few months ago. Really raises the question (not merely on Matt's service talking generally now) how many of the first page placements that are given are based on long tail. Sellers usually angrily deny it but given that was a proof screenshot it stands to reason that it would be one that would be particularly proud of not some low example

To be fair the term gets a 100 per day so it should deliver a little traffic (since it still is not at one) but your point is well taken. Don't worry about the noise level.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

That's why I think it is funny our competitors think we do not allow for tough keywords. We allow our clients to choose any 5 keywords of their choosing.

Not a competitor but in their defense its funny because that originated with you

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Of course there are limits. Some folks take extremely greedy keywords and we reject them as they come in. Plus the tougher keywords take longer to rank for.

I admit it takes guts to tell people others are making up stuff when in your very own thread and Post #995 you said it point blank but it comes from things YOU have said..and said.......

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Don't be greedy with the keyword selection though. Otherwise I'll refund your money back so fast you won't even notice it leaving your account in the first place.

and um........said

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Now I'm telling you to hit the bricks. I have clearly stated that we either guarantee a page one ranking or we give an immediate refund if we think the keyword is being greedy.

and well err..... shucks..said

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

If a keyword is too greedy I immediately refund the money back. SO take your chances.

It is funny though.Now if you have changed your policy thats fine but claiming they just pulled it out of thin air is false.

[Matt Ward]

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Big surprise. If you are a client or a former client pm your ticket id and I'll check on your campaigns. If not then smell you later.

Edit: Oh wait. I know who you are now. You're the dude I popped with an infraction for coming on to our wso thread raising stink and not backing up your allegations. Still not going to share your ticket ids?

Do we really need to have a public pissing match?

I'll PM you the ticket ID, but to be fair, in that thread I offered to show proof, and you didn't ask me for a ticket ID nor did you respond to my response to your PM. I didn't think to refer to the ticket ID, I'll admit, because it's been so long that I forgot about it.

I'm a straight shooter, believe me; I wouldn't have said anything if I didn't think something was amiss. I even publicly praised your customer service here at first, because I was pleased with the prompt response and updates I was getting. That was until those stopped happening and my campaign seemingly fell into a black hole.

Update: For the sake of fairness, I'll say that Matt and I have cleared things up privately. Not that this even had to be brought up here, when it wasn't a public matter. Apologies for the thread derailing - back to the complaining about SEO services.

[friendfeed]

Many peoples go for Black hat and many getting Bulk of Links from quality sites.So if we get to go with white hat then the site remains first page and if we follow **** things then we unable to get into first page.