> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 14:43:21 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>I was deceived too at first. It was only once I went to his sites that I
>>realised it was somewhat a monkey business. Don't get me wrong, he does
>>everything he does quite well, but he cannot mention and present the high
>>numbers to someone with a 5-page Web site and the desire to lure more
> Can you show me one 5 page web site that gets high traffic?
Wordpress.org. PageRank 9 and not much more than 20 /significant/ pages.
Good sites with many references present themselves gracefully.
> Be realistic, for almost any site to do well in Google's organic
> listings it needs a reasonable amount of content pages. There are
> exceptions, but if a 5 page site can get high traffic they don't need
> organic SEO, they most likely have a great word of mouth service.
I fully agree. Does that justify adding organic content to all pages on the
Net? What will cyberspace benefit from the most? I am having mixed feelings
about this, but what if 80 millions domains or so (including parked ones)
contained appended pages whose volume was 1000% of the master content?
That's the same type of sites that Charly referred to as "a lot of spammy
sites" a few hours ago. Spam is evil. Greed drives spam. Greed is evil.
> When I take on clients with few pages first advice is add more content
> pages, fortunately for the client I have the tools to help them do
> this if they can't do it themselves.
> Took on a client with a 20 page site (never had a client with just 5
> pages) which isn't enough to do really well, now their site has over
> 3,000 pages indexed in Google with an increase in targeted traffic and
> sales (the client is happy and looking to expand their business).
That's great news for him and for you. I hope that not all of his
competitors follow suit though (see arguments above).
> What I do for myself I also do for my clients, this month my sites
> have sold $29,000 worth of Amazon products, works out about $400,000
> worth of Amazon stock a year (though this figure will almost certainly
> be higher next month and the month after.... since the relative sales
> figures increase daily). I started creating Amazon sites April 16th
> this year, so in just over 3 months I've gone from selling no Amazon
> products to the above figures. When you consider how Google works now
> that's impressive to say the least.
> I don't get full details of what my clients make, but when they stick
> with me for 6 months they generally don't leave due to the increase in
> The clients who haven't done well have either quit the service early
> (under 6 months) or not made the changes recommended.
> So please tell me where the deception is Roy?
Using statistics as a tool for high self-portrait while neglecting the very
important 'details', which are the nature by which you scrape the sites.
You should become a prefessor. Publish some papers. Here is a place for you
"SCIgen is a program that generates random Computer Science research papers"
> Do you really want me to post sale type stuff like this in the NG so
> you know how I work!! I'd probably get more clients from it, but I
> don't as a general rule chase new clients this way (currently turning
> clients away, not enough time in the day!).
> You'll note I don't advertise SEO Services in my sig, I advertise a
> free SEO tutorial, I don't need more clients and haven't for a long
> time. SEO practically sells itself, finding clients is easy since they
> find you in bulk (10 quote requests so far today, each with the
> potential to make over £4,000 a year from)!
...but how do you perceive your /contribution/ to the Web? Please tell me,
seriously. By all means, I don't consider you to be a spammer (upcoming is
just a 'case study'), but here is the story of another man who thought he
just carried on 'business as usual':
Roy S. Schestowitz