The first thing you need to do is understand that . . . → Read More: Protect Your Rankings with Effective SEO for On-Page Elements]]> 04.04.2011– There are many approaches and techniques to rank highly in Google and others. If you desire to achieve high first page positioning, then you have to know about on-page SEO factors. Butler Vs Uconn Live Stream and SEO are highly related.

The first thing you need to do is understand that success with on-page SEO will only happen if you use the right keywords. Everything that SEO does is centered around the keywords and phrases you use since this is how people search for information. Using keywords in your URL is an effective way to get your site ranked higher because of the fact that search engines give a higher value to URLs. If you can get a domain name with your keyword in it that’s even better. If you are able to grab such a valuable domain name, then having only a few backlinks can do the trick. The first words you use need to not be preceded by anything in order to stay up on the search engine results pages.

Another thing to do, to please Google, is externally linking to highly related sites that have trust rank. You are doing on-page SEO, do that means you have to be sure you link to proper sites. It is pretty easy to find high quality sites to link to, so just take the time to do it right. Besides that, too many outgoing links may drain your page rank and affect your ranking negatively than positively. There are no hard and fast rules about how to determine where and when to link. There should never be any broken links on your site no matter what they are for. If you have a huge site, then the best solution is an automatic link checker. Your objective here is to present your own website in the best possible way to the search engines. Kourtney and Kim Take New York Season 1 Episode 10 is a good example of a good title tag.

The issue of hyphens in domain names is always debated, but you can find high ranking sites that do have them. But, there are no totally solid reasons to avoid using them, so it really is your call. Too many hyphens may hurt the credibility of your site and your business in the eyes of visitors. From this information it’s easy to see how important these techniques are to your SEO campaigns. Use these tips to help make SEO enhancement much easier for you both on and off page. Watch Dancing With The Stars Season 12 Episode 4 and apply the tips mentioned in this article and you will get good results

Submitting to directories is among the simplest methods to build links for your websites. Nevertheless this type of practice is not without problems, there’s a prevalence of small web directories and set of providers who mainly exist to swindle you. You have probably noticed lots of web directory lists floating throughout the web. There . . . → Read More: Seo austin Directory Submission List: Significant Aspect For SEO]]>

Submitting to directories is among the simplest methods to build links for your websites. Nevertheless this type of practice is not without problems, there’s a prevalence of small web directories and set of providers who mainly exist to swindle you. You have probably noticed lots of web directory lists floating throughout the web. There are free web directory lists, paid web directory lists, and even regional ones.

Further enquiry, are web directory lists really good entities? Sure, they may be used in web promotion. But they can and usually do result in spam. That does not just include the people who were spammers going in. Web directory lists can unintentionally turn well-intentioned webmasters into spammers too. A look at both the positive and negative sides of web directory lists. To help you assess if they are a worthwhile tool to either generate for your own website or utilize in your marketing strategy.

The great thing about web directory lists is that they can serve as marketing tools. That’s only half the storyline though. Even while working as a promotional tool, there are downsides. Let us investigate both: Positive elements of web directory lists as marketing tools. An internet directory list can help you save time since you no longer need to manually search for the web directories you would like to submit your site to. Internet directory lists could inform you the page rank of each directory to assist you prioritize them. You might be able to find well-targeted lists that help you sort through the noise on the web, and want more regional links and publicity.

Some of the negative elements of web directory list as advertising tools. There are many web directory lists available online. It may take you just as long to find a good one as it would take you to use a search engine to pull up targeted directories on your own. Numerous web directory lists are obsolete. Meaning you will need to evaluate listings for directories that no longer exist, have moved, or are being neglected by their owners. Submitting your site to a huge number of general directories is not generally a good way to spend your promotional time. It is far better to work in high quality directories that offer a real chance for targeted traffic and high quality links, after which combine submissions with other marketing tactics for a well-rounded approach.

A well designed, up to date web directory list may be used as one component of an effective online marketing campaign. But that doesn’t mean it is the best tool. It all relates to the individual list you are using, and how you intend to use it. Directory submission is one of the ways for search engine optimization. Website promotion is another one crucial factor for all websites that need to gain better organic search engine rankings and boost website traffic. Posting your site as part of your web advertising strategy to SEO friendly and high traffic business directory for review is an excellent way to obtain a valuable backlink and improve your websites visibility online. Check out for site advertising blog with unique articles on a range subjects including internet marketing and search engine optimisation. Look for a directory list that is regularly updated, high page rank and have their editors do review before submission. You may save cash and improve your company profits.

SEO Austin

SEO Austin

For any one who is inquiring to see much more relating to the directory submission, a rising outsourcing sector that can most unquestionably help jump start your small business and enable you to avoid wasting dollars, then logon to virtual assistant . You’ll enjoy it!

SEO Austin: SEO Austin

This article, the best article ever, kindly provided by UberArticles.com

Recently, singer Seo In Young guested on MBC FM’s “Younha’s Starry Night” radio program and promoted her latest single, “Wash.”

As expected, she put forth a great performance, showing off her vocal abilities and interpreting the sad lyrics with heartfelt emotions.

After the performance, Younha and the other guests gave Seo In Young . . . → Read More: Seo In Young sings “Wash” on MBC FM’s “Younha’s Starry Night”]]>

Recently, singer Seo In Young guested on MBC FM’s “Younha’s Starry Night” radio program and promoted her latest single, “Wash.”

As expected, she put forth a great performance, showing off her vocal abilities and interpreting the sad lyrics with heartfelt emotions.

After the performance, Younha and the other guests gave Seo In Young a big round of applause, praising her on her performance. One of the guests complimented Seo In Young’s ability to deliver the emotions of the song by commenting, “I didn’t know ‘Wash’ was such a sad song.”

Watch her performance below!

Tip: Zain

Incoming search terms:

• google management jobs (1)
• semantic web (1)

WHEN Thursday, May 12, 6:45-9:45 pm

WHERE mediabistro.com, 475 Park Avenue S. (at 31st), 4th Floor, NY, NY 10016

MORE INFO Email us, or call 212-547-7890

PRICE$65 (or $50 for AvantGuild members)more info

Add to CalendariCal | Outlook

This is according to tech reporter http://econsultancy.com/uk/blog/7258-seo-a-due-diligence-mustPatricio Robles, who claimed in an Econsultancy blog that this should be something that is examined when looking at an organisation from . . . → Read More: SEO profiles ‘may be looked at before a company is acquired’]]> In the near future, firms might find that their search engine optimisation (SEO) profile is examined before investors and acquirers consider putting money into the venture.

This is according to tech reporter http://econsultancy.com/uk/blog/7258-seo-a-due-diligence-mustPatricio Robles, who claimed in an Econsultancy blog that this should be something that is examined when looking at an organisation from an investment standpoint.

He noted that the recent crackdown by Google on paid links and content farms means that this should be something looked at even more closely.

Mr Robles cited a number of recent examples in which companies were taken over and then in a matter of weeks taken off Google’s index.

According to the expert, it is only a matter of time before investors start to utilise tools to establish if there are any SEO risks involved with a prospective purchase.

SEO consultant Paul Carpenter recently said in a David Naylor blog entry that the Farmer update from Google is about providing better quality content in search engine results pages.

News brought to you by ClickThrough – specialists in Search Engine Optimisation and Internet Marketing. 

That editor, Joshua Topolsky, is joining SB Nation, a newish publisher of sites for sports fans, . . . → Read More: AOL Defector Blasts ‘Content Farming’ and ‘SEO Spam’]]> Arianna Huffington has probably uttered the phrase “great journalism” in public a thousand times since she took over AOL in February. But the recently-departed editor of AOL’s most successful content site, Engadget, thinks greater journalism is possible elsewhere.

That editor, Joshua Topolsky, is joining SB Nation, a newish publisher of sites for sports fans, to launch a technology news site sometime this fall. And Topolsky isn’t the only Engadget editor signing onto the venture: According to David Carr, he’ll be bringing up to eight of his former staffers with him, leaving Engadget effectively gutted.

In explaining his decision, Topolsky offered a rationale clearly intended as an indictment of his former employer:

SB Nation believes in real, independent journalism and the potential for new media to serve as an answer and antidote to big publishing houses and SEO spam — a point we couldn’t be more aligned on….This isn’t tabloid page grabbing or content farming — it’s news and insight by and for a passionate and informed group of people.

The adoption of “The AOL Way,” a metrics-driven strategy for building pageviews by obsessively reacting to trends in search, prompted at least one Engadget editor to bolt. Huffington, since coming aboard, has made it clear the AOL Way is no longer the blueprint, but then her site has long engaged in its own forms of search-baiting and pageview juicing.

——

Dislosure: For the umpteenth time, I worked at AOL before joining Forbes last October.

Incoming search terms:

• semantic web (1)

SEO Site Clinic panel from Affiliate Summit East 2009, which took place August 9-11, 2009 in New York, NY.

Speakers:

Live QA, site audits and . . . → Read More: SEO Site Clinic]]>

SEO Site Clinic panel from Affiliate Summit East 2009, which took place August 9-11, 2009 in New York, NY.

Speakers:

• Chris Pearson, Overlord, DIYthemes (Moderator)
• Michael Gray, Owner, Atlas Web Services
• Rae Hoffman-Dolan, Owner, Sugarrae Inc
• Michael Streko, Owner, Streko Media LLC
• Frank Watson, Owner, Kangamurra Media

Live QA, site audits and suggestions on how to help the internal site structure, as well as ideas how to build a better site for organic rankings.

More details on Affiliate Summit at http://www.affiliatesummit.com/

Note: the company(ies) and position(s) listed above were current as of the time of the conference. Some of this information may have changed since then.

Video: SEO Site Clinic

This article courtesy of SEO Site Clinic

Related Posts

• How to Work with Virtual Assistants to Help Build, Market and Grow Your Blog
• Links That Can Get Your Penalized or Banned By Google
• Google: Are You Really Serious About Tackling Webspam? I Doubt It!
• 3 Steps To Cracking Google’s Search Domination
• Dynamic Shopping — Content, Conversion, Analytics
• Tracking Your SEO Efforts with SEscout
• Tracking Your SEO Efforts with SEscout
• The 2010 ShoeMonies… errr not quite
• Dot Com Pho – First Pho of 2011 Edition
• Why “Hard Work” Won’t Make You Rich…

Tagged as:
frank-watson,
internal,
internal-site,
michael-streko,
owner,
seo,
streko,
streko-media,
time

Incoming search terms:

• semantic web (1)

Linda Buquet,

March 28th, 2011 at 12:06 pm ET:

Great points all Chris and thanks for all the research and time that went into this post.

On the flip side I wanted I wanted to mention to SMBs that using an 800 number OR a tracking number on . . . → Read More: For Local SEO, Lack Of Call Tracking Solution Spawns Cloaking]]>

Linda Buquet,

March 28th, 2011 at 12:06 pm ET:

Great points all Chris and thanks for all the research and time that went into this post.

On the flip side I wanted I wanted to mention to SMBs that using an 800 number OR a tracking number on your web site and your local number on your Place page can also cause a disconnect with Google and hurt your rankings. Truly local companies generally don’t need an 800 # but some marketing companies will put an 800 or tracking number on the web site, so they can prove to clients where their traffic is coming from. Just remember, when it comes to Google Places, data integrity and consistency is key.

Back when I was 1st reverse-engineering the new local algo that started Oct 27th, I was trying to determine why some sites were missing from the top of page 1 in the new merged listings, that were high ranking and SHOULD have been there. One of the most common reasons organically high ranking sites are skipped over and don’t rank in the new merged algo, is due to the site having an 800 or tracking number that differs from the phone number on their Place page.

Hope that wasn’t too off topic, but it was slightly related and I’ve run into lots of business owners that didn’t realize having a different number on their web site could potentially hurt their local rankings.

Trent Carlyle,

March 28th, 2011 at 2:19 pm ET:

This is a great comprehensive article on call tracking for local. Our conclusions have been that any location that is already indexed or listed on IYP type sites, etc should be off-limits when it comes to applying a tracking number. However, if its a brand new listing – NAP info does not currently exist – then you should be fine.

Ultimately, you may lose the ability to give accurate performance reporting as the NAP data gets picked up by other sources. Unless, as an SEM you are just trying to propagate your clients listing data to as many places as possible and get credit for that.

If you are doing call-recording with these numbers, there is certainly an application for customer service and quality control, etc.. but thats another topic. :)

Great, comprehensive post. Thanks!

Mike Belasco,

March 28th, 2011 at 2:19 pm ET:

Chris,
Do you know of any sites getting banned by Google for cloaking call tracking numbers only? We published this solution a while back and it has worked well for those who have implemented it. http://www.seoverflow.com/call-tracking/roll-your-own-phone-call-tracking-program-it-is-easy/ We have not heard of anyone getting banned. While I agree if you take the Webmaster Guidelines literally this does qualify as cloaking, however there are many other instances on the web of ‘acceptable’ or ‘good’ cloaking which seem equally as benign.

We certainly would never recommend call tracking numbers in local profiles at the moment

Cheers!
Mike Belasco

Boyd Butler,

March 28th, 2011 at 5:13 pm ET:

Chris, I just wanted to thank you from the UK because this article is excellently written and very informative.

It is such a shame that Google and call metric companies can’t work together on this. It seems Google would benefit as would call metric companies through understanding the online (clicks) and offline (calls) driven by Places listings.

Perhaps the click to call product that Google will introduce (I’m assuming) will be the trump card on this one. You could add it to your Google boost package?!

jeffpnovak,

March 28th, 2011 at 5:38 pm ET:

Chris, I’m unsure about what you mean by:

“Avoid call tracking numbers for your website and for any online directories or online yellow pages which are being actively indexed by Google and other local search engines. ”

Don’t dynamic call tracking phone numbers on your website, even your homepage, utilize javascript to be displayed? Wouldn’t that javascript be excluded from indexing?

You could also use a static local phone number using the proper microformatting in your footer or somewhere lower on the page to help with SEO rankings?

That way you’d have your highly visible javascript based dynamic number for call tracking back to your campaign sources, and your static local phone number for SEO rank?

Thanks for the post!

Bradley Reynolds,

March 28th, 2011 at 5:43 pm ET:

Chris,

Thanks for the article. I agree that call tracking for local SEO is a major concern. I think the solution turns on whether the search engines feel that it is important enough to dedicate development time.

We would love to work with the search engines to implement some method to allow them to distinguish a tracking number from the canonical business number. To accomplish this, we need to have a two-way dialog between call tracking vendors and the engines. I am open to any solution that works for all parties and we are quite flexible.

Perhaps you could serve as a mediating point to start this conversation moving by coordinating relevant parties from the engines and some call tracking vendors? We have tried to reach out on the topic but have not had success. Let me know if we can be of any assistance in moving towards a solution, we are here to help.

Bradley Reynolds
CEO
Mongoose Metrics

Chris Silver Smith,

March 29th, 2011 at 10:08 am ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

Linda – good point about toll-free 800 numbers. I think for those companies who have them, it would be ideal for them to list both the local number and the tollfree number, where possible.

Even better if Google Places allowed one to choose whether to display the 800 number for people outside of the area, and the local number for those browsing locally.

Chris Silver Smith,

March 29th, 2011 at 10:10 am ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

Trent, your approach isn’t a bad theory, although I’d caution that one risks losing some longevity of the listing if you later choose to discontinue the tracking number and the only number indexed by Google is the tracking number. I also don’t see how one could use separate numbers for multiple organic channels and avoid getting multiple numbers indexed by Google.

Chris Silver Smith,

March 29th, 2011 at 10:16 am ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

Mike, I’m not at all sure that “we haven’t been penalized yet” is a good thing to depend upon. Unless I skimmed too fast, your code appears to alter Google Analytics, which I think could go against their terms and conditions which disallow modifications of their code.

Chris Silver Smith,

March 29th, 2011 at 10:20 am ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

jeff, you need to go back and read in the article the link where Matt Cutts commented on how NOT to hide text. Google can and does read Javascript. They most especially are interested in anything which is intended to display different content for search engines than for users.

Bradley, I’d certainly be willing to assist as a mediator in resolving the issue, and helping drive towards either clarity or a solution.

NMI,

March 30th, 2011 at 10:49 am ET:

regarding, “Matt Cutts commented on how NOT to hide text”
It’s hard to believe that showing a call tracking # to users via javascript really equates to the same kind of deceptive cloaking Matt was describing, but I understand that Google can’t magically determine intent. Would displaying the # as an image accomplish the same purpose without raising red flags for Google?

Chris Silver Smith,

March 30th, 2011 at 1:48 pm ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

NMI, actually this is the very sort of thing they wouldn’t be big on, I think. They’re specifically looking for text that’s intended to be different for search engines than for endusers, and text that’s intended to manipulate search engines in some way. If a consumer searches by phone number, and they matched up the page based on hidden text, if the consumer can’t then find the text on the page, it’s a confusing result to them.

So, this might not be interpreted as being purely benign.

Regarding embedding the number in an image, it’s not a perfect solution either. As noted in the article, Google can and does interpret text in images sometimes, and they’re only likely to expand that functionality. For an enduser, if they try to copy and past the number from that image, it won’t be text they can copy. For mobile users, that image number won’t be interpretable for click-to-call functionality on the phones, making for a poor user experience.

reidwakefield,

March 30th, 2011 at 4:56 pm ET:

If a site was rigged to suppress a div tag for non-human visitors or generate dummy contact information for a crawling bot, then you could make an argument that SEO rankings might be affected. I can’t imagine any reputable call tracking provider using that approach, though. Most implementations retain the primary business phone number in the loaded source code. If certain criteria is met (a UTM tagged session, a recognized visitor, a particular referring source), then the primary business phone number gets swapped out for another line. A search engine crawler would see the primary business phone number, just like any other visitor who didn’t happen to trigger the dynamic tracking piece.

According to the definition you’ve used to condemn call tracking, just about every site in the world is guilty of cloaking. When I visit SuperPages.com (a relevant example for you), the home page makes several references to Dallas, my detected location. That content is different from what the Google spiders would see, but no reasonable person would try to spin this as cloaking. It’s white hat IP Delivery that has no negative impact on the visitor experience. How is this different from a proper implementation of dynamic call tracking on a company’s website?

reidwakefield,

March 30th, 2011 at 4:57 pm ET:

Sorry, I thought my profile would be attached. Disclosure: I’m a programmer for Century Interactive, a call tracking company that has been doing dynamic number swapping since 2006.

Chris Silver Smith,

March 30th, 2011 at 5:52 pm ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

reidwakefield, I haven’t worked for Superpages for a number of years, so I will not speak for functionality that may have been implemented since I was there.

However, what you’re describing is targeting content based on user IP addresses, I believe, which is an accepted practice by Google. See Maile Ohye’s explanation of how sites can deliver content conditionally, so long as it is not attempting to treat search bots differently:

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/06/how-google-defines-ip-delivery.html

So, Google very clearly has defined content geotargeting for users’ location as acceptable, while it’s not acceptable to try to show them something different from what endusers are likely to see on the webpage. Until or unless Google makes tracking phone numbers an exception case, I don’t know how much more clearly it can be defined.

reidwakefield,

March 30th, 2011 at 9:19 pm ET:

So the only time it’s acceptable for a website to show different content to different users is when the site is geotargeting based on the user’s location? If searchengineland.com recognizes me as a logged in user and adds “HI REIDWAKEFIELD” to the top of the page, then that fails your definition of cloaking. What I see as an enduser is different than what the search bot would see, so this could only be justified if a Google blogger specifically published an exception case for saying hello to existing users. I hope we all agree that this is an absurd supposition.

If you talked to a call tracking company whose output treats spiders differently than regular visitors, then there might be a case for a cloaking accusation for that particular approach. But you’ve grossly misunderstood what the knowledgeable companies are doing. We’re not “serving a different file” (to quote Ohye from your link); we’re simply filling a consistent container with different dynamic information for different types of users who fit different profiles.

“I don’t know how much more clearly it can be defined” – to help me better understand your position, can you give me the specific definition of cloaking that a proper implementation of call tracking fails?

- Reid

David Mihm,

March 31st, 2011 at 11:10 am ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

Chris,

Obviously I am very late to the game on this column, but great job (as usual). #1 I never advise clients to use call-tracking #’s on their websites under any circumstances. But I understand the desire of marketers to use them.

Although I am less concerned than you are that Google would ban or penalize sites who are obfuscating #’s using images, wouldn’t a way around that be to display the actual number in HTML text (a user would still be able to get through on that line) so if someone came to the site with javascript disabled, or on their mobile phone, or whatever? From a user-/customer-experience standpoint it seems like as long as the # rings directly to the business, what is the harm? Matt is always talking about the intent of cloaking this seems fairly harmless on that score.

Also, do you feel that Google’s stance on this is any conflict of interest related to their OWN call tracking products (which will likely be an opt-in for Place Page owners in the near future, given the success they’ve had with click-to-call on mobile devices)??

Chris Silver Smith,

March 31st, 2011 at 11:26 am ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

Reid – Serving custom content to registered/logged-in users is not considered cloaking, and is not what we’re talking about here. Google’s definitions of what they don’t want is delivery that’s conditional based on rules intended to target different content to the search bots than to human users. The bot should receive the exact same thing as a non-logged-in human user landing on the page. If you’ve got a problem with that, you’ll want to take it up with Google — I’m merely trying to point out that some of the call tracking code in use appears to be running counter to the rules they’ve published.

I suggest you’ll want to familiarize yourself fully with Google’s Webmaster guidelines to understand the definitions fully.

Chris Silver Smith,

March 31st, 2011 at 11:38 am ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

Hi David -
I understand some of the call tracking solutions do have the main phone in HTML, but may have it tagged so it becomes changed or replaced with the Javascript. So, I think they’re doing what you’re describing in some case. The issue is if they’re not obfuscating it based on the useragent string, and it’s still not ideal for SEO even if it’s not penalized because Google can process the Javascript and use the tracking number instead of the main phone. So, either it’s potentially going to be flagged as hiding text and penalized, or it’s still not going to be effective at canonicalizing perfectly for citational value.

As for the intent, I think you have a point that the result to the enduser isn’t totally bad. However, there are reasons why it’s not ideal from Google’s perspective, such as the number may be temporary and if stored by the user could go defunct a short time later, and if users search by phone number, they wouldn’t then find a listing on the page that matched their search.

Quite a few of the Googler’s statements about the intent of the cloaking centers around whether it has been implemented with the intent of giving different content to the search engine than to users. This is where I think this practice is highly risky, because it’s doing exactly that. If Google makes an exception case for phone numbers, it’d be great if they’d officially let us know. However, they’ve communicated a few different times and in a few different ways that they don’t want the tracking numbers, or they feel that tracking numbers are not the best local number for endusers. So… there are consistent and significant reasons to consider cloaking of tracking numbers to be a very, very bad idea.

I think you have a point about their own product plans possibly impacting how they will approach this.

reidwakefield,

March 31st, 2011 at 2:01 pm ET:

I’m very familiar with the webmaster guidelines and expect that you are as well. That’s why I’m so surprised by your wild mis-classification of dynamic call tracking. Even in this most recent response to David Mihm, you’re still describing a cloaking operation.

At least you’re finally backpedaling by saying that “some of the call tracking code in use appears to be running counter to the rules” – that language is certainly a lot softer than what you used in the article. I understand the purpose of writing inflammatory pieces (this is comment #20!), but it seems irresponsible to falsely accuse a valued (and harmless) service of being “poisonous” and “like a doctor who says he’s okay with electrocuting his patient.” You’ve provided tremendous knowledge to the SEO community over a long period of time, and your opinions carry well-deserved weight. I hope you’ll gain a broader understanding of true dynamic call tracking before making any further sweeping statements. Posts like this one create unnecessary confusion for the tens of thousands of clients and SEO professionals who have enjoyed great value from dynamic call tracking for years.

- Reid

Chris Silver Smith,

March 31st, 2011 at 2:41 pm ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

Reid, I had suggested you familiarize yourself with the webmaster guidelines because you’d tried to compare the disallowed hiding of text from bots with Javascript with the accepted practice of geotargeting by IP address location — something that those familiar with the guidelines generally wouldn’t do.

I’m not back-pedaling whatsoever, and I don’t believe I misclassified anything.

I quite carefully qualified in the article by saying that “a few different well-known call tracking companies” appeared to be using practices specifically against Google’s webmaster guidelines.

I’ve used strong language in characterizing both the pushing of an analytic solution that could impair local search rankings as well as potentially getting webpages penalized because I think a number of people in the call tracking industry appear to be unaware or in denial of the implications. The technology some of these companies are using appears quite naive to me, vis-a-vis Google’s guidelines.

There’s a high risk Google will interpret this as undesirable hidden text because people are specifically trying to show something different to Googlebot than to humans, and are doing so for ranking purposes. Google might or might not deem this to be benign — but, their written guidelines and statements appear to be in alignment against using differentiated numbers as well as against hiding text on pages.

If they don’t consider it bad behavior, it still appears rather pointless to do it, because their algos are sophisticated enough to understand the javascript used, and they’d index the generated text that results instead of something located on hidden div tags. They’ve also said that image replacement can be fine when used for style, but the text in the image needs to replicate the HTML text that’s being replaced.

While this piece may be inflammatory, and I can appreciate that it’s undesirable attention for call-tracking companies, my goal is centered upon pushing for greater clarification and/or a solution to the dilemma. It has appeared to me that without properly outlining and highlighting the issues, people are working at opposite ends with insufficient motivation to resolve the issue. And, obviously, there are a number of people who absolutely were unaware that doing this could be very, very risky.

claye,

March 31st, 2011 at 3:46 pm ET:

I’d love to see Google Bing’s Webmaster teams cover this topic and give guidelines for how “the little guy” can use phone call tracking numbers safely.

Wanted to weigh in with my experience and thoughts on the matter – not long ago, I was working in a full service ad agency setting with a lot of local SMB clients. We discussed the pros and cons of using local phone call tracking numbers on the web, and the decision was made that until we saw negative effects from search engines, the information we gathered from the tracking numbers was too valuable to pass up on. Information that would give us clear metrics to aid in decision making about their marketing budget and the effectiveness of their various on- and off-line campaigns. Metrics like correlating a clear Cost Per Call and ROI to organic paid keywords, referrers, and other web sources. Pretty valuable information!

We used a combination of standard tracking numbers and “dynamic” numbers for our local clients, depending costs and budget – so far, those websites are performing very well in SERPs, Maps, etc., and haven’t seen any penalization or loss of rankings. The dynamic number btw work exactly like Reid’s description, having a ‘base’ number that is changed by JavaScript to unique users. Maybe that’s a credit to Google’s ability to adapt and understand tracking numbers, but I suspect it’s more like a heavy dose of good fortune.

“So far” being key – use at your own risk and evaluate the pros and cons for yourself. Does the increased visibility of the effectiveness of your ad spend outweigh the risk of hurting your rankings in local search?

Now that I’m back in the SEO agency setting, I would NOT feel comfortable recommending any form of phone call tracking my local clients – yet. Not until the major search engines come up with a “canonical-like” tag for phone numbers or implement one of your suggestions above… all of which I love by the way, let’s just pick one already and let local businesses start accurately tracking the effectiveness of their (limited!) advertising spend.

Now if you’re a global, lead-gen, or e-commerce website, I HIGHLY recommend using phone call tracking.

Also, I remember seeing Mike’s seoverflow article when they published it, on creating your own phone tracking system – I haven’t put it in practice but it’s really incredible, and incredibly cheap.

reidwakefield,

March 31st, 2011 at 4:23 pm ET:

Claye: I agree on the need for a robots.txt type of index function that could map a universe of owned phone numbers for a site. As Bradley mentioned earlier, the providers are waiting on something to emerge. Chris Silver Smith deserves great credit for leading this charge.

CSS: I’m sure everyone (including you and me) is tired of our back-and-forth, but I’m frustrated that you’re still trying to group all dynamic call tracking products into the “hiding of text from bots” camp. I agree that this approach would be risky.

You acknowledge that your familiarity is limited to a small handful of call tracking providers who might be using questionable methods, yet you choose to stand by your statement that ALL websites should reject ALL forms of call tracking? I assume advertisers will harbor a certain level of suspicion about SEO professionals who are so passionately opposed to the truest form of performance metrics available. I hope future readers of this article will as well.

Chris Silver Smith,

March 31st, 2011 at 6:44 pm ET:

Premium member since 01/2009

Reid – Kudos for bringing the conversation back to main talking points.

For organic sites, I don’t believe tracking numbers are good for local SEO as things currently stand. I think it’s fine to use for landing pages if one has taken care to keep them separate from main website pages and use something like robots.txt disallows for them.

I believe I agree with part of what you’re saying — I’m aware that some call tracking products use dynamic number replacement for reasons other than intending to hide from bots. For instance, if you had a PPC ad campaign and clickthroughs carried a tracking ID in the URL or referrer, or if you cookied everyone coming to a subdirectory and redirected them — and you did this so that all the numbers on a website would reflect a tracking phone number specific to your campaign or referrer source.

If such a campaign is implemented to keep Google from crawling/indexing those pages for organic/local search, there’s no issue.

Unfortunately, I don’t believe care is being taken to insure that tracking numbers and dynamic replacement code are properly segregated from organic search spidering. I have yet to hear of a dynamic number replacement method that wouldn’t risk being assessed by Google to be an attempt to show different content to them vs humans. For local search, Google has clearly signaled that alternate phone numbers are contraindicated. Dynamic replacement can either be assessed by them as undesirable hiding of text, or they interpret the code and use the tracking numbers instead of the primary phone — either way is bad for search optimization.

I can’t see an upside for organic, until or if Google chooses to provide further clarification.

My agency uses tracking numbers for paid search. I would like to have more analytics capability available for local websites. As I described, my logic boils down to: performance trumps analytics, if you’re confronted with an either-or situation.

stevecravens,

April 1st, 2011 at 11:54 am ET:

While I’m just a sales guy with only a cursory understanding of SEO and am biased on the side of call tracking, I can’t ignore one particular assertion by Chris, which discredits his premise in my opinion.

His stance is based on a belief that advertisers who dynamically generate phone numbers “are doing so for ranking purposes.” This is a generalization and indicates a stubborn case of myopia.

Businesses who use dynamic numbers on their website do so to understand what referring sources and keywords are generating phone calls, not to falsify a local presence. I’m weighing in on intent, and I know that these businesses are *not* creating a ghost presence in a local area, as Chris asserts.

I’m sorry Chris, but the picture you paint of having a moral authority is dubious, and I don’t accept your premise.

Mike Belasco,

April 1st, 2011 at 12:47 pm ET:

Hey Chris,
For the record out code absolutely does not modify Google Analytics. It reads from the GA cookie.

Cheers!
Mike

Incoming search terms:

• semantic web (1)