Paul Burke wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 08:24:14 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>Paul Burke wrote:
>>
>>> On 11 Aug 2005 22:18:16 -0700, "Brijesh Kumar" <brijesh123@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi Friends,
>>>>
>>>>I gone through the utilities of Alexa, the below are the few pointers
>>>>which shows how and why Alexa is useful for webmaster and seo.
>>>>
>>>>? Alexa is a partner of Amazon.com
>>>
>>> Correct, but so what ?
>>
>>
>>Agreed. Amazon.com have been extremely unpopular recently because of their
>>ridiculous patents.
>>
>>
>>>>? Alexa tool bar gives useful information of every site like customer
>>>>reviews, traffic rankings, website contact information. (Alexa.com's
>>>>traffic rankings are based on the usage patterns of Alexa Toolbar users
>>>>over a rolling 3 month period.)
>>>
>>> useful information ? Rubbish.
>>
>>
>>Traffic rankings rarely work (see my previous post on the topic) and to
>>get contact information (even telephone number), use whois.net.
>
> which is why I said "useful information ? Rubbish."
>
>>>>? Alexa tell one more important thing regarding the comparison of the
>>>>traffic of your and your competitor website.
>>>
>>> again, rubbish.
>>
>>
>>Not from what I have seen. I came across sites that get merely any
>>traffic, but get good Alexa ranks due to a statistical sample that's too
>>darn small.
>
>
> So you agree with what I said ........ his statement was rubbish.
>
>>
>>>>? Alexa one URL also tells the broken links of your website.
>>>>(http://pages.alexa.com/associates/sitereport.html)
>>>
>>> So can many other programs that (and don't need spyware installed.)
>>
>>
>>Such as http://validator.w3.org/checklink which is superior to all others
>>I have come across and is not commercial.
>
> Agreed. Hence you don't need a spyware program to do the same thing.
>
>>
>>>>? Alexa is a directory and its a good thing if your website is
>>>>submitted and indexed in the data base of Alexa.
>>>
>>> Rubbish. Complete tosh.
>>
>>
>>Who told you that? Any site can be submitted to Alexa. I know because I
>>did this 3 times and the process was automatic. It is not a moderated
>>directory. It gives it no credibility.
>
> Which is why I said Rubbish. Complete tosh.
> You should direct these to Brijesh as he is the one thinking
> otherwise.
It was addressed at that earlier message, but I wanted the arguments to be
boosted by your message too.
Alexa is okay as a very /rough/ indicator of traffic in sites, but it tends
to benefit amateurish sites like yahoo.com (number 1 among Alexa sites the
last time I checked) and not technical sites whose visitors laugh at the
very thought of installing the Alexa toolbar.
Alexa ranks would motivate a whole new SEO 'creature' which is attracting
visitors to feebie content like Windows icons and Britney Spears pictures.
Good sites can easily 'inject' a lot of PageRank into such pages and have
hordes of Alexa-zombied enter their sites.
>>The bottom line is that I view Alexa rank, but I also know how rubbish so
>>I take everything with a pinch of salt.
>
> Exactly.
|
|
