Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Yesterday
  3. Last week
  4. That's what I think, too. He does have an additional number, now, but what a mess his original GMB account was. I didn't set it up for him, just his new one for his store. Thanks for the help Mike.
  5. Well, yeah different businesses should have different phone numbers.
  6. I have another client with two businesses, one is his shop (store) and the other one is his mobile business. Google removed his mobile business. I'm guessing here, but it could be because of the phone number? That is what had me worried about the ex's business being on there.
  7. There can be more than one business at the same address. You don't need hers moved.
  8. I'm thinking both Mike. I just went back and checked it. Her business is still listed there, but there is a BIG RED bar that says "moved to a new location". It's frustrating because I need this woman off of there! I need to use that address for his new 'branch' of business. It's the only address I can use without GMB not approving it. It's a HUGE piece of property and a whole family lives there. I believe it's split, but the parents have two businesses and the son has an existing business. The address hers is listed at is available because of the split in parcels. I guess the new break up saying is gonna be "Take your cat, take your sweater and take your GMB account too!"
  9. I'm guessing ones that are not claimed and actively managed the changes go live right away. That or it's just showing for you as you are logged into the Google account that suggested the edit... maybe?
  10. I added opening dates to mine and those that I managed. Thanks Mike! I have a client who's ex wife still has her business listed at his address. I have been asking my client to call her and have her remove it.. PFFT! He still hasn't. Yesterday, I went in and suggested an edit. I just entered 'moved to another location' and Google updated it right away. I don't know how they would know I am telling the truth? Her website is gone, (she let it go) but she still has her FB page and to my knowledge, she doesn't even list her new address.
  11. Maybe Google patched it. It might also be that it only lets you do it if you don't have an opening date listed. I honestly don't remember if I did or not.
  12. I've been forced to use Gutenberg on a couple of client sites. I'm getting better with it. It's not quite as clunky as it first felt. I still feel like this was some straight out of college junior programmer's first attempt at making a page builder though.
  13. The one I always stuck to was https://color.adobe.com Allows you to browse pallets, save pallets and overall a few more options I think.
  14. What Mike said.... I know there are a few hosting companies out there that also push updates.
  15. Interesting, I took a look at how someone would even do that but it doesnt seem to let you date things for the future, so I wonder how they got around it.
  16. Earlier
  17. Interesting. I have never seen an affiliate program that restricts participants by state.
  18. Picking keywords that are easy to rank for really has nothing to do with content. It's still all about links.
  19. Social Media Marketing is good for both of them. Should be used correctly with a previous analysis of each product and a creating a good marketing plan.
  20. I've never had this happen before. I built out a landing page / funnel around a specific offer. I usually build this out first before I try to apply to the affiliate program so I can show them the landing page. Between that and being incorporated, I've never been declined on an affiliate network or from a company with an affiliate program. Until today. Apparently due to sales tax nexus laws, this company does not work with affiliates from my entire state. Thankfully, a different company with a similar offer will work with me, but I have to redo much of the campaign material. Lesson learned. If you're going to build out a funnel that is specific to an offer/company, make sure you can get approved first and show them something similar to what you plan to do.
  21. I would say picking the right keywords and understanding at what keyword competition level your content can compete at is king. It works consistently across all of my sites. And I really don't recommend using Moz to try to find those keywords out.
  22. You know what the Moz followers would say to that? Content is king. Links are no longer that important.
  23. Looks like Mike was right. /facepalm I'm pretty sure they're baking rankings into the calculation. I believe I can prove this as I have a domain that Moz reports zero links (there are some Moz just hasn't found them) and it reports DA 2 PA 6 which is an improvement from DA 0 PA 4. With Moz, their target audience is agencies and larger corporations. Depending on what you use the metrics for, this can be useful but that's not really what I personal use SEO data tools for. To give you an idea how accurate this is, my PA 6 page of content is beating a PA 42 and a PA 47 and those pieces of content are on the same topic. For link prospecting, it's useful as the metrics do represent "value" but not exclusively link equity.
  24. Not sure if anyone saw this, but Google launched a new Google My Business spam complaint form. https://www.seroundtable.com/google-my-business-spam-report-form-27183.html It's supposed to be used for GMB listings that lead to fraudulent or misleading content. I know there are a lot of people out there making a living with fake GMB listings that are generating leads they sell off. I would imagine competitors are going to use this form to report those listings. I wouldn't be surprised if Google uses this data to crowd source a solution to those local lead generating listings. If that is your only source of income, I would start diversifying now.
  25. The forum is now integrated with Giphy. Hit the GIF button in the editor and you will see options to post Gifs.
  26. Trying to respond in order of your statements. Reminder: my responses are from the perspective of an affiliate marketer. Context is critical when discussing SEO. Yeah definitely. I'm just tired of targeting lower volume keywords. I've done it every way imaginable. I can never personally get the content to go viral where the "quality" might matter enough where I actually do earn tons of links. If I target higher competition keywords it might work, but if I don't have enough links to get the content to page 1, it's a broken loop, it just doesn't work. If you're flying solo or it's a small shop with a handful of employees/freelancers, trying to beat out the competition with better quality content doesn't really work. The strategy that works for the "small guys" is usually to farm easy keywords with "decent content" that's informative and helps people. It doesn't need to be mind blowing and if this is done right, since you get traffic and it's helpful, your site will earn links slowly over time. The alternative is grey hat and if done right, does work. The skyscraper technique where you spend 100 hours creating a piece of content and then spend hundreds more marketing it to bloggers can work, I've just had it fail one too many times. I gave up on infographics as well. It's a lot of time invested and the "zero results" outcome just started happening too frequently for me. The only ways to do it and "guarantee results" are to scale it into oblivion or bribe people. I know I'm jaded from some bad outreach campaigns but considering the number of times people have suggested to me that they're willing to link if I pay, I would suggest that is the correct way to go. As far as the gurus, the more time I spend in this space, the more I bump into somebody from an agency that built links for X Y Z guru. I recommend that you completely ignore gurus like Neil Patel and Brain Dean. At least Nathan Gotch is honest and tells people that he buys links. They're not going to run a test like that because then it makes them look foolish and I'm sure they know that with their absurd backlink profiles, they can pick easy keywords and rank gibberish. If the keyword is easy enough you can rank junk content. This isn't very scale-able as panda will hit you eventually. It's looking for a combination of low quality score (ratio of branded searches to unbranded, note: this doesn't matter for low volume sites) and there's likely some kind of objective analysis, things like spelling errors or percentage of content that is unique. If the links are super sketchy as well then it's easier to get penalized. I've never done that exact test but my bet is that it's going to come down to links and whatever click data Google analyzes. Google has no way to evaluate "quality" as it's subjective. I assure you that Google's analysis is "objective." I've done the opposite test plenty of times where I put up an extremely good piece of content on a competitive keyword and since I don't have enough links, I don't rank at all... It's much easier to test that conversely.
  27. I enjoy whenever the topic of Moz comes up on /r/seo. Everyone bashes them and they have one lone employee on there that attempts to defend it. He usually gets called out for his lies. I think one time I remember Tim from Ahrefs even jumped in to call him out on his BS.
  28. But here's the thing with that. When the competition is really low, it doesn't even have to be all that decent of a piece of content to rank. Here's what I have never seen any of the "content is king" gurus do. Run a test like this. Find relatively easy to rank keywords. Put up a piece of content that is just okay and rank it. Then a few weeks later do the same thing but write a piece of content that is much higher quality and see if that piece of content outranks the first one. Do this 25-30 times to eliminate some of the variables. Why has nobody done this yet to try to prove that Google really is a good judge of the quality of the content? Or maybe some people have and didn't get the results they were looking for.
  1. Load more activity


  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.