Comments on: Content May Be The SEO King But Check The Palace Architecture

By: Directory Submission

Directory Submission — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:02:37 +0000

I really wonder how many ppl look into this area of SEO, site architecture. Good you mention it.

By: Hospedagem

Hospedagem — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:00:26 +0000

I have a blog from blogger and it does so well in SERP with good traffic stats based on google analytics using the same SEO practices I did for my website.

By: Barry Welford

Barry Welford — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:03:55 +0000

Thanks for mentioning them, Peter.

By: Peter Davies

Peter Davies — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:36:29 +0000

Architecture and content are important but surely keywords within the content is worthy of a mention here.

By: Top 10 items in SEO and SEM for the week of August 3 – August 9 | Rockin' SEO Blog - SEO Tools

Mon, 10 Aug 2009 07:08:04 +0000

[...] Site architecture is important too [...]

By: TigerTom

TigerTom — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 19:11:42 +0000

Mediocre content and good backlinks trumps great content and poor backlinks. If you produce worthile content and actively seek medium-to-good backlinks you’ll be fine.

RESIST the siren lure of autogenned content and cr*p backlinks. Unless you don’t care about a ban.

By: Terry Van Horne

Terry Van Horne — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:00:19 +0000

Nick… have to disagree it starts and ends with content because trying to get links to lousy content is almost impossible. A site that was built for the audience has chosen content that is in high demand and therefore linking takes care of itself. IME, sites that need a lot of link development were poorly planned and launched. If that ship has sailed then… you need to step back and figure out why links didn’t come naturally and change content choices and do some competitor and audience analysis.

I agree there are many things involved and a lot of those are not even SEO they are marketing and competitor/audience related. I disagree that link building has to be part of it, sure I list with a few of the main directories and set blogs up withh RSS feed distribution, do news releases etc., encorage the use of Twitte and social media(if you are using Social for link building don’t be surprised when your house of cards comes down) however I would call that the normal course of launching a site not “link building”. The main way you can build links is through directories, recips, articles is it any wonder 2 of those 3 have been more or less proven near useless for traffic and passing link authority. Possibly because all SEO manipulation techniques have a shelf life of less than a year?

By: Nick Stamoulis

Nick Stamoulis — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:18:27 +0000

I think what people tend to forget is that is not one single action that works best. Yes content is extremely powerful and important but the best content in the world won;t help you if you have not done a well rounded link building campaign. One that includes all aspects of the internet. Finding one component and beating it into the ground simply does not work long term.

By: Ventrilo Servers

Ventrilo Servers — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 14:05:21 +0000

Sometimes SEO and google can be really confusing. It takes a lot of studying to learn the best formula.

By: Business Management Consulting

Business Management Consulting — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 04:44:38 +0000

Well, I just wonder why my site appears with no error on the google webmaster tool but got poor rankings while careful and persistent SEO tactics have been executed.

Another thing, I had a blog from blogger and it does so well in SERP and good traffic stats based on google analytics using the same SEO practice I did for my site.

Could this mean google favors some site architecture?