
Everything You Already Know About SEO - andyangelos
http://www.kadavy.net/blog/posts/everything-you-already-know-about-seo/
======
nerme
Anecdotal evidence:

My band's website is the highest ranked page for the search term "red blue
yellow".

No meta headers, no keywords, no <strong>, no <h1>... nothing, not even <html>
or <body> tags. In fact, the only HTML is a <pre> tag containing ASCII art and
a link to our Facebook page. I mean this quite literally, view the source.

However, it has been linked to from other sites quite frequently in recent
weeks.

It would seem that Google doesn't penalize invalid HTML, or even pages that
have only the most basic HTML.

~~~
kadavy
Yeah, wouldn't say they _penalize_ , but since your site actually is at the
URL of redyellowblue.com, and there are other sites (probably with some
authority) linking to it, it doesn't surprise me that it would rank highly.
Additionally, I doubt there is much competition for this keyphrase. It has a
global monthly search volume of 1,600.

~~~
InfinityX0
I should not that there is no way in hell this has a global monthly search
volume of 1,600. Google Adwords lists it at 1,600 probably, which means that
the actual numbers are more like 100.

You have to remember Google is inflating these numbers for their own gain -
being increased PPC spend, of course.

Who in their right mind would search for "red yellow blue"?

~~~
detst
> Who in their right mind would search for "red yellow blue"?

People searching for the band, the "primary color triad in a standard artist's
color wheel"[1], or maybe an artist entering random colors because they're
bored and want to see what they can find. Since I just learned about the band,
I'm sure there are many other reasons that I haven't thought of.

I'm surprised it's not more. Can you substantiate your claims?

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RYB_color_model> (second result)

~~~
InfinityX0
OK, you may be right. Didn't really think about that. Still, seems like a
strange way to search for the RYB color model.

------
enjo
So the author makes the supposition that Flash contributes to low ranking (in
that the content is not indexed). Google most definitely crawls flash (in some
fashion) at this point...

I'm curious, does anyone have any idea how that content ranks compared to good
old fashioned mark-up? Is it 1:1? Is it harder to rank with flash content? I
really have no idea.

~~~
Concours
SEO for flash is very complex, mostly based on tips and tricks. The easiest
way to go is external links with anchors +the basics html optimisation. If you
are serious about it, Adobe has partnered with the search engines to make
flash content discoverable (Ichabod), some peoples (Damien Bianchi) suggest
developers to create XML and video sitemaps along with an HTML sitemap for
websites, reading this article may help you :
<http://www.adobe.com/devnet/seo/articles/checklist_ria.html> , I hope this
helps.

------
mcantor
[citation needed]

Seriously though, despite how anecdotal this page is, it gave me some food for
thought. Does Google really care about how far in the future I have registered
my domains? I'd love a source on that.

~~~
WillyF
A citation would require a source with knowledge of Google's algorithm. Some
of the best research that I've found on SEO is SEOmozs Search Engine Ranking
Factors: <http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors>

It's based on a survey of SEO professionals/experts, which leaves a bit to be
desired, but I still think the conclusions are on point.

~~~
tocomment
Why is page load time listed on that page? I thought I read recently that's a
new thing google is doing?

~~~
kadavy
Google had hinted before this year that they would use speed. This article is
from December, but perhaps there's something earlier:
[http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2009/11/13/google-page-
spe...](http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2009/11/13/google-page-speed-may-be-
a-ranking-factor-in-2010)

Still, Google said it will only affect 1% of searches.

