<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><rss xmlns:atom='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom' xmlns:openSearch='http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/' version='2.0'><channel><atom:id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735</atom:id><lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:37:58 +0000</lastBuildDate><title>SEO Ranks</title><description/><link>http://www.seoranks.com/</link><managingEditor>Jan</managingEditor><generator>Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>21</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>25</openSearch:itemsPerPage><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-646302276053751756</guid><pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:05:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2008-01-22T10:24:00.568-08:00</atom:updated><title>Google's Supplemental Index</title><atom:summary type='text'>

Pages in google's supplemental index aren't penalized, but they may as well be.   The supplemental index consists of pages that are deemed to be similar enough to other pages, that they don't appear in the SERPS.    No penalty, but no traffic to those pages, either.    If you find you have a lot of pages in supplemental hell, you know you're losing a ton of potential traffic.

Problem is, you </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2008/01/googles-supplemental.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-114539135456785410</guid><pubDate>Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:11:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2006-05-18T21:15:33.510-07:00</atom:updated><title>Been a While</title><atom:summary type='text'>It's been a very long time since I've made a post here.    I've been busy working on sites that actually earn me money, and this one doesn't!   I've also been busy with some extraordinary new members of my family.   Ferrets.

I have absolutely fallen in love with these little guys.  So much so, in fact, that in the past few days I've created a Ferret Forum!

As far as SEO goes, I am entirely </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2006/04/been-while.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-113781973940609523</guid><pubDate>Sat, 21 Jan 2006 01:32:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2006-01-20T21:21:17.510-08:00</atom:updated><title>Google Sued Over Drop in PR</title><atom:summary type='text'>Have you heard this one yet?  A webmaster who was raking in the cash selling links on his PR8 site is suing Google, because his rank dropped to a PR4.

Search King, Web site network and advertising seller in Oklahoma City, has filed a lawsuit against Google for allegedly bumping down it's Page Rank unfairly.

Search King states that they started a PR Ad Network - an advertising network sells text</atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2006/01/google-sued-over-drop-in-pr.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-113756757660178975</guid><pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2006 06:52:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2006-01-18T13:01:04.110-08:00</atom:updated><title>Blog Spamming</title><atom:summary type='text'>
I have a few blogs hosted at blogspot.com.  On these blogs I get some comments that are obviously put there by webbies to get some backlinks to their sites.

I don't try to stop them.   After all, they've always left a nice little message...Now, I don't know if they're using any blog spam warez or not, but I don't really care.   I just don't get all excited about blog spamming.

Some SEO people </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2006/01/blog-spamming.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-113212136103515880</guid><pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2005 05:59:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-11-15T22:13:41.636-08:00</atom:updated><title>SERP report - Month 3.</title><atom:summary type='text'>I don't know about you, but I'm a regular statistics addict.  I check stats every time I sit down at the computer.   I just can't help myself.    So I figured that some of you might find it interesting to see what kind of traffic this new blog is getting without doing any of the usual SEO stuff, such as exchanging links, buying traffic, spamming forums for backlinks, blah blah and blah.     None </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/11/serp-report-month-3.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-113211982185186288</guid><pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2005 05:36:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-11-15T21:48:03.300-08:00</atom:updated><title>SEO Ranks in the sandbox</title><atom:summary type='text'>
SEO Ranks has made it into the google sandbox!

I started this blog partly to experiment with pristine, white-hat SEO.  I haven't given links out to anything or anyone because they asked, I've added links add value and interest to this blog.  

I also haven't asked for any links - except that I have added the blog to a couple blog directories so that the search engine could find me.   I haven't </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/11/seo-ranks-in-sandbox.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-113199383313096998</guid><pubDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:38:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-11-15T21:49:08.643-08:00</atom:updated><title>Yahoo! loving link spam - still.</title><atom:summary type='text'>I keep track of highly competitive phrases on the search engine.  Every day I check out the serps for holy grail phrases in areas where webmasters are fierce and ruthless in their quest for serps.

Yahoo's serps seemed pretty reasonable until today.  I checked out a couple phrases and found a huge shift in some areas - and a lot of crap in the results.  Redirected sites and link spammed sites </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/11/yahoo-loving-link-spam-still.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-113183597510243120</guid><pubDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2005 22:41:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-11-12T17:20:25.063-08:00</atom:updated><title>Reciprocal Linking 101</title><atom:summary type='text'>
The jagger update is done, leaving some sites in its dust and elevating other sites to new highs.   Something that has become very clear is google's refined link credibility:  Quality of the pages who are linking to you are of the utmost importance if you want to do well with google.  

- Avoid site-wide links and links that the search engines can easily identify as paid links.  i.e. links under</atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/11/reciprocal-linking-101.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-113027764728075964</guid><pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2005 21:49:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-10-25T15:01:21.106-07:00</atom:updated><title>Measuring the Quality of a Site</title><atom:summary type='text'>Everyone who has done any SEO work on their site knows that getting backlinks is at least half the battle - if not more.   Quality backlinks and quality content have always been, and will always be what makes or breaks a site in the SERPs.

Now, you can go out and get a zillion reciprocated links from any site that will link to you, but 1,000 links from 1,000 crappy sites is worth less than 10 </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/10/measuring-quality-of-site.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112976689454034117</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:02:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-10-23T02:57:28.166-07:00</atom:updated><title>Google's algo and the age of domains.</title><atom:summary type='text'>
The recent changes happening at Google seem to indicate a much larger emphasis on the age of a website.  I recently investigated the top 20 websites for my sought-after key phrase ( a very competitive one ) , and found that the domain names were all registered prior to 2002.  Most of them were older than that, some dated back to the 1990's.

It would appear that the older a domain name is, the </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/10/googles-algo-and-age-of-domains.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112753651784207206</guid><pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2005 23:35:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-23T22:02:59.726-07:00</atom:updated><title>Pharma Sites Busted by DEA</title><atom:summary type='text'>
     Big changes to come at the pharm after 18 people arrested for allegedly selling pharmaceutical drugs illegally over the Internet.  Those arrested include the "ringleaders" of more than 4,600 "rogue" Online pharmacy websites.    Read the DEA press release while trying not to gag. Whether or not affiliate sites are in danger of facing legal action, they do bear some risk.  At the very least, </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/pharma-sites-busted-by-dea.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112628792743309044</guid><pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2005 12:45:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-09T11:22:22.190-07:00</atom:updated><title>Is the Yahoo! Honeymoon Over?</title><atom:summary type='text'>
Is the Yahoo! Honeymoon Over?       Yes, I think it is. Over the last year and a half Yahoo! have well and truly won the hearts and minds of the blogging and tech community - no small feat, and very, very important. Yet much of that achievment, perhaps all of it, can be directly attributed to the Y! Search team - they get it, 100% However, there's a large disconnect between Y!Search and the rest</atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/is-yahoo-honeymoon-over.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112597685130431391</guid><pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2005 03:00:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-06T11:41:25.950-07:00</atom:updated><title>Getting Spidered: Static vs Dynamic</title><atom:summary type='text'>
Search Engine Spiders prefer Static URLs

The structure of your site is very important for search engine spiders, and search engines seem to favour static urls over dynamic urls (urls that have a ? in them).  Dynamic URL's are created by server side scripts, and the portion of the url after the ? is not static.  

Yaho recommends avoiding dynamically generated urls for pages that you desire to </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/getting-spidered-static-vs-dynamic.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112594601769736982</guid><pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2005 13:46:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-06T07:01:33.050-07:00</atom:updated><title>Fishin for MSN UK Serps?</title><atom:summary type='text'>
Previously, MSN UK did not allow .coms to feature in the MSN UK search,  whether or not they were UK hosted. That policy seems to have changed, since .coms, .nets,  ecetera hosted in the UK, are featured in MSN SERPS.

However, instead of simply giving preference to sites hosted in the UK, MSN does not allow sites into the searches unless your site is either hosted in the UK, or is a .co.uk site</atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/fishin-for-msn-uk-serps.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112601402810573371</guid><pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2005 08:40:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-06T07:21:12.220-07:00</atom:updated><title>MSN Paid Search</title><atom:summary type='text'>MSN Paid Search Details EmergeSomething missed in the week, but fortunately picked up by slashdot was this ZDNet Asia report on MSN Paid Search that details the launch in Singapore, with France to follow an...</atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/msn-paid-search.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112601402622486881</guid><pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2005 08:40:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-06T07:18:50.816-07:00</atom:updated><title>Google Stuff</title><atom:summary type='text'>
Google Showing Ads In Regular SERPS  I didn't see anything on TW or elsewhere about this, but it's really amazing to see how many more ODP descriptions and META descriptions are taking the place of snippets in Google's SERPs. If this keeps up, SEOs will be begging DMOZ to remove their sites from the directory, so they can get their META descriptions (aka ad copy) displayed. Google "...     Is </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/google-stuff.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112587583556133857</guid><pubDate>Sun, 04 Sep 2005 18:17:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-04T16:43:12.883-07:00</atom:updated><title>Online Casino SEO Scam</title><atom:summary type='text'> A new scam is in the works.  BeTheDealer Casino, who spearheaded the "fortuno Winnero Google Contest, offered a cash prize pool of $7000.00.  Basically, to participate, webmasters were asked to put this on sites (I've made changes made to syntax  show the code, not run it):
  
I'm participating in the challenging [a href='http://www.btdino.com']search engine optimization competition[/a][br]</atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/online-casino-seo-scam.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112581950927884216</guid><pubDate>Sun, 04 Sep 2005 07:38:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-06T07:08:09.610-07:00</atom:updated><title>SEO Ranks . com</title><atom:summary type='text'>SEO Ranks is simply a fledgling site about Search Engine Optimization. It in no way pretends to be a professional SEO site, it's simply a site owned by a very interested webmaster. Complete amateur Optimizer.  Optimizing for the search engines is always a moving target. What's true one day may not be true the next - at least it sure feels that way.  But the basic principles for SEO always remain </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/seo-ranks-com.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112582092544913615</guid><pubDate>Sun, 04 Sep 2005 03:02:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-04T01:15:41.100-07:00</atom:updated><title>Bloggers Legally Liable?</title><atom:summary type='text'> Are Bloggers Legally Liable For Readers&amp;#39;Comments?  sued Aaron Wall, who maintains a blog on search engine optimization - tactics companies use to get themselves to appear   </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/bloggers-legally-liable.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112582092643312354</guid><pubDate>Sun, 04 Sep 2005 03:02:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-04T01:15:07.320-07:00</atom:updated><title>New SEM Tools</title><atom:summary type='text'> New SEM Tools From Search Engine Strategies San Jose Internet Search Engine Database - Aug 29, 2005   Links are a huge topic of discussion in search engine optimization. Backlink Anchor Text Analyzer is a tool that lists the backlinks to your website.    </atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/new-sem-tools.html</link><author>Jan</author></item><item><guid isPermaLink='false'>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16295735.post-112581974535561342</guid><pubDate>Sun, 04 Sep 2005 02:42:00 +0000</pubDate><atom:updated>2005-09-06T07:24:42.933-07:00</atom:updated><title>Alt text and SEO</title><atom:summary type='text'>How Important Is ALT Text In Search Engine Optimization WebProNews, KY - Aug 15, 2005   2. Use your keyword phrase in one or two instances of ALT text on the page - no more. Use moderation in everything you do in search engine optimization.   Web Design Templates And Search Engine Optimization WebProNews, KY - Aug 23, 2005I am worried that code bloat and other template issues might interfere with</atom:summary><link>http://www.seoranks.com/2005/09/alt-text-and-seo.html</link><author>Jan</author></item></channel></rss>