Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 31 posts

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#21

Post by patio11 »

tptacek wrote: post #18
il wrote: post #2

I don't mean to be a jerk, and I'm going to be downvoted into oblivion for this, but I don't think Patrick is the brilliant SEO wizard some people on here make him out to be, certainly not anywhere near a Rand Fishkin type level. He's an excellent writer and marketer, but it's not like he's privy to some magical SEO techniques that would explode SEO traffic. I would be surprised if he uses SEO tools much himself. Fro…

I don't think Patrick would claim to be a "brilliant SEO wizard". He's made mention of friends who are. Patrick's SEO abilities are notable on HN because he has managed to run a business quantifiably tied to SEO and search advertising. He's hasn't just "done" SEO. Lots of HN people can claim that. He's successfully taken a product to market with it. That's impressive. Referring to Patrick as an SEO undervalues him. S…

Please rap my knuckles soundly with a wooden spoon if I ever refer to myself as a wizard in a context unrelated to Dungeons and Dragons.

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#22

Post by mattgratt »

wolfparade wrote: post #8
patio11 wrote: post #4

For your future reference, I have an email address and answer at least half of all questions asked to it. (100% for elementary school teachers.) 1) Providing value in a scalable fashion in SEO is hard, because Google has an incentive to make it hard. If SEO were only as hard as AdWords, Google would lose billions of dollars. Google considers virtually any repeatable process that improves rankings to be black hat. I d…

I think "Demand media in a box" is brilliant. It is exactly what I would want in SEO tools. I have a problem domain where I need SEO traffic. You obviously know how to find good free lance writers and you can teach them all the SEO basic and anything else they need to know. So it's like consulting but scalable or it's like running a free lance writing website but target at making great SEO content and picking topics…

I believe CopyPress by BlueGlass (http://www.copypress.com/) is this. And those guys are some SEO geniuses - like Greg Boser?

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#23

Post by nickfromseattle »

kriru wrote: post #15

I have done loads of SEO research and no tool comes close seomoz.org . They have created their OWN index similar to that of google's . I would make a similar tool or maybe even better

Can you expand on 'no tool comes close.'? What makes Seomoz pro tools stand out?

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#24

Post by aaronwall »

bigiain wrote: post #3

My first guess is that he's smart enough to realise the somewhat greater competition for all the good keywords you'd be facing if your product was "SEO tools" compared to "bingo cards"... If you had to choose _one_ vertical to be in, would _you_ chose one where every competitor in it knew all the dirty SEO tricks in the book?

This is a bit ironic, but inside the field of SEO I don't think search rankings matter that much.

Anytime you sell something which is a higher end service or an abstract type of service what drives sales is word of mouth recommendations rather than rankings. This is true for the higher end of the legal spectrum, the higher end of the health spectrum, and the higher end for any b2b services sort of business model.

Those who are buying based on rankings will see the Google AdWords ads for $149 SEO and such...and get sucked into buying trash. Those who are even cheaper will get scammed by their domain registrar or web host.

It is hard to make much money in the SEO game teaching others or providing tools to other. It is much easier to make more as a publisher, as Patrick stated.

One of the reasons I haven't invested more into some tools area is just how much stuff is becoming freely accessible. Google's keyword tool is amazing, Google analytics is amazing, some of the competitive research tools are awesome & cheap.

When you get down to it, its hard to automate the link parts without running into issues. Automating some of the link research areas is still an area for innovation, but most the stuff around keyword research, keyword organization & general content creation have already been heavily commoditized.

Another area where some folks work is baking a semi-legitimate cloaking service into their SEO product & then making it seem legitimate by only working with huge brands who agree to minimum contract amounts in the 5 or 6 figures per month. That model works well for the SEO because they typically get paid by the click, but it is pretty crappy for the client because they end up reliant on a tool that can be pulled out from under them at any time.

Brokering links is a huge business as well...but its sorta a gray area.

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#25

Post by aaronwall »

i-like-water wrote: post #16

I used to think there was some magic sauce to SEO - that only good content with proper promotion would get high rankings. I've worked with SEO consultants on every level. I've worked with two separate individuals who are extremely well known (sorry NDA prevents sharings names), hired writers, and outsourced work overseas. For my particular industry, which i won't share because it will identify me, my content is prett…

That comment sorta makes me cringe for choice of branding, as sometimes when anyone who talks bad about someone with a "very popular SEO book" people will assume that it is me.

I would just like to clarify that I have never had a customer paying 5 figures a month that was unhappy with what they got from me. ;)

Also agree with you that spammy links can work better than what one would think if they attended Google's sermons about quality links. Though typically from a risk profile it is better to mix and match so whatever your promoting doesn't stick out as an outlier & get whacked at some point.

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#26

Post by aaronwall »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #19
i-like-water wrote: post #16

I used to think there was some magic sauce to SEO - that only good content with proper promotion would get high rankings. I've worked with SEO consultants on every level. I've worked with two separate individuals who are extremely well known (sorry NDA prevents sharings names), hired writers, and outsourced work overseas. For my particular industry, which i won't share because it will identify me, my content is prett…

>Google's algorithm is not a mystery - most 'SEO' people will try to sell you some snake oil. Google's current ranking algorithm is a mystery. Sure we have some good clues to go on but outside of Google's own info (which on at least one occassion I've considered to be a deliberate attempt to mislead, though I might be wrong) or industrial espionage the only way to determine the nature of the algo is to experiment (or…

Follow the money.

What % of spam sites are wrapped in AdSense? Greater than 5%? Greater than 50%?

For all Google's talk of content quality, they are clearly willing to make some concessions with who they have as business partners and the type of "content" they are willing to fund.

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#27

Post by aaronwall »

il wrote: post #2

I don't mean to be a jerk, and I'm going to be downvoted into oblivion for this, but I don't think Patrick is the brilliant SEO wizard some people on here make him out to be, certainly not anywhere near a Rand Fishkin type level. He's an excellent writer and marketer, but it's not like he's privy to some magical SEO techniques that would explode SEO traffic. I would be surprised if he uses SEO tools much himself. Fro…

I can confirm that Patrick knows more about SEO than 98% of SEO experts.

I know this because he is a member of our community and we chat often, I tell him stuff that is off the record & sometimes he evolves the model & pushes my model of thinking in new directions.

If I had his programming skills my goal would to be able to retire by the end of next year. :D

Probably the only thing that holds Patrick back in terms of aggressively using SEO to make a ton of money is that he isn't primarily driven by making a boatload of money. Some people are, but he isn't.

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#28

Post by gacba »

robryan wrote: post #11

Can this process really be automated in any way that Google would not consider black hat?

The problem is not "Is this possible?", but how long before Google recognizes it and then classifies it as black hat, thereby causing anyone who uses the technique to get downranked. The problem with any popular SEO technique or tool is that it will eventually attract the attention of Google and then be evaluated as "black" or "white" hat.

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#29

Post by pbhjpbhj »

aaronwall wrote: post #26
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Google's algorithm is not a mystery - most 'SEO' people will try to sell you some snake oil. Google's current ranking algorithm is a mystery. Sure we have some good clues to go on but outside of Google's own info (which on at least one occassion I've considered to be a deliberate attempt to mislead, though I might be wrong) or industrial espionage the only way to determine the nature of the algo is to experiment (or…

Follow the money. What % of spam sites are wrapped in AdSense? Greater than 5%? Greater than 50%? For all Google's talk of content quality, they are clearly willing to make some concessions with who they have as business partners and the type of "content" they are willing to fund.

>What % of spam sites are wrapped in AdSense? Greater than 5%? Greater than 50%?

It wouldn't matter if it was 100%. Google apply pressure via their ranking algorithm to encourage quality content which in turn relies incoming links and to a lesser extent well crafted pages. Basically Google don't primarily themselves judge the quality - that would be futile with so many pages, they allow the net to do it, that's the whole point of PageRank to attain a metric for quality without actually measuring the quality per se.

On the subject of "spam sites" - spam is unsolicited content delivered to you, that's not possible unless you're talking about popup/popunders. You actively seek out the sites.

Now if the top rankings on Google are unwanted poor quality sites and Google are advertising spamily and not flagging malware, etc., then I think you'd have a point.

Re: Ask Patio11: Why don't you make SEO tools?

#30

Post by i-like-water »

aaronwall wrote: post #25
i-like-water wrote: post #16

I used to think there was some magic sauce to SEO - that only good content with proper promotion would get high rankings. I've worked with SEO consultants on every level. I've worked with two separate individuals who are extremely well known (sorry NDA prevents sharings names), hired writers, and outsourced work overseas. For my particular industry, which i won't share because it will identify me, my content is prett…

That comment sorta makes me cringe for choice of branding, as sometimes when anyone who talks bad about someone with a "very popular SEO book" people will assume that it is me. I would just like to clarify that I have never had a customer paying 5 figures a month that was unhappy with what they got from me. ;) Also agree with you that spammy links can work better than what one would think if they attended Google's se…

Just to clarify it is not Aaron.
Post reply on HN