Offering Premium SEO service - get top Google Rankings

[jim85]

I'm a London-based SEO specialist and am providing SEO that actually works.

Google is constantly changing its algorithms so nobody can guarantee rankings. This being said, we have a very good past track record. We are currently working with over 50 websites that are ranking very well for their chosen keywords.

If you want to rank for specific keywords then we are the best choice. We do both on and off page SEO and use only whitehat techniques. Furthermore you will be provided with monthly reports and we are always available on Skype or email to chat.

<snip spammy stuff>

 

[Nottsogreen]

SPAM

SPAM




Reported

 

[jim85]

Hardly..

 

[Simmo!]

spam
noun
irrelevant or unsolicited messages sent over the Internet, typically to large numbers of users, for the purposes of advertising, phishing, spreading malware, etc.

KInd of is The forum is also for "Help Wanted" not "Help Offered".

But leaving that aside for a moment, I'm intrigued as to what constitutes SEO these days. Linking techniques are dangerous territory and their impact dying fast, meta, tag and keyword relevance is getting less so and kw density is no longer a factor in semantically sensitive algos. What's left other than good content?

Any form of manipulating results can only be a short-term solution, surely?

 

[jim85]

Fair enough newbie mistake, can mod please remove. No not short term.

 

[The Dude]

Fair enough newbie mistake, can mod please remove. No not short term.

I'm accepting your "newbie" mistake on the condition that you explain how manipulative SEO is good. I'm also moving this to the Webmeister section, and I'll give you access so you can explain. Like Simmo pointed out, this is Help Wanted, not Buy My Services.

Anticipating your answer.

 

[The Dude]

I noticed on your profile, you claim to be an "SEO expert". What exactly qualifies you as an "expert" - in other words, what are your qualifications?

 

[dunover]

Here we go again. It's 'Spammy Sunday' the day it seems this forum gets hit by most of it's chancers, snake-oilers, system-sellers and Timbuktu-based new casinos.

Haven't they got a church to go to, a football match on TV or Sunday roast to cook?

 

[jim85]

Thank you for moving the thread.

Here we go again. It's 'Spammy Sunday' the day it seems this forum gets hit by most of it's chancers, snake-oilers, system-sellers and Timbuktu-based new casinos.

Haven't they got a church to go to, a football match on TV or Sunday roast to cook?

This thread was from saturday

I noticed on your profile, you claim to be an "SEO expert". What exactly qualifies you as an "expert" - in other words, what are your qualifications?

I've ranked a number of websites very highly in Google for very competitive gambling keywords. If anyone wants to know more they are more than welcome to a private chat.

KInd of is The forum is also for "Help Wanted" not "Help Offered".

But leaving that aside for a moment, I'm intrigued as to what constitutes SEO these days. Linking techniques are dangerous territory and their impact dying fast, meta, tag and keyword relevance is getting less so and kw density is no longer a factor in semantically sensitive algos. What's left other than good content?

Any form of manipulating results can only be a short-term solution, surely?

Yes this is true, SEO is not what is used to be. You can never go wrong with high quality content. However, Google has changed their algorithms to incorporate social networks and social metrics. I.e. Having a Facebook page with high quality content, lots of likes and comments will boost a websites' ranking. There are other ways of manipulating this. Image sharing and Google Plus play an important role.

 

[dunover]

Thank you for moving the thread.



This thread was from saturday



I've ranked a number of websites very highly in Google for very competitive gambling keywords. If anyone wants to know more they are more than welcome to a private chat.



Yes this is true, SEO is not what is used to be. You can never go wrong with high quality content. However, Google has changed their algorithms to incorporate social networks and social metrics. I.e. Having a Facebook page with high quality content, lots of likes and comments will boost a websites' ranking. There are other ways of manipulating this. Image sharing and Google Plus play an important role.

Instead of diversions, perhaps an answer to CM's questions above??

 

[Simmo!]

There are other ways of manipulating this. Image sharing and Google Plus play an important role.

But this is where I struggle with SEO. Google doesn't want it's results manipulated: it wants to deliver results based on value (not "perceived" value). At best, doing this will get you some short-term results and at worst, as we have seen with linking strategies, it will get you penalised.

I am not saying there aren't ways to manipulate a higher ranking but ultimately, it is simply a short-term strategy and you will always be fire-fighting (or starting over LOL).

 

[KasinoKing]

Yes this is true, SEO is not what is used to be. You can never go wrong with high quality content.

You're right there. I have NEVER done any SEO, but my site ranks very highly (top 10) for many key-words.
Obviously I waffle too much!

KK

 

[jim85]

Instead of diversions, perhaps an answer to CM's questions above??

My 8+ years experience in SEO would probably be a start..

But this is where I struggle with SEO. Google doesn't want it's results manipulated: it wants to deliver results based on value (not "perceived" value). At best, doing this will get you some short-term results and at worst, as we have seen with linking strategies, it will get you penalised.

I am not saying there aren't ways to manipulate a higher ranking but ultimately, it is simply a short-term strategy and you will always be fire-fighting (or starting over LOL).

This is true, however, SEO is not always about creating 'perceived value' rather it is possible to create value i.e. genuine people blogging about your sites with their own large blogging networks. It is possible to create long-term results but ultimately it is the guys with the biggest budgets that will win.

 

[Simmo!]

My 8+ years experience in SEO would probably be a start..



This is true, however, SEO is not always about creating 'perceived value' rather it is possible to create value i.e. genuine people blogging about your sites with their own large blogging networks. It is possible to create long-term results but ultimately it is the guys with the biggest budgets that will win.

In many verticals yes, the general public do "blog" but in the gaming industry, particularly areas like casino which are often regarded as less socially acceptable, it doesn't happen. Blogs are 90% done for SEO with a handful perhaps for affiliated monetisation and certainly anyone with a large network of blogs would be the former.

Ultimately though, links are too easy to abuse and there will come a time when link juice is all but irrelevant in ranking algorithms anyway. It will dwindle on for now obviously, with the last bastion no doubt being links from "authority" sites but IMO, any links from blogging networks that still have value, are merely for short-term gain.

What links could do however is maybe push a site more into Google's limelight whereupon it can better assess authority.

The long term goal for any site has to be authority: valuable content - not "quality content" as is so often touted. Anyone can produce quality content with a bit of research but valuable content comes from an authority. Community sites aside, I think you could count on one (OK, maybe two) hands the number of authority sites in the online casino sphere. There are lots of very good sites but very few that would be missed if they weren't there tomorrow.

There is of course a good argument that SEO provides an alternative to people who can't build authority but it's obvious where the search engines (or "knowledge engines"!) are headed so we're right back into the short-term gain area. Which will suit many people especially, as you say, the richer ones who prefer to ride the waves and can afford to churn and burn.

In light of how Penguin actually penalised sites who went link building to rank, it's a bit more dangerous if you are trying to build a "brand" I would suggest. In fact, Google sent a very clear warning there that if you do things to manipulate your own ranking you have to accept that there might be consequences down the line.

 

[dunover]

My 8+ years experience in SEO would probably be a start..



This is true, however, SEO is not always about creating 'perceived value' rather it is possible to create value i.e. genuine people blogging about your sites with their own large blogging networks. It is possible to create long-term results but ultimately it is the guys with the biggest budgets that will win.

Is that 16 x 6 months' experience by any chance?

So, you come on here and offer services for free? What are you after. Cut to the chase.

 

[ville]

Are you a wizard?

 

[kahntrutahn]

I've ranked a number of websites very highly in Google for very competitive gambling keywords. If anyone wants to know more they are more than welcome to a private chat.

Naming some names would have gone a long way towards your credibility here. However, naming names isn't what SEO companies do if they don't use 100% whitehat methods. Given that you stated you do whitehat, but were unwilling to name names, I have to call your claims into question.

Yes this is true, SEO is not what is used to be. You can never go wrong with high quality content. However, Google has changed their algorithms to incorporate social networks and social metrics. I.e. Having a Facebook page with high quality content, lots of likes and comments will boost a websites' ranking. There are other ways of manipulating this. Image sharing and Google Plus play an important role.

As an aside, this info is already out of date. Facebook has completely changed up how they operate and you have to pretty much specifically create content for Facebook. Just posting links to your own custom content on your website is about 10% as effective as it once was.

Google has all but abandoned G+ as it was originally intended and the G+ links were highly devalued.

I had one SEO try to sell me on a 5k/month package. I declined. I saw someone that he did go to work for, and likely at a higher price I might add given that they were churning out 8 "blog posts" a day with keywords and G+. It was rather comical to watch. They'd have a poorly written blog post, keyword rich, with 4000 or more Google Plus likes. The other social shares? 0-2 Facebook and tweets. Do you think Google was smart enough to figure that fraud out? HINT: They were, it was a complete waste of money and they probably ended up penalizing themselves in the process.

 

[The Dude]

As an aside, this info is already out of date...

So is this guy, he hasn't logged in for over a year..

 

[kahntrutahn]

So is this guy, he hasn't logged in for over a year..

I doubt he got any business either with that lame pitch.

PM M3 4 UB3R R3SULTZ!

 

[Pulver]

What I fail to understand about these "SEO-Companies" is, if they are as good as they say they are, why don't they build their own sites and make bank? My answer to that question is that 99% of them are not as good as they say they are.

 

[Nicola]

While we're on subject of SEO...

If a gambling link is placed on a completely un-topic web site (say a highly-ranked official government front page) - with permission of course - does this still have effect?

 

[kahntrutahn]

What I fail to understand about these "SEO-Companies" is, if they are as good as they say they are, why don't they build their own sites and make bank? My answer to that question is that 99% of them are not as good as they say they are.

I don't disagree with your premise, that 99% of them suck at what they do, but I do disagree to some extent about why.

I felt the same way at first... "If you can rank everything so highly, why don't you?" The answer to that, at least in some cases, is because they can't create the proper content due to a lack of competence. Sure, they can edit your content and link it up, and backlink the hell out of it, etc in order to improve your rankings. But they could never write quality content like you do.

Another thing to consider, in defense of SEO companies, is that some people just like to do one task over another. For example. I could maximize my hourly rate and earnings by shutting down my affiliate business right now. If I went back to focusing on playing poker online 8/7/365 like I used to, I'd make more money every year. But I'd be less happy. Even though I'm working 12 hour days all the time, I rather like having different tasks to do besides methodically grinding out the $$ playing poker.

I presume the same could hold true for an SEO guru. Sure, he could do other things, but doing SEO gives him or her the ability to vary their workload and keep things interesting. With that said, this is probably only a fraction of the 1% of these guys that are actually worth their salt...

 

[kahntrutahn]

While we're on subject of SEO...

If a gambling link is placed on a completely un-topic web site (say a highly-ranked official government front page) - with permission of course - does this still have effect?

While I don't have any of them, I'm pretty sure that true .gov links are still quite powerful and authoritative. Now, if you get a gambling link on the agriculture page of a gov site, that's likely not nearly as good as having one from the Nevada Gaming Commission, but I'm sure it's still very valuable. Hell, I'd take one from the Department of Sewers and Sanitation if it were a legit .gov website

 

[Pulver]

Fair points you make there kahntrutahn.

With that said, this is probably only a fraction of the 1% of these guys that are actually worth their salt...

This was essentially what I was trying to say.

 

[Pulver]

While we're on subject of SEO...

If a gambling link is placed on a completely un-topic web site (say a highly-ranked official government front page) - with permission of course - does this still have effect?

Links are still important for rankings, that's for sure, so getting links to your site is generally a good thing. Links from relevant web pages are of higher value, but I would not turn down a link like that if you have the opportunity. The only exception would be if the site is spammed to death and has a high outbound link count.

 

[Nicola]

Thanks for the replies

 

[kahntrutahn]

a gambling link is placed on a completely un-topic web site (say a highly-ranked official government front page) - with permission of course

So, who do you have to bribe to get one of these! And can I get an introduction

 

[Nicola]

So, who do you have to bribe to get one of these! And can I get an introduction

Haha, no bribing involved! I'm still the webmaster and asked permission for the link.

The best link I've ever secured was a PR9 from a European Government '.int' domain - that pushed my personal site to top spot of Google within 48 hours!

 

[kahntrutahn]

Haha, no bribing involved! I'm still the webmaster and asked permission for the link.

The best link I've ever secured was a PR9 from a European Government '.int' domain - that pushed my personal site to top spot of Google within 48 hours!

I believe I'm turning green with envy. You must be one smooth talker/emailer

 

[bonustreak]

So is this guy, he hasn't logged in for over a year.

LOL... Can I get my 10 mins back ..