Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mike Friedman

Stupid Buzzwords

Recommended Posts

SEO certainly loves its buzzwords, and gurus latch on them in order to lure in suckers to their sales funnel.

I'm in a few Facebook groups (most of them pretty shitty) and have seen two floating around recently... a lot. 

The first one is Google Stacking. This one is freaking hilarious. 

So basically shitty backlinkers realize that people are getting wise to the fact that just building links from a bunch of crappy Web 2.0 sites is not going to get them ranking for much of anything. So what do they do? They tweak it a little and repackage it as Google Stacking.

Remember Link Wheels and Link Pyramids? It's the exact same thing except that the first tier of sites which link to your money site are all Google properties. YouTube, Blogger, Google Maps, Google Docs, GMB, etc. They claim that they are using the "authority and trust" of Google to rank your website. 

Lol. Just know that if you see anyone recommending Google Stacking, what they are really advocating is going back to 2007 and using extremely weak links that will magically rank you highly. 

The other one I had not heard of much, but the past two weeks I see it keep popping up. It is Topic Clusters. These SEO ninjas will claim that Topic Clusters are the next big thing in SEO. Someone wrote an article last year literally calling them The Next Evolution of SEOThe author of that article has obviously never heard of a man named Bruce Clay who has been advocating the exact same thing for over a decade, only he calls them by something you probably have heard of: silos.

The author of that article acts as if they stumbled on to some great new concept that nobody else had ever thought of and is going to change the landscape of digital marketing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Web Hosting

The Google Stacking thing is irritating. As soon as I see anyone mention it, I know they are not worth listening to.

Someone, and I forget their name right now, keeps popping up with ads in my Facebook feed. He has a "book" promising the secrets of ranking #1 in local results in Google. It's his secrets to how he has stayed ranking #1 for the past two years. 

It keeps popping up and it is free, so I figured why not, right?

The "book" is about 15 pages and his "secret" methods are Google Stacking and a couple of gigs from one of the cheap ass outsourcing sites. It wasn't Fiverr, but I forget which it was. Maybe Konker. I can't remember. 

I see him posting in a Facebook group all the time too. It is scary how many people listen to these kind of jokers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2018 at 2:42 PM, Mike Friedman said:

SEO certainly loves its buzzwords, and gurus latch on them in order to lure in suckers to their sales funnel.

I'm in a few Facebook groups (most of them pretty shitty) and have seen two floating around recently... a lot. 

The first one is Google Stacking. This one is freaking hilarious. 

So basically shitty backlinkers realize that people are getting wise to the fact that just building links from a bunch of crappy Web 2.0 sites is not going to get them ranking for much of anything. So what do they do? They tweak it a little and repackage it as Google Stacking.

Remember Link Wheels and Link Pyramids? It's the exact same thing except that the first tier of sites which link to your money site are all Google properties. YouTube, Blogger, Google Maps, Google Docs, GMB, etc. They claim that they are using the "authority and trust" of Google to rank your website. 

Lol. Just know that if you see anyone recommending Google Stacking, what they are really advocating is going back to 2007 and using extremely weak links that will magically rank you highly. 

The other one I had not heard of much, but the past two weeks I see it keep popping up. It is Topic Clusters. These SEO ninjas will claim that Topic Clusters are the next big thing in SEO. Someone wrote an article last year literally calling them The Next Evolution of SEOThe author of that article has obviously never heard of a man named Bruce Clay who has been advocating the exact same thing for over a decade, only he calls them by something you probably have heard of: silos.

The author of that article acts as if they stumbled on to some great new concept that nobody else had ever thought of and is going to change the landscape of digital marketing.

 

I think they're just trying to say that SEO should move beyond the silo structure, I actually have a tendency to agree.

It's a good internal link structure but you can do better.

Obviously that piece by Matt is content marketing so it's blown massively out of proportion.

Let me translate for him: Instead of using category pages, use a piece of content instead.

So target keyword: SEO - 10,000 word guide on SEO

children pages:

white hat seo

link building

on page seo

google penalties

Then link the guide to the children pages internally and the children pages back to the guide.

It's the exact same thing as the silo structure except that the links will all be in the body of content, rather than navigational or breadcrumb links.

The weak part of the silo structure is the category pages don't attract many external links, so what is he saying is indeed better.

I didn't need to read that piece of content to know that though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mki said:

I think they're just trying to say that SEO should move beyond the silo structure, I actually have a tendency to agree.

It's a good internal link structure but you can do better.

Obviously that piece by Matt is content marketing so it's blown massively out of proportion.

Let me translate for him: Instead of using category pages, use a piece of content instead.

So target keyword: SEO - 10,000 word guide on SEO

children pages:

white hat seo

link building

on page seo

google penalties

Then link the guide to the children pages internally and the children pages back to the guide.

It's the exact same thing as the silo structure except that the links will all be in the body of content, rather than navigational or breadcrumb links.

The weak part of the silo structure is the category pages don't attract many external links, so what is he saying is indeed better.

I didn't need to read that piece of content to know that though.

 

 

I always considered silos to be that way. They never had to be navigational or breadcrumb links. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol Google Stacking. I keep seeing that one too in a Facebook group. People jump into threads, post it, and then refuse to give any details. They act like it is some big secret or it only works if you use their special method that you will find in their course for $500.

It's no wonder people are so confused by SEO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

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.