An Investigation of Some SEO Firms and Practices

I just stumbled upon the most original and interesting post I've read on SEO for a while. I quite like the way the author put some money in and did some real research to make a unique article. Here are my thoughts in response, which of course will only make sense after you've read the article in question...

Commentary on Labour Generally, not Just the SEO Industry

Sadly the post says more about people generally and their attitude to their work than it does about SEO. I believe a similar test could be conducted with similar results in any industry. One thing that has dawned on me during my working life is that most people are not very good at what they do. Sorry to offend anyone, but it's true. Some people are more naturally gifted which is fair enough, but the real problem is that most people just aren't interested in furthering their skills and ensuring they are doing the best job possible, learning from mistakes, learning from others. These are things everyone can do but people are inherently lazy. If you don't believe me, just read the mentioned post again. Initially I saw it in IT and thought it was only our industry, but I have come to realise that it's fairly universal. To take just one example from the article, why did some firms not respond to the author's request? He attributes it to them having enough business, but surely a company interested in excellence would take 30 seconds to shoot a one-line reply saying "Thankyou for your request, sadly we are too busy to take on new clients at the moment"? Assuming there's no technical explanation like lost emails, then the observed behaviour is simply laziness and a don't-care attitude.

So how do you find the people that do care and do strive for excellence? Hmm... I wish I had a simple answer.

Valid Personal Conclusions That Shouldn't be Generalised

I think this article has one major failing in that the statement "I would not spend a lot of money on a SEO firm or anyone offering Adsense consulting" comes across as general advice to all readers, whereas this should be a limited personal statement.

Correct, the author wouldn't spend the money. Correct, the author shouldn't spend the money. But he should point out that most people are not as knowledgeable as he is. For most business people, time is money. Many don't have the skills to re-write their content. Yes the advice from the adsense guys might be freely available on the internet but if you run a law firm, does it make economic sense to spend weeks of your time filtering and deciphering it? All the information needed to conduct heart surgery is probably on the internet too. There's definitely better general health information on the internet than your local doctor knows. But going to the doctor when you have the flu, for what is in fact an inferior treatment, is at least more time-effective (OK actually I don't really go to doctors so I might be arguing against myself, but you get my point).

Ongoing SEO Charges

The author expresses surprise at companies wanting to charge him a monthly subscription. However, there is a very justifiable reason for ongoing costs for SEO - that is the process of link-building takes time.  I'm surprised that the consultants did not explain this clearly to the author. Our SEO services are always sold on a basis of monthly subscription, because the last thing a site needs is 100 incoming links to pop up immediately and then nothing new for the next year. It's much better to grow the links gradually.  Additionally it's easier, and more pleasant as an SEO consultant, to work on a site a little bit every week, and build in new links when you happen to come across a new business directory you didn't know about etc.

Those are my responses to some of the points raised that I thought warranted another viewpoint, however allow me to re-iterate that I nevertheless found the article excellent.