Posted Monday, December 19th, 2005. Filed under CEO not SEO Stuff, Google, Internet Marketing Tips, SEO FAQ's, SEO Research.
Today I re-read Google's "Information for Webmasters" page. I agree with much of it, but a few items make me scratch my head. Google says useful SEO services include writing copy, but isn't the best copy written by site owners who know the topic, not the SEO?
Google says you should never have to link to an SEO, but I don't see why that's bad if a client wants to, just like linking to a website designer. Google also says it never sells better ranking, yet around that time the New York Times reported Google agreed to give favored placement to AOL content throughout its site.
Google suggests asking how long a company has been in business and how many employees it has — I'm not sure size or years in business really tells you if an SEO is good. And Google says you should insist on a full, unconditional money-back guarantee, while also warning to beware of SEOs that guarantee rankings. Those two pieces of advice seem to contradict each other — the first thing an unhappy client asking for a refund will cite is "they didn't get me rankings."
I agree with most of what Google says on that page, just these few points I have issues with. Do you agree?
Georgi: Yes, absolutely agreed on all points Jim. I have read those pages at Google a couple of times, and these things have always made me raise an eyebrow.
Andrew Johnson: That's pretty funny! I've been watching the whole AOL thing closely — interesting how Google's definition of "evil" quickly changes when money is involved.
randfish: Yeah, that last one is especially egregious — dictating hypocritical business practices leaves a very bad taste in one's mouth.
Jill: Jim, you're correct that SEOs shouldn't be the ones writing copy, but neither should clients unless they're a copywriter. Copy should only be written by professional copywriters, and any good SEO worth their salt should have one on staff or on call.