So you think you're an SEO expert?

[3oltan]

My philosophy on SEO is that it is one-part art, one-part science. A strategy that works well for one client in one market, may not work well for a different client in a different market. For arguments sake, assume that both markets have an equal amount of competition.

What if I told you a website that continues to hold the #1 spot in Google for a couple of different search terms that represent a multi-billion dollar industry has done it through:

- a blog website with a total of twelve posts since 2006; none of the posts were compelling, they were simply self promoting
- the last blog entry was February, 2009
- there is very little meta information
- has approximately 100 backlinks from sites with a PR mix from 2-5
- of the 100 backlinks, every single one has the exact same anchor text; let me emphasize EXACT aka they are using one term and one term only with no variation. And remember, the anchor text they are using is a search term that is competitive - not something like "chickens who grow more than ten feet tall in a day."

I recently was hired to do competitive analysis for a company and after doing the research, the above is what I found. And it is not only the website in the #1 spot, six out of ten sites on page one of Google are all using the exact same strategy; this strategy is continued through for about 50% of the competition on pages 2 - 10.

So are you surprised at all by what I've uncovered? And if everyone at the top is utilizing the same strategy, which is to focus EXCLUSIVELY on quality backlinks, would you adopt the same strategy?

[The Old Sarge]

... focus EXCLUSIVELY on quality backlinks ...

Can you substantiate that for us?

I have a site that's been at #1 in The BIG Three (and several other minor SEs) for a few of my primary keywords/phrases for more than two years. The site has some pretty good backlinks arranged in what I consider a very logical manner. However, I fail to see how those backlinks are due much credit for the site's performance at #1. It all started coming together when I hit on my current strategy concerning meta tags and page content on all the pages except those with outside links.

[JEccles]

And if everyone at the top is utilizing the same strategy, which is to focus EXCLUSIVELY on quality backlinks, would you adopt the same strategy?

As my mother would say "if everyone was jumping off a bridge, would you too?". Links have their place but it is site content that will be the best determining factor in your success.

[The Old Sarge]

Holy Cow! I think we have the same momma.

[JEccles]

Holy Cow! I think we have the same momma.

Did yours also say "if you fall out of that tree and break a leg, don't come running to me"?

[3oltan]

As my mother would say "if everyone was jumping off a bridge, would you too?". Links have their place but it is site content that will be the best determining factor in your success.

you mom is absolutely right

do you please mention your point of success ?Did you put on your statement for SERP or some other processed area?

[3oltan]

Can you substantiate that for us?

I have a site that's been at #1 in The BIG Three (and several other minor SEs) for a few of my primary keywords/phrases for more than two years. The site has some pretty good backlinks arranged in what I consider a very logical manner. However, I fail to see how those backlinks are due much credit for the site's performance at #1. It all started coming together when I hit on my current strategy concerning meta tags and page content on all the pages except those with outside links.

Its depend on your niche & targeted keywords + competition against that specific keywords

[JEccles]

you mom is absolutely right

do you please mention your point of success ?Did you put on your statement for SERP or some other processed area?

I was referring to SERPs.

[The Old Sarge]

I was referring to SERPs.

So was I.

I've seen many people claim that backlinks improve SERPs but have yet to see any evidence/proof.

[3oltan]

So was I.

I've seen many people claim that backlinks improve SERPs but have yet to see any evidence/proof.

i do believe back links can improve your PR but quality & relevant back links could improve PR & SERP as well.

what would you refer to us to improve SERP?

[3oltan]

I was referring to SERPs.

so your believe is only contents can improve SERP. do you have any solid reference?

[JEccles]

so your believe is only contents can improve SERP. do you have any solid reference?

Experience

[The Old Sarge]

i do believe back links can improve your PR but quality & relevant back links could improve PR & SERP as well.

Backlinks indeed count toward PR. Not much else does. But I have never seen any evidence whatsoever that either backlinks or PR have any bearing on SERPs. Can you substantiate that claim somehow?

what would you refer to us to improve SERP?

On-page SEO. In all its permutations. And PR is NOT one of them.

[3oltan]

Experience

Experience of?you can show me your Experience in reference.

[3oltan]

Backlinks indeed count toward PR. Not much else does. But I have never seen any evidence whatsoever that either backlinks or PR have any bearing on SERPs. Can you substantiate that claim somehow?



On-page SEO. In all its permutations. And PR is NOT one of them.

On page SEO is an important part when it comes to rank well in the search engines, after optimizing your on page seo factors you need to build quality back links to your website.