Fantastic! I’m glad you enjoyed the blog! :)

Hi Graham!

Wow, it wasn’t too long ago when there were NO content shops exhibiting at a conference (at least during Search Engine Strategies.) I’d say that SEO content providers have come a long way…but I also know what kinds of companies are out there. :) Hopefully, at least one of them exhibiting *was* a solid white hat provider.

Oddly, I have written content about cement (assuming cement pavers qualifies!) It was a…challenge…but the client liked the articles (and I did too!) :)

Thanks for your post.

Hi Vanessa!

You’re exactly right – solid content that’s SEO AND conversion optimized is still the way to go. Congrats that none of your clients were attacked by the big, hungry Panda. That definitely shows that you’re doing something right. :)

Thanks for your comment!

I haven’t noticed it affecting my clients negatively and I love the challenge to continue developing my strategist skills for a better user experience.

Thanks again.

Terry-

FANTASTIC insight from one of the industry’s oldest (and best) SEOs. Thank you!:)

A: In general the tecghnique was overused with too narrow of focus, that, I agree seems an element of the algo

B: this is not a penalty in any sense of the word! It is simply an algo to make the techniques associated with some content type less valuable (likely partly manual and partly algorithmic). Penalty is often misused in our industry. If Google decides certain content is less valuable than thought… Google is not penalizing you… your expectations of the technique were not meant! There’s a difference and your judgement about content will improve if you don’t see these as penalties but a shift in value. Those who call them penalties need to see a site that gets penalized… panda though big… is nothing in comparison

C: if you look at the article archives in particular you see the heaviest hits are to the cats described above. ie inordinate amount of content with very narrow keyword focus.

I have spent a lot of time reviewing Panda with a lot of people asking me to review their site thinking they were hit. Many times I can’t see it directly on the site but you look at the off site work and well a lot of times it’s collateral damage from the sites linking to them sending much less value/link equity or as some may call it authority/PR.

BTW seen lots of people add images, comments, videos etc. I’d say it’s hardly a fix or that those elements are required for Google to like your page, people definitely but Google IMO, could care less!

In 16/7 years I’ve learned one thing that I always remnind myself going into a project… all sites and businesses are unique… your campaigns and strategy should be based on that rather than some cookie cutter solution like spinning articles and some magic formula that google likes to see in a page. #JusSayin