analyzing the competition

8 years ago

Depends on many factors:
- if they actively work to improve rankings
- establishing your authority
- your domain age
- your on/off page seo

you sure can rank well, it just gonna take time thats all.

Thanks

Signature

THE WEBMASTER FORUM -Webmaster Forum

Boston Web Developer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8850886].message }}

Peter Lessard

8 years ago

Throw up a youtube video with an exact match title and optimized description and also do an exact match post somewhere on a classified site or something similar. See if they break the top 10 with ease within a week. If they do you are good as gold.

If that does not work buy a fiverr gig to build some links to the vid and see if that breaks the top 10.

You can always get there just quick ways to see how much of a pain in the rear it will be.

Thanks

Signature

Ready to generate the next million in sales? The Next Million Agency

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8850906].message }}

pizzacashmon3y

8 years ago

if your competition is doing nothing to improve rankings, then you have a good change (suppose theyre just regular wikis or abouts or youtube pages)...

regularly update content, blast links with diverisifed anchors, and you'll slowly but surely reach the top of the SERPs. this is a foolproof method, and as long as links and content remain the major signals that a site is valuable in google's eyes, you'll reach the top

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8850918].message }}

savidge4 8 years ago

I would say yeah not a problem. A good solid Video link as Plessard suggested, a graphic (using the keyword as the name of the graphic) with the keyword in the img and link alt. 2 in site links pointing to the page using the keyword in the link alt, and the 2 pages pointing to the one you want to target be sure they are of similar content. Work on 1% "exact keyword" usage, with another 1% partial, but similar usage. ( 1% is 1 time per 100 words ) Use at least 500 words, would suggest 800 to 1000 Use the keyword in a H1 and a BOLD type.

If you are confident in html programming I could get the keyword in there a good 4 to 5 more times if you like. My page target on a exact match keyword is 20 - assuming there are 1000 words on the page. And then I try to target 5 more proximity keywords on the same page using each 2x.

SEO really isn't rocket science, however it IS science!

Hope that Helps!
- Thanks
Signature

Success is an ACT not an idea
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8850948].message }}

runningfree73

8 years ago

If you are confident in html programming I could get the keyword in there a good 4 to 5 more times if you like.

What exactly do you mean?
Digging deeper into the SERPs (page 2), there are a few pages with keyword optimized titles and even one with an exact match domain. They also have reasonably high PA and DA. This makes me think it would take a lot of time and effort to rank for this keyword.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8851089].message }}

savidge4

8 years ago

Originally Posted by runningfree73

What exactly do you mean?
Digger deeper into the SERPs (page 2), there are a few pages with keyword optimized titles and even one with an exact match domain. They also have reasonably high PA and DA. This makes me think it would take a lot of time and effort to rank for this keyword.

SEO is a calculation with a X and Y set meaning left to right top to bottom. If you look at any page source file you will see the lines are numbered down the left side. The higher things are the more "weight" they are given. the same goes with the further left the more "weight"

That is just one way to look at it, you also need to look at the site as a whole how that page is linked, and some other factors. again, knowing what you are looking for, it is generally an easy process.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Success is an ACT not an idea

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8851238].message }}

DubDubDubDot

8 years ago

Originally Posted by savidge4

SEO is a calculation with a X and Y set meaning left to right top to bottom. If you look at any page source file you will see the lines are numbered down the left side. The higher things are the more "weight" they are given. the same goes with the further left the more "weight"

This is highly likely an old SEO myth. Any reasoning for it would have to date back more than a decade.

Nowadays you can have hundreds of lines of code before getting to the content.

Here is one random example:
Dennis Rodman apologizes for North Korea outburst - CNN.com

The story doesn't begin until line 388. So if CNN posts a link within a story, it's worth less than had their developers coded the stories to begin on line 50?

Links to the left carrying more weight is also suspicious. There was previously an unwritten rule among designers that links went down the left side, but layouts have evolved since then.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8851446].message }}

savidge4

8 years ago

Originally Posted by DubDubDubDot

This is highly likely an old SEO myth. Any reasoning for it would have to date back more than a decade.

Nowadays you can have hundreds of lines of code before getting to the content.

Here is one random example:

Originally Posted by DubDubDubDot

Dennis Rodman apologizes for North Korea outburst - CNN.com

The story doesn't begin until line 388. So if CNN posts a link within a story, it's worth less than had their developers coded the stories to begin on line 50?

Links to the left carrying more weight is also suspicious. There was previously an unwritten rule among designers that links went down the left side, but layouts have evolved since then.

boy did you picked the wrong page to make your point!

You see the story... I see what is going on behind. What about lines 4,12,24,26,28,29,38,59,60 etc?

Out linking, Internal linking, images names, image alts, page titles, description tags, etc etc etc This ALL has a factor on "RELEVANCE" don't for 2 seconds think its a decade old myth.

There are 1200 words in the article... the term "Dennis Rodman" is used 22 times on the page. Interestingly enough of those 22 times NOT ONCE in the text will you find "Dennis Rodman". Using the idea that just short of 2% is a good keyword threshold, and looking at this article to see they are in at 1.8% seems interesting... but this a "Aged Myth"

You actually picked a REALLY GOOD example of what I am talking about!

For any and every page there are only 4 elements that create a layout. there is Text, Links, Images, and Script. The combination and use of all 4 is what creates "Relevance" It is generally taught here and every where else you want the keyword in your body of Text. This article CASE AND POINT is suggesting otherwise!

Ok left to right... I'm not talking about how a page is physically laid out, I'm talking about the coding. Look at the page code again. How many times in each line is a "Name" the first word used? how many times can you see term such as "NBA" and "Basketball" used. This is due to weight considerations.

Did you happen to notice that their body of text is broken up using storygraph tags? Its not just one big lump. Why would they bother? You could say oh its to make it easier to edit one line vs. the whole story.. you can say whatever you want. They PAY someone to sit there and lay that out for a reason!

News media is cut throat at best. SEO on that level is insane, they HAVE to be on top of their game. And it has to be done yesterday. Applying what you see in what they do, is a dang good idea.

But again, this is a decade old methodology that is just a myth.

The point to all of this is that there is muttled SEO throwing the keyword in the title, the first paragraph and again in the last, hoping the keyword is "Implied" or there is the mathematical approach, and using any and every aspect of coding to get the job done. Using the known percentages and variables to your advantage.

SEO is not Rocket Science. However, it is Science!

Hope that Helps

Thanks

Signature

Success is an ACT not an idea

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8853106].message }}

DubDubDubDot

8 years ago

You stated that links have more value the further up the raw code they are and that links to the left have more value than those to the right. That is what I responded to.

Originally Posted by savidge4

Did you happen to notice that their body of text is broken up using storygraph tags?

There is no such thing as a storygraph tag. Those are P (paragraph) tags named "storypgraph1" (2, 3, 4 etc...) to cross reference the CSS file. It's for formatting. Nothing more. It has nothing to do with a special SEO trick.

I would venture to guess they have a WYSIWYG system for employees to format a story without having to work with the raw code. That would automatically add P tags with unique CSS names to each new paragraph even if the formatting doesn't change from one to the next. In a previous era of the internet it would have been called bloated code, but it's kind of a moot point now given computing power and connection speeds.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8853819].message }}

savidge4

8 years ago

Originally Posted by DubDubDubDot

You stated that links have more value the further up the raw code they are and that links to the left have more value than those to the right. That is what I responded to.

There is no such thing as a storygraph tag. Those are P (paragraph) tags named "storypgraph1" (2, 3, 4 etc...) to cross reference the CSS file. It's for formatting. Nothing more. It has nothing to do with a special SEO trick.

I would venture to guess they have a WYSIWYG system for employees to format a story without having to work with the raw code. That would automatically add P tags with unique CSS names to each new paragraph even if the formatting doesn't change from one to the next. In a previous era of the internet it would have been called bloated code, but it's kind of a moot point now given computing power and connection speeds.

Your previous example was a bit of a loaded gun for me, due to the fact I have a friend that is a content editor with CNN. Yes they use a proprietary WYSIWYG. Not only does it obviously make it easier, but it keeps track of many variables, that they have to push into green zones. IE Keyword, and topic relevance and more.

Lets look at 2 other sites I am using Yahoo and searching "weight loss programs" Link 1) Reviews of Best Weight Loss Programs and Top Online Diet Plans I'm not even going to get into the word count and all that... its Yahoo, and there is no rhyme for reason in it. But this page ranks #3 on page 1 look at how close together in general the line #'s in the "content" portion of the page. now lets look at link 2) https://www.dietspotlight.com/ this is ranked 5th on page 5 look at the gapping in the "content" portion its not to good.

Now comparing the 2. Site #2 happens to be a word press site, so the meta tags are way down to line 42. There is decent use of the keyword. However, not to much of it is to the far left. The programmer felt that "Find reviews on diets" is a better target to go after

Site #1 Keyword, description and title page are up at line 8,9,10 The use of the keyword is to the far left. The keyword use in the content is not to strong. But look at the linking on the page, it ALL has the keyword

To be honest neither of these pages are great. Without looking I will figure neither rank well in google. But like I said that is the nature of Yahoo. the #1 site in my concept of the aged myth top to bottom left to right clearly out performs #2 They both in general have crap content, but again looking at the left to right structure, #1 again out performs #2.

Start looking at this for yourself, you will see time and again the pattern. Honestly I wouldn't believe me either, but I would absolutely look into what I am saying to make a determination for yourself.

Thanks

Signature

Success is an ACT not an idea

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8854363].message }}

pizzacashmon3y

8 years ago

forget about the competition. too many people focus on the competition that they ignore their own businesses. focus more on your business and b4 you know it you'll be at the top