2006 SEO/M predictions - form an orderly queue

8 comments

Stuntdbl starts off with a 2005 vs 2006 head to head - '40 SEM 2006 Predictions - Search Engine Marketing Trends and Opportunities'. Have to say that some of the 2006 terms sound like they've been cranked out by a Web2.0 bollocks-omatic generator though. He sums up with:

I think we’ll see a polarization in the “hat color” of SEO’s in 2006. The folks that apply real marketing principles will be seperated from those that use technical tricks. The “tech tricks” will continue to work with a limited window of opportunity and increased difficulty. Choose one or the other and start studying or find a new occupation. Happy New Year!

Todd also kicks off a thread at SEW which sees concerns, shared elsewhere, over what analytics might come to represent:

And lastly, improved analytics will allow it all to come together and truly show us what is and isn't working. My only fear? People finding ways to trick analytics. ...it never ends.

Re-purposed, smarter clickbots are now in some SEO toolkits, and that's just the primitive methods - I'm sure it will get more interesting as time goes on.

My fear? The only way to get perfect results is to have perfect information. My concern is how far SE's will go to get the information they need to improve their results.

To finish, John Battelle from just before Christmas - 'Predictions 2006':

2. Google will stumble, some might say badly, but it will be significant. How? My money is on its second or third major deal - something on the order of the recent AOL deal. It may well be a loss (perceived or otherwise) in the Google Book Search case. Or it might be the privacy issue. This is not to say the company is going to fail, or the stock, for that matter. Just that it will face a major test in 2006 that it won't pass with flying colors.

Comments

pheh

I'll toss in here because I like how TW was built on ThreadJacking™.

I predict that more and more "corporate" SEOs (e.g. Todd as reflected here...gulp) will be shocked by the amazing quick success of newly-discovered "tech tricks" used by their competitors, and start using them again ;-)

Seriously, consider SEO a business or a vocation. As a business, you will need a business model. Who can build a business based on "tech tricks" that could go away at any moment? Who could trust their full-time staff, 5 year office lease, and lecture circuit contracts on that?

On a related note, I predict an increase in the number of talking heads populating the SEO speaker circuit.

They have it wrong 2006 will

They have it wrong 2006 will be the year tech tricks get less detectable.

I predict that tech tricks will be more focused on content generation than on straight up SERP manipulation. People will start coming up with ways to have usable computer generated text that isn't detectable to a human reader as computer generated. The rub in this is the newbies that can't program will never figure it out, get frustrated, and quit.

Log files will be spammed with increasing frequancy but in new ways. They will be spammed to hide what terms you are successful for and what terms you are not. This will prevent you from determining how you are doing in the serps with log analyzers and you will be forced to scrap the serps via rank checkers to determine your relative success in a SEO campaign.

SEO Predictions

Hmmm, does this have anything to do with a new ebook I see being promoted? Take a peek at seopredictions.com. I received a printed mailer today in fact asking me to be one of the 50 experts to submit predictions for the 2006 year. Anybody else get a postcard from them in the past few days?

Weird how...

Weird how they don't have an easy to find name on their SEO Predictions site.

The guy on the WhoIs does not currently have a single Google search result for "his name" + seo.

I would be much more inclined to buy off someone who is open with their identity like Mike Grehan or Dan Thies.

Wow. Tough Crowd.

This was just some off the top of the head thinking I had on the subject of '06. Guess some of it did get a lil' heavy on the 2.0ish stuff :)

Quote:
I predict that more and more "corporate" SEOs (e.g. Todd as reflected here...gulp) will be shocked by the amazing quick success of newly-discovered "tech tricks" used by their competitors, and start using them again ;-)

I definitely never said I WOULDN'T be looking for and utilizing any tricks I can get my hands on that fits within my own or my client's own risk tolerance. I'm only saying as webprofessor said a little differently that they aren't going to be so glaringly obvious, and much more difficult to suss out and put into action. Technically sound stategy is good. Relying on technical tricks *is* a pretty tough biz model (not impossible...just not my first choice personally).

Quote:
Web2.0 bollocks-omatic generator though

Guilty as charged on this. If you'd like to add some predictions you can try this or this

Quote:
I predict that tech tricks will be more focused on content generation than on straight up SERP manipulation.

Agreed. The "non-corporate" side of SEO will continue to get more heavily automated and even less detectable. Definitely not against this form of SEO, just the opposite in fact...I very much respect the technical ability it takes for a lot of the more "creative" forms of button pusher SEO. It's just not the type of techniques that I'm most qualified for (I'm more of a business/marketing guy than a technical/ programming guy).

Quote:
On a related note, I predict an increase in the number of talking heads populating the SEO speaker circuit.

Speaking on concepts is much different than being highly knowledeable on a subject. I would much rather listen to someone from highly competitive industries talk shop in the pub than I would watch many of the presentations (on a personal learning level) as it is much more tangible in terms of techniques. Very seldom is someone willing to stand up in front of a crowd and go on record publicly releasing a "secret" (though it still accounts for the death of most of them - and also probably the last time that person will be told a "secret".) This doesn't mean that sessions and conceptual teaching isn't important in a broader sense...only that it's different and aimed at a different audience at a different stage in the learning curve.

>talk shop in the

>talk shop in the pub

SHHHH!

I predict that the pub-style meetings will become more private/screened than they've been in the past.

tough crowd

Nah... don't take it personal ;-) Attention is good, right?

The old adage, "those who can't do, teach" has alot of truth to it, even if it is a consequence of professionalism.

>Attention is good,

>Attention is good, right?

In a word, "No."

Comment viewing options

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