Critique my SEO please (will pay with tits & ass)

what you said...

Lol. Just read what I posted right after you wrote all this.

EDIT: I'll respond to the allegations that I'm just a coder building tools for noob SEOs: I have said for years I don't believe in manually collecting data, at least when starting a campaign. In fact, that's what got me into SEO; I'm a coder first, and I like automating systems.

SEOs use my product, Term Explorer, SECockpit, whatever because they agree with me that manually collecting metrics is for fools. Whether you factor in all of the data my product collects into your ranking strategy is your prerogative, but that doesn't change the fact that the metrics we (and the other products I listed, and countless other keyword tools professional SEOs rely on daily) are key ranking factors to varying degrees.

"If this guys niche was Raspberry Ketones or Viagra"...his niche is not anything close to that. It's like a 4,400 searches per month product review keyword. Trying to attack Ketones or Viagra is something only the most elite of SEOs can pull off, and the techniques and strategies and behavior of those SERPs are in no way comparable to OPs niche.
 


If this guys niche was Raspberry Ketones or Viagra and you took the coders approach to SEO and looked at the averages for anchors and links velocity and words on the front page, you might end up taking averages for a SERP where 4 out of 10 spots were all rank and bank, thus making dirty your averages of what "Good SEO" that you are saying actually is. This logic and info doesnt benefit your customer 7 days later when those sites are all penalized bro.

Also, "Good SEO" has nothing to do with authority sites that might also make up 4 out of 10 spots in that same SERP, where you have dominate domains like Amazon, Wikipedia, and even some leech authority sites that can take a damn good beating of % of anchor text and link velocity or any other metric you average out. Amazon or HuffingtonPost can take a 30% anchor text ratio and thousands of spam links in 1 day from Xpression Engine.. your typical client site will not and will get butt fucked pretty hard from the averages you gave.

Again, throw away your coder perspective and give this man some real solid advice about SEO and not averages based on some flawed code working in the background that doesn't take these considerations into favor.

This is a really good point. With that being said, that doesn't mean the concept of "code that can determine what you should do" is flawed. I think it just means that the requirements to have code that can accurately give you recommendations is much more complex than just looking at the top ten and computing averages.

I've played around with the concept of building something like this, although not for consulting, (although my time is better spent on other things right now) and what I quickly discovered is that you need to be analyzing how other sites that are similar to yours are improving their rankings, which is not a trivial task. It's not enough to just look at all top ranking sites for a certain keyword, because as eliquid mentioned, it is often an apples to oranges comparison.
 
"Good SEO" is, like the algorithms themselves, a moving target. What is good now wasn't good 3 years ago and definitely wasn't good 6-8 years ago. The only proof of what is working that we have to work from is what is currently ranking high for the keywords we care about.

All SERPs are different, all niches are different, all ranking conditions are different, and all ranking timeframes are different. There is no such thing as universally good SEO techniques.

False on all levels. I have been doing SEO since about 2000. I know plenty of properties I have worked on that ranked in 2010 and 2007 that still rank today. What was good SEO then is Good SEO now.

The same methods have been applied to different niches and verticals, so yes there are such things as univerisally good seo tactics.
 
Lol. Just read what I posted right after you wrote all this.

EDIT: I'll respond to the allegations that I'm just a coder building tools for noob SEOs: I have said for years I don't believe in manually collecting data, at least when starting a campaign. In fact, that's what got me into SEO; I'm a coder first, and I like automating systems.

SEOs use my product, Term Explorer, SECockpit, whatever because they agree with me that manually collecting metrics is for fools. Whether you factor in all of the data my product collects into your ranking strategy is your prerogative, but that doesn't change the fact that the metrics we (and the other products I listed, and countless other keyword tools professional SEOs rely on daily) are key ranking factors to varying degrees.

"If this guys niche was Raspberry Ketones or Viagra"...his niche is not anything close to that. It's like a 4,400 searches per month product review keyword. Trying to attack Ketones or Viagra is something only the most elite of SEOs can pull off, and the techniques and strategies and behavior of those SERPs are in no way comparable to OPs niche.

Darrin, no one is attacking you personally.

Are you a coder? Yes. Have you been mostly a coder compared to a SEO professional? Yes. How do I know, well I have been in several different skype chat groups with you over the years so I know what I need to know when it comes to what I am saying. Your a coder first, SEO person second. Nothing wrong with that at all. Its great. But admit your not a SEO professional or have enough experience to call yourself that.

I did not mean you were actively coding tools just for noobs. What I meant and maybe was not clear about was when people use tools ( not just yours, I could point out thousands of them like Ultimate Demon, Term Explorer, Kontent Machine ).. if your a noob and dont know what your doing, your using the tool wrong. I did not mean or wish to imply You yourself code tools for only noobs.

I also believe in automation and collecting data via machines. Hell no I am not doing that by myself. However, when you rely only that data to make your choices and decisions with no other consideration or input, thats when I have a problem with the advice you give people.

I would like to remind you, just because you code a tool.. that doesnt make you a subject matter expert. Just because someone uses your tool, doesnt make you a subject matter expert either. Sure your tools make life easier, but they are not decision makers. Do you see the difference? If you want to nitpick, I must be a subject matter expert on Wordpress SEO becuase I actually made one of the first plugins for Wordpress regarding SEO back in the day, but at that time I was no where near a expert on Wordpress. I also didnt go around touting I was or charging people money or giving them false advice on Wordpress either.

I have no issue with using SerpIQ or Term Exmplorer to help me collect information, I just dont base my final judgment on them alone. When you tell someone to analyze the top 10 of a serp and do exactly what they are doing, you are letting tools ( whatever you coded to get that info, etc ) to make the final decision for someone. Your telling them to blindly to do as others without looking at all variables. That is the issue.

Also, SEOCockpit and TermExplorer are different. They are not giving advice to people on how or what they need to rank a site. You on the other hand did.

Darrin, I am not knocking you so get off the high horse. I think you let the fact that you created a tool that API's into other existing services already in use and then presented that info into a pretty PDF for people to read get to your head and make you think you were qualified to give people actionable SEO advice, when in fact you haven't ranked a site since Tony Horton had a product on Clickbank. Again, I am not trying to be harsh, but the fact people use your tool doesnt make YOU a SEO professional any more then Mattseh just because Mattseh created about 100 tools on this forum that other SEO use daily as well. I guess Bill Gates is an excel expert or Larry Page is a SEO expert as well, because you know they own billion dollar companies. We know that they are not though, right? yeah.

Also the fact his niche is a 4,400 volume term product review niche, tells me for sure his anchor ratio should not be in the 20-30's. Any SEO on this board that has ranked more then 5 sites ( and more importantly 5 active sites in this SEO world today ) will tell you the same about anchor text.
 
I take that back this part:

Also, SEOCockpit and TermExplorer are different. They are not giving advice to people on how or what they need to rank a site. You on the other hand did.

SEOcockpit kinda does. my bad
 
So in this thread, we have me who has given 4 pieces of actionable SEO advice based off of my years of experience running an SEO tool and doing client SEO work, 1 piece of advice which I was called out on and then substantiated with actual serp data which I didn't even use my own product to find.

And then there's you telling me OP to just do "good SEO".

My product doesn't tell anyone to do anything. We intentionally don't do that because we recognize everything is different per SERP. We just take a multi hour manual process and compress it down to something that takes about 60 seconds. The competition index is just a ballpark metric to help get a brief idea of if something is crazy competitive or relatively simple.

So OP, you can either take advice from this noob named dchuk who clearly knows nothing about SEO because obviously eliquid is almost done writing my biography, or you can just do "good SEO"

Good SEO luck bros
 
  • Like
Reactions: jorarulit
Yeah, take SEO advice from someone that couldnt even rank in the peppers for weight loss niche ( darrin ) and has only been involved in SEO since he left his full time job as a coder ( about 2-3 years ago, right Darrin? ). Im not knocking you being a coder, im knocking that you dont know enough SEO to give the right advice. Big difference

Or take advice from someone that not only outted ranking in niches like Payday Loans ( see SpamWow ) and has been employed as digital marketing consultant/professional since 2000, but also made a large sum of money in affliate marketing and digital marketing on his own too.

I think the fact other SEO pros on this board that have been validated and vouched for already like Grindstone ( you know, he only won 1 other SEO contest n this board and had this breakthrough service called SpamGoneWild and ranked shit in the weight loss vertical and was also a big part of LayeredLinks and SerpIQ - the services and tools you help create ) also speak that your anchor text metric were flawed too darrin.

Wait, I guess I can also reach out to your past clients of RocketAudit that have hit me up and some of my other friends for explanation of your audits to them and why you told them to do XYZ when in fact XYZ could have damaged their sites?

Yeah, lets get into this rabbit hole darrin. Maybe you should stick to coding reports.

Again, not hard feelings dude.. but you dont have any real skin in this game called SEO do you?

You need to rethink the data your collecting and giving back out. The multi hour approach to SEO sometimes is better then your 60 second solution.
 
1) 23%
2) ~ 24% (it's an phrase match domain so it's a bit skewed)
3) 0% (very very strong domain, no backlinks to actual URL at all)
4) 0% (even stronger domain, about 14 backlinks to actual URL)
5) 0% (0 links, blogspot hosted domain)
6) ~ 32% (another phrase match domain, but 12% of links were direct exact match anchors, rest were the URL which obviously has the keyword as well)
7) 0% (Extremely powerful domain, only 20 links to actual ranking URL)
8) 0% (a shorter tail variation of the keyword makes up 51% of anchors to this URL...think "payday loans" vs. "cheap payday loans"

On a scale of 1 to Wikepedia, what authority score would you give the bolded domains.

2) Not 1 of us has any fucking clue how Google is going to bend us all over next

That's the truth. You can certainly rank with super high anchor text ratios. For how long is a different question, the answer to which is one we'll never know.

Risk tolerance is unique to all of us. For a throwaway churn and burn, try it and see.

If it's your baby and you want it to be in play with google traffic this time next year, I'd highly recommend not trying to approximate those ratios unless you have a site that would grade out with other low Alexa high PR high inherent authority (read that as age and real world business presence) sites.
 
Last edited:
1) 23%
2) ~ 24% (it's an phrase match domain so it's a bit skewed)
3) 0% (very very strong domain, no backlinks to actual URL at all)
4) 0% (even stronger domain, about 14 backlinks to actual URL)
5) 0% (0 links, blogspot hosted domain)
6) ~ 32% (another phrase match domain, but 12% of links were direct exact match anchors, rest were the URL which obviously has the keyword as well)
7) 0% (Extremely powerful domain, only 20 links to actual ranking URL)
8) 0% (a shorter tail variation of the keyword makes up 51% of anchors to this URL...think "payday loans" vs. "cheap payday loans"

Why did you tell the client 20-30% anchor text ratio?

based on the above data, 5 of the 8 sites have 0.

1 way of looking at this is you can have anchor text of 0-30% right? Why didnt you tell them 10% or 5% then? Why did you go top end and say 20-30%? Thats only based on 3 of 8 sites in the serp.

Why didnt you just tell them to do 9.875%
 
Nerd fight!

NERD-FIGHT.jpg


I actually like this thread quite a lot, the discussion is quite interesting.

I'd agree not to try and up your anchor text ratio. I'd rather increase the domain anchor's on pages with decent keyword density.

Google is a lot less sensitive (spam filter wise) when it comes to the keyword being used relatively heavily on the OBL pages... and it has a very strong effect on rankings.

I do agree with dcuck on the no-follow; keep it real!

OP, if you like, PM me domain and keyword and I'll take a looksee
 
On a scale of 1 to Wikepedia, what authority score would you give the bolded domains.

Ha, I'm not sure about the gradations of that scale, but I will say that the bolded sites are much closer in authority to OP's site than the other, non-bolded ones. The other sites are like Alexa top 50k type domains, the types of sites no one on this forum owns.

Why did you tell the client 20-30% anchor text ratio?

based on the above data, 5 of the 8 sites have 0.

1 way of looking at this is you can have anchor text of 0-30% right? Why didnt you tell them 10% or 5% then? Why did you go top end and say 20-30%? Thats only based on 3 of 8 sites in the serp.

Why didnt you just tell them to do 9.875%

I'm not even sure why I'm replying to you because clearly your goal is to rant with personal attacks rather than actually give advice, but...

I've never once said to average out the anchor texts of SERP's front page, I just said to shoot for 20-30% on average (as in, that's a rough starting point), but compare it to the competition. The sites without around 20% anchor text are all crazy authority sites and should not be compared to OP's site in terms of developing a ranking strategy (which is what you yourself are arguing). The ones with anchor text percentages in that range are comparable to OP's site in the sense that they're also micro niche sites, not major authority sites.
 
And just to prove to myself that I'm not crazy, OP sent me this message a little bit ago:

Thanks for the help so far.

Can you define what "good SEO" is for you? In the thread, everyone kept on talking about it but no one defined it and I'm guessing everyone's definition is different.

(sorry for posting a private message OP, I just think it adds to this clusterfuck of a discussion)
 
I'm not even sure why I'm replying to you because clearly your goal is to rant with personal attacks rather than actually give advice, but...

I've never once said to average out the anchor texts of SERP's front page, I just said to shoot for 20-30% on average (as in, that's a rough starting point), but compare it to the competition. The sites without around 20% anchor text are all crazy authority sites and should not be compared to OP's site in terms of developing a ranking strategy (which is what you yourself are arguing). The ones with anchor text percentages in that range are comparable to OP's site in the sense that they're also micro niche sites, not major authority sites.


Im not ranting, but I also didn't volunteer to give out free advice or accept payment for my SEO advice. I have no reason to give people advice about SEO, especially not for free and not even for payment. I did however start a PPC thread where I did give out advice for free because I felt like it. I also didnt want to run for President, but that doesn't mean I dont have the right to point out what is being done wrong, especially when it could hurt someone or their clients. There is no benefit to me giving the OP the right advice for any reason actually so just because you give advice and I don't, doesn't automatically make your advice "right" or make you an "expert".

You take it as a personal attack because you are trying to position yourself as an SEO expert since you run 2 services positioning yourself as such which can effect your income stream. Take it as you want. Your offering bad advice about SEO and I called you out on it and so did several others on this forum.

I am not doubting that 20-30% can't work. Hell I have seen 100% work. Does it work over the long term, no. You said SEO from 6 years doesnt work today, but the only SEO that didnt work 6 years ago was the wrong SEO like link spamming and heavy anchor text. People that did SEO correctly 6 years ago are still ranking. Your method looks at todays SERP which can be filled with 2 day churn and burns and authority sites that the client will most likely never have. I am not saying his specifically is, but its not the correct way to evaluate a SERP when your spending 60 seconds in it today only.

In your example, your telling him he should do 20-30% because other sites like his are. Did you fail to realize those sites are in the realm of exact match/partial exact match domains too you based that info on, but his site is not? I have the site and serp data now btw. Also, just because those exact ad partial match domains are using the 20-30% anchor ratio doesnt mean his site should. His domain doesnt even contain the whole KW. The reason the other sites anchor ratio is so high is because even if they dropped a non anchored link, it would still get counted to that KW. Ever heard of EMD bonus? Did you take into consideration that maybe exact or partial match domains are also allowed a bit more anchor ratio.. kinda like how an authority site can take on a bit more spam links thrown at it? Things that make you go hmmmm.


"The sites without around 20% anchor text are all crazy authority sites and should not be compared to OP's site in terms of developing a ranking strategy (which is what you yourself are arguing)"

Im not arguing anything other then the advice you gave which has been backed up by a few more people in this thread. Just because sites got away with 20-30% doesnt mean his site can or will. It also doesnt mean he couldnt with 10%.

OP do want you want man. my last words in this thread:


PENIS
 
Good SEO is different to everyone. Darrin's approach is "look at what is ranking today, average those metrics out, match and exceed based on the kitchen sink and everything in it today".

It has no regard for past or future, just today. What is up ranking today could have been different then yesterday and might be different tomorrow. Hell you could be looking at a SERP full of garbage or competition you will never outrank. You don't know because your only looking at today.

When you dont learn from history, your doomed to repeat it, right?

OP, if your site is churn and burn.. follow Darrin's advice.

If the site is long term, figure out SEO from the past and why it is where it is today. Find sites that have ranked for more then today in your same niche and find out WHY they are still ranking today just like when they ranked for the same KWs 6 months ago or 6 years ago. Not every site ranking from 6 years ago or even 6 months ago is an authority site, so don't be scared thinking you can't do it too.

I am not going to tell you everything in 1 post that took some of us years of failure and success to know and even if I did, someone else would have a different method as well.

Bottom line is, you can use the same approach Darrin does, you just need to filter the data going in and filter the data coming out 10x better to make a more informed decision.

Otherwise, you will be a slave to tools and consultants that could be leading you down the wrong path and never understand why, because you dont understand the core of your question to begin with.
 
I'm curious about two things at this point:

1) Why are you so fired up by my original post in this thread? I have never once personally attacked you in this thread (or really anywhere as far as I can recall) and yet you've gone on a tirade attacking me at the very least on a professional level. What gives? You could have just easily ignored this thread, or my advice, or said something to the extent of "I'm gonna have to disagree with Darrin's point #1" and given your own advice, but instead you flipped out like I just spit in your face or something equally as offensive.

Why are you so angry?

2) I gave 4 distinct points of advice based on a brief look at the SERPs for OP's site after he messaged me and asked me to. I spent maybe 15 minutes on the whole thing, looking at one keyword, a few pages of results.

You've managed to write a short thesis at this point about how wrong I was for 1 of my points without even going so far to acknowledge the other points I made.

Again, why such a visceral reaction to a single point of advice in a public facing thread asking for some SEO advice? Who cares?
 
OP sent me his site. Here is my review:

#1 issue - The site offers nothing of value. I know, I know, this sounds like Matt Cutts shit. But it is true. The text is a bunch of fluff. It was written by someone who is not into widgets, and widget people will see this right off the bat. All the reviews are not unique, just embeded youtube videos of other people

#2 Pushing affiliate links WAY too hard - You need to be more subtle, provide more value, push sales less.

#3 VERY thin site - No about us, no privacy policy, sign up page without SSL, no youtube channel, unlinked facebook+twitter (with very few followers/likes), no author page... very little 'trust signals'

#4 Affiliates links aren't cloaked

#5 No diversity in affiliate links - There is nothing wrong with having an affiliate site, but if you are only pushing products from 1 online store that already has reviews, why would the big G put you above them?

#6 Links - I didn't check deep, but your links are all SEO links. I didn't see any links from widget review sites, or links from widget related sites that have actual users.

#7 Too few unlinked references (real sites don't only get links, they get unlinked references)

#8 Too many links from the 'legal widget aspect' and not enough for the words you are targeting 'widget review', this might be boxing you into a category.



In short, the OP should start doing actual reviews, or paying people to do them. That way he would have real content. Then tone down the affiliate links. Diversify them (so not only pointing to one online store). Cloak the links. Include authority signals (privacy, about us, SSL for registration, etc). Network with people in the industry and get truly relevant links from sites that exist for non-SEO purposes. Start sending out press releases. Get a youtube channel going and get your videos ranking. Get more attention from review/sales targeted sites and not just from legal.



In short; do good SEO. All the stuff I have mentioned has been covered in MANY threads. There are awesome advice threads out there. While there are better threads than the one I created, here is something I posted recently that should give you some ideas:
http://www.wickedfire.com/shooting-...ffic-content-links-greeneys-post-2-785-a.html

Now I want to see some big asses, hopefully jiggling or something ("big" for a skinny white guy, not big as in stretch marks over stretch marks big; think CCarter's chick big)
 
I'm curious about two things at this point:

1) Why are you so fired up by my original post in this thread? I have never once personally attacked you in this thread (or really anywhere as far as I can recall) and yet you've gone on a tirade attacking me at the very least on a professional level. What gives? You could have just easily ignored this thread, or my advice, or said something to the extent of "I'm gonna have to disagree with Darrin's point #1" and given your own advice, but instead you flipped out like I just spit in your face or something equally as offensive.

Why are you so angry?

I wasn't angry to begin with. I think I was rather professional with my first post here:

http://www.wickedfire.com/shooting-...seo-please-will-pay-tits-ass.html#post2116131

I didn't attack you from what I can tell and I even offered up why it was the wrong analysis. Maybe I hoped you would see why it was wrong too and maybe take into consideration what I was trying to tell you and OP.

I think the part in the above URL specifically where I said noobs and you took offense to it as in me saying you only code tools for noobs ( which is not what I mean ) is where it took the wrong turn.

Then, to be so closed minded as to say "By definition, the sites ranking highest for a keyword are doing good SEO" showed me you had no reason to think outside the box about other variables like authority sites and spam link machines that even I can crank out and rank within a couple days time into consideration as those would be "good seo" too by your definition. You can't see the issue with that, so that showed me a side of you that was rather unknowledgeable. Still I wasn't angry at that point yet.

Even in my second post, I was rather professional and offered up another example.

When you posted this:
http://www.wickedfire.com/shooting-...seo-please-will-pay-tits-ass.html#post2116364

I again see how little you know of SEO. There are universally good SEO tactics and there are SEO tactics that worked 3-6 years ago that still work today. You just do not know them so you made this generalization based on the limited experience you have. Again, I was not angry yet but I do think I was irritated. I knew what I was dealing with already with you though seeing how you were closed minded to just your method and limited understanding. Plus I have been saying for years each SERP is different anyways, but there are still universals you can follow. I do agree you need to know what your competition is doing, to a degree and that some of the universal good SEO strategies have a limit to them, but some do not.

It was at this point here:
http://www.wickedfire.com/shooting-...seo-please-will-pay-tits-ass.html#post2116372

I wanted to explain why it was wrong and even that 1 of your former partners who does SEO day in and day out even said it would not help long term. Wasn't angry, but a bit irritated. I was actually about to leave the thread anyways at this point.

At your post here:
http://www.wickedfire.com/shooting-...seo-please-will-pay-tits-ass.html#post2116378

I realized what is actually going on is, your trying to throw around your weight as the creator of SerpIQ into your benefit for being a SEO professional. I don't discredit using automated tools for metrics, but I got a whiff of "hey Im Darrin and i created SerpIQ therefor since other seo guys use my tool and I made it, Im qualified to give seo advice". It was at this point I was pretty disgusted with it. I dont have a problem with your tools, trust me I dont. I have a problem with you thinking you can give advice because you created them, especially when that advice is flawed or the metrics your taking in dont consider other important factors and when also other people more senior then you in a subject try to tell you and show you the flaws, you insist your data is right instead.

At this point it became a pissing match with you of "hey im darrin, creator of SerpIQ which entitles me to giving SEO advice" and me "hey its Jason, ive actually been working in this space for over 13 years, had a spam ranking service that ranked elusive niches like Payday loans and I even outted it, and also made some good money to live off for years in this space as well" with you thinking you actually had better advice to give to OP just because I didn't give any. I base that off this post here from you:
http://www.wickedfire.com/shooting-...seo-please-will-pay-tits-ass.html#post2116428

At that point, I just didn't care anymore. I am tired of people thinking because they did 1 thing in SEO or co-created a tool people use and pay money for as their validation into being someone that can give credible advice about strategy. Especially when you try to throw that around up against someone that actually does this for a living and ranks sites for clients day in and day out and has done it for a magnitude 4x longer then you. Its even more disgusting when one of your former partners points it out and even some other guys on this board but you dont take the hint. I wasn't angry before this point Darrin, I tried being professional and point out the flaw in the metrics before I pointed out your flaws but you wanted to keep proving your angle even when others pointed it out as wrong.

It reminds me a lot of Rand Fishkin. Guy is smart about business, but that is it. But the guy is treated like SEO Royalty and is invited and asked to speak on all kinds of marketing related topics, but the guy is about a dumb as a bag of rocks when it comes to what actually is working in digital. Point in case, you have pointed out several times yourself about how they are unprofitable and cant scale with their servers and coding they have on their backend, but I bet you he has probably been picked as a speaker to give advice to other start up and SaaS guys about how to scale and reach the top even when he was broke as fuck with SEOMoz. He is not an expert just because he made a tool.

It was childish of me to nit pick and call you out, I admit. Therefor I bow out even though I know the extent of the damage done already to me and you both because of it. However, I cant sit by and let OP take that 1 piece of advice from you and be fine with it when I know it was wrong and pointed out why it was wrong before we started in on each other.


2) I gave 4 distinct points of advice based on a brief look at the SERPs for OP's site after he messaged me and asked me to. I spent maybe 15 minutes on the whole thing, looking at one keyword, a few pages of results.

You've managed to write a short thesis at this point about how wrong I was for 1 of my points without even going so far to acknowledge the other points I made.

Again, why such a visceral reaction to a single point of advice in a public facing thread asking for some SEO advice? Who cares?

I didnt look at the others, I admit. I didnt need to though in my mind based on what I put above.

But like you said above, Who cares? I could have said the same to you when you kept pressing on with the reasons why your were right in your analysis when I was trying to just point out why it was wrong in my first couple of posts. Who cares works both ways.

So now I ask you, why did you feel so inclined multiple times to prove your analysis right over and over again to lead to this point in the thread even though several people who do this for a living told you it wouldnt fly?
 
  • Like
Reactions: quintana
I realized what is actually going on is, your trying to throw around your weight as the creator of SerpIQ into your benefit for being a SEO professional.

If you look back in this thread, I specifically don't mention my own product by name, only the names of others. There's no links in my sigs to it, no mention of it other than by you a bunch of times as a means to attack my professional credibility.

Sure, most people probably know me as the guy who made it, but I avoided naming it on purpose because I didn't even use it to answer OP's questions. I just used ahrefs and the SERPs themselves.

And I sure hope my product isn't perceived as a tool that just collects averages of data.

I didnt look at the others, I admit. I didnt need to though in my mind based on what I put above.

But like you said above, Who cares? I could have said the same to you when you kept pressing on with the reasons why your were right in your analysis when I was trying to just point out why it was wrong in my first couple of posts. Who cares works both ways.

So now I ask you, why did you feel so inclined multiple times to prove your analysis right over and over again to lead to this point in the thread even though several people who do this for a living told you it wouldnt fly?

I supported my advice because one point of it was under dispute and I wanted to share why I came to that conclusion.

Pretty sure myself and greenleaves are the only two dudes here who actually tossed some advice out. Fuck me right?