Saturday Morning Funny - Contender for Moron of the Week?

10 comments
Thread Title:
"the truth about search engines", article
Thread Description:

Im finding it a bit tough to be mean to this guy/girl, maybe im not awake enough yet heh... <a href="http://www.highrankings.com/forum/">HighRankings</a> member <em>jpmuofu</em> writes about an <a href="http://www.site-reference.com/4229/The-Truth-About-Search-Engines--Playing-A-Game-You-Can-t-Win.html">article he found</a> (dont bother, it's crap..) about why SEO is just not an effective way to spend your time and money. er...

What tickled me though was this:
<blockquote>
Case in point: I have been working for the last 4 months or so to get one of my clients ranked in search engines with the goal of driving "free" targeted traffic to their site that would in theory increase sales. They have spent approximately $16,000 on this effort thus far. We have followed all the "best practices" discussed on this forum and others. So far we have seen very little movement in ranking on our targeted keywords and 0 traffic. In contrast, for the coming three months we are changing our strategy and will spend approximately the same amount on targeted PPCs at $.35 a piece through a leading online ad network. We have already proven an average conversion rate of 4% with an average shopping cart of $41.00. Therefore, for that same $$ amount we have a near guarantee of earning at least $75,000 in revenue or a 470% return on investment. Seems like a no brainer to me.</blockquote>

followed by <em>Jill</em>:
<blockquote>
JPMUOFU, admitting on a public forum that you took $16k of some company's money and have nothing to show for it, doesn't seem like that greatest move to me.

Will you be returning their money?</blockquote>
I'll be the first to admit to posting things I really wish I hadnt, on an almost <strong>daily basis!</strong> but this really does take the grand prize for <em>setting yourself up for a fall</em>.. heh!

Comments

$16,000!!!!

Confusing thing is, how can anyone spend $16,000 in 4 months if only using “best practices” from highrankings?

Wow that forum must of changed since i last visited, or maybe $16,000 is the going rate for content content content ;)

without renting links or doin

without renting links or doing PPC it is kinda hard to burn through 16K unless you are setting up some large databases or making some nifty custom software and whatnot.

Too funny.

Can't imagine link buying is in highrankings best practises – though i haven’t been there for over a year. Guess he paid for a yahoo listing and kept the rest for consulting fees and daily ranking reports “rank:0” ;)

Perhaps you (seohelp) should

Perhaps you (seohelp) should actually take a look at the High Rankings forum, and review our outstanding link building forum before making statements that just make you sound dumb.

Hi Jill,

No need for insults, i wasn’t blaming highrankings for his failings.

I simply stated my opinion “i can’t imagine” based on visiting your forum over a year ago that highrankings would not be recommending link buying as a best practice.

Though you probably have an outstanding link building forum, I’ve just performed a quick search and wasn’t able to find anyone recommending link buying. From the few threads i just read(only a quick search) link buying seems to be discouraged. Can you point me to where link buying is recommend please?

Cheers

Wow!

TW's second forum scuffle eh? - we must be going up in the world LoL!

Steady on guys, Jill didnt mention or insinuate that HR does encourage link buying. No need to go down that route.....

I will say that he looks like an unlikely HR member though, one can only speculate as to what he actually did with that money! - I mean, 16K? - Sheeesh!

That company needs a lawyer rather than another strategy from this "seo"... hehe ;-)

Nick

Sorry if you took it as an in

Sorry if you took it as an insult, seohelp. I'm just sick of hearing that High Rankings doesn't believe in link building.

I've been link building for clients for 9+ years before link building even had a name. So when I see someone providing inaccurate information about my forum (which also insinuates what I personally believe), it's pretty infuriating to me because it simply spreads the falsehoods further.

Since when is link building ALL about buying links? (Which, fyi, is indeed discussed and encouraged where appropriate by many mods on my forum, including our link building mod.)

Back on topic to this particular thread...

The original poster is a member of the HR forum, but I believe only has a few posts under his/her belt. Regardless, we can't be responsible for how people implement the advice we give, and how people put it to use. Obviously, if he threw $16k away and didn't see any increase in traffic, he's missing the plot somewhere!

Never meant to imply highrank

Never meant to imply highranking gives bad info or doesn’t have a good link building section.

Saying that someone cannot spend $16k using highranking best practises is a good thing, especially a forum with a reputation for not promoting risky techniques “content content content”, unless its changed to the dark side ;) << wink/joke

As the guy managed to squander $16k in 4 months its stands a good chance he spent a lot of this buying links or had a very expensive host. Not blaming highranking, he does say “and other forums”, but sounds like he just screwed up.

As far as i remember link buying was always discouraged/frowned upon on highrankings even if it was acknowledged as sometimes being effective. After a quick search I wasn’t able to find any mention of link buying without the general tone being negative. I didn’t say this was bad thing, seeing as this guy probably lost most of his money using a technique not encouraged its actually a good thing to say.

If i had more time i would visit highranking more often, but it has far too many posts for me to keep up. So i’ll leave it to Nick to pick the best threads and post them here

cheers

I do not think people mean to

I do not think people mean to throw insults...lots of awesome people post at HighRankings...you got to realize that when you brand yourself as "THE CONTENT SEO" that many people are going to just assume that concept does not align well with "AGGRESSIVE LINK BUYING"

Certainly $16,000 is a ton to blow through when you can get on the internet.com network for ~ $5,000 / month (which can usually guarantee at least a strong PR7 right out of the gate)

Give me a break

I guess I was pretty niave to believe that I could suggest an opposing point of view in a SEM forum without personally offending people who have built a career around a single traffic driver.

In my defense, if you read what I said a little more carefully you'll notice that I never said anything about my company being the recipient of that money. The grand majority of the $16,000 went to the salaries of the individuals who were spending their time executing SEM "best practices." The last time I checked spending time doing something costs money.

My point, although poorly stated was this, there are effective alternatives to SEM which should be considered when laying out an overall online marketing plan. In some cases a company may have a better ROI if they spend their limited time/money on these alternatives.

I was hoping to get other forum members opinion on this idea but as you can see many of them were too defensive of their industry to focus on the question/debate (Jill) and decided to focus on attacking me personally instead. I found this unfortunate since HighRankings seems to be one of the best SEM information resources available.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.