From: Tamara

Hello Jill:

I love your advice and have a simple question, I wonder if you would be so kind to answer. I am a psychic who has two sites up since 1994 and 1995. I have done all my own submissions, and have done very well for myself. I feel my recognition has put me in all directories and all search engines for free. I am now considering paying for maybe Yahoo! Express or something. My question is this: Since I am already in these engines, should I just work on my wording of my index page of my site, or actually pay for a higher ranking, knowing nothing is guaranteed.

I really appreciate your expertise and know how. Grateful for your time.

Peace and blessings,

Tamara
Psychic to the stars
www.tamara3.com

++Jill's Response++

Hi Tamara,

Nice to hear from you.

If your site is already listed in Yahoo! you can't actually submit to them again. They will simply take your $299 and that will be the end of it. Once you're in, there's nothing much you can do to change your listing. However, if your scope of services has changed, you may be able to submit a request to get your description changed.

Also, it's important to note that working on the wording of your page will have no effect in directories such as Yahoo!. Since Yahoo! is not a search engine but a directory, you have your one listing and changes to your site have no bearing on it. Changes to your site will, however, affect your listings in the spidering search engines such as Google. If you're not getting the kinds of rankings you want with them, you should definitely work on the copy in your pages.

It's important to first do some keyword research and determine the keywords people are actually searching upon to find your type of site. In my opinion, the best place to do keyword research is WordTracker. Once you have determined your best keyword phrases, you'll then have to incorporate them into the copy of your pages and your HTML Title and Meta tags. Since your site has been around for a long time, there should be no reason to have to pay for submissions anywhere. The search engine spiders should already be crawling your site on a regular basis.

Good luck!

Jill

++Weird MSN Results++

From: Rick Barker

Hi Jill,

Thank you for your great work. I always look forward to receiving your newsletter.

Late last week I noticed MSN started delivering search results numbering in the hundreds as opposed to the usual thousands. At first I thought they were doing maintenance of some sort. But now roughly four days later their primary search results still number in the hundreds.

The latter made me wonder if MSN primary search results, now scant, were coming exclusively from LookSmart and Overture. If the latter is correct, I think that would make MSN the first major search engine to generate all paid for listings at their primary search page. I couldn't help but wonder how the Internet community would respond to this change if true. I asked myself that question because in a recent Search Day newsletter (#275), a LookSmart advertisement noted 7 out of 10 users skipped over paid listings opting instead to click on "core" search results. Could MSN just have cut their throat?

Anyway, you have the wherewithal to see if my suspicions are correct so I thought I'd bring this to your attention. Thank you again for your great work.

Rick

R. Barker & Associates
rbarker@divns.com

++Jill's Response++

Hey Rick,

Good observation!

I just checked my favorite phrase, "search engine optimization" and found that it does say only hundreds of results (178), and all 178 of those were from their Web Directory, aka LookSmart listings. However, going through each page and past the 178 Web Directory pages, the next page gave me the "Web Page" results (or Inktomi results), which were numbered 179 and above. Suddenly at the top of the page it said "Results 166-180 of about 195757 containing 'search engine optimization'."

So apparently, they're only counting the directory results when they first tell you how many, but if you get past the directory results (or do a search that comes up with only a few or no directory results) you get the actual number of sites as per Inktomi.

Hope this helps!

Best,

Jill

++Rick's Follow-up Comments++

Oops! I didn't think to actually go through all the listings they mention to see if they end at the number given. With the recent changes at LookSmart, I'm still wondering if some search results will eventually lead to all-paid-for search results at MSN. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out by July 14th. Thank you for your prompt response. I really do enjoy your newsletter and writing style.

Rick

++Jill's Follow-Up Comments++

Hi Rick,

Actually, with the changes at LookSmart, I think it will start to go the other way. There will be fewer paid results, because so many people will be refusing to pay LookSmart's alleged "extortion fees." (At least this is what I'm hoping for!)

An Inktomi listing should become more valuable at MSN once LookSmart starts dropping all those who refuse to give in to their demands.

Glad you enjoy the newsletter!

Jill

++More From Rick: Theme-Based Web Site++

I actually agree with you. I recently advised a client that our Inktomi listings could possibly begin to shine if LookSmart does indeed begin to drop listings. But part of me is in disbelief they would do something so stupid.

On another issue, there has been some discussion in your newsletter about "theme" based web sites. It made me wonder if what I've been doing for several years is now referred to as "theme" based web design.

When Pokemon first came out I decided to go after roughly twelve keywords with doorway pages for affiliate programs I was in. Rather than hanging single pages off sub-directories, I decided to build one big website-looking doorway page. All the navigation links (text) in the left hand column were actual search terms. The "Pokemon Hats" page, for example, linked to a doorway page about Pokemon hats and had the same navigation links in the left hand column (just as with normal web sites). I scored big with this web site placement wise.

Today, I still employ what I call a "related search term/keyword" approach to web design. My own site incorporates this approach but doesn't yet rank well (too much competition). Another site I used the approach, which really scored earlier this year (minimal competition).

Is my approach what is being referred to as "theme" based web design? If so, it really works well most of the time; particularly for search terms with minimal competition. Frankly, I've never seen anyone else use this approach.

Rick

++Jill's Response++

Hi Rick,

"I actually agree with you. I recently advised a client that our Inktomi listings could possibly begin to shine if LookSmart does indeed begin to drop listings. But part of me is in disbelief they would do something so stupid."

They've already been doing it. Most of the sites that don't pay after their clicks run out (usually in just a few days) are being dropped from the results.

"On another issue. There has been some discussion in your newsletter about "theme" based web sites. It made me wonder if what I've been doing for several years is now referred to as "theme" based web design."

Until I read Dan Thies's ebook last week, I wouldn't have been able to tell you. Yet, from what you're telling me, and from what I gathered from his ebook, it does sound like you're doing nearly exactly what he says to do!

Jill

++Search Engines and Cloaking++

From: Linda Girard

Hello Jill!

I enjoy your newsletter very much - thanks for putting it together!

My question is:

I just found out that some SEO companies that specialize in "Cloaking" have underwriting agreements with Search Engines in order to get around the negativity of this topic.

Could you please tell me if this is true and doesn't it seem unethical on the part of the SEO'er and the search engine to do this? Also, if this is true: why are the search engines telling us cloaking is bad but letting this underwriting happen?

What is your opinion? Please enlighten me -- Thank you!

Linda Girard

++Jill's Response++

Good question!

I believe what you're referring to is the "trusted XML feed" programs offered by Inktomi and some of the other search engines. Some, including Danny Sullivan, have referred to this as cloaking, yet in the strict definition of the word, it's really not cloaking. (I use Alan Perkins's definition which briefly is the following: "Identifying a search engine using its IP/HTTP request and delivering content to that search engine that will not be seen by users of that search engine.")

What the search engines are doing (for a hefty fee) is different from that. These XML feeds are showing the search engine one thing and showing the user something else; however, they are under the strict control of the search engines themselves. Since the search engines are the ones that determine what is allowable and what is not, this method is definitely acceptable. They have stated that they do not allow cloaking (as defined by Alan), but that they are willing to work with you if your site has special needs and you wish to provide your site info via XML feeds.

I realize this sounds like a bit of a double standard, and personally, I'm not all that comfortable with it myself. However, it's their search engines and they can allow whatever they want and disallow whatever they want, ya know?

Jill