In a recent thread at Cr8 I gave some rough averages of incoming bid requests I received:
- 80% has a annual budget less than 1,000US$
- 10% has an monthly budget of 100-400US$
- 9% has an annual budget larger than 5,000US$
- 1% has an annual budget larger than 10,000US$
(These may be bit different compared to most SEOMoz readers, because SEO prices in US and globally are very different; and I do receive a fair share of requests outside US).
In US SEO consultation prices vary from approx. US$20/h (non-professionals) to US$100/h (semi-pro's) up to US$500/h (high-paying professionals) per hour. Then there are SEO packages that vary from US$49.95 (total bogus, but they do promise to rank #1 for any keyword) to US$2,500 (a basic SEO package) up to US$5-10,000 a month (professional packages).
With prices like these it is pretty obvious that 80% of SEO seekers have very little to choose. They could either purchase few hours of quality consultation or waste their marketing budget by trying bogus SEO packages. What is pretty clear that with current SEO services pricing demand and supply don’t meet each other extremely well, and I am surprised how little focus this issue has received amongst SEO community.
Would it be possible someday to provide quality SEO for US$500? Initially when I began thinking this issue few weeks ago I had very large doubts, but now I think it could be done. I admit that the solution would be very different compared to standard SEO, but would it matter if it delivered the goods?
So, basic SEO can be mass produced but the targeting and linkage are the make-or-break factors.
Egol, I've tought of these also and think it can be solved at satisfactory level. US500 is a limited budget and acknowledging the limitations on both sides (SEO and customer) is essential for success. Focusing on high or medium keywords is too high goal for this kind of budget, finding niches is easy and very affordable ground to begin. In the end of day, if the client get's increased revenue / more visitors (or whatever the goal was) then all is fine.
What we are talking about here is some SEO that will accomplish a traffic improvement. This is better than no SEO and could bring nice traffic from low competition terms on a large site.
However, if a person wants to go after competetive terms it will fall short. Also, I find that I can double the traffic on a site by watching my logs and getting more savvy about keyword research - and that can take more than $500 worth of time but yield thousands of dollars in profits over the lifetime of a site.
IMO the value of the work you propose is to demonstrate to a customer that SEO work is valuable and there is where you get the upsell.
So I would offer a tiered pricing with this automatic SEO as Step 1... and then have add on packages for KW research, link building, content development, etc. These require more thought and hand/brain work.
However, if a person wants to go after competetive terms it will fall short.
This is part of what I mean by acknowledging the limitations.
IMO the value of the work you propose is to demonstrate to a customer that SEO work is valuable and there is where you get the upsell.
I agree with your thinking here... Also if the upsell never occurs, the market size of low budget SEO carries a huge potential that can prove to be equally valuable.
I agree with Rand, and find it hard to believe that you could quote a one-time fee for SEO work when true SEO experts recognize that effective SEO takes time to show results, and needs consistent measuring, evaluation, and adjustment. Can this be done for $500.00, not with the amount of time required to produce long term results. (IMO) A credible consulting firm will acknowledge that SEO occurs over time, and therefore would quote on a monthly basis based on the phases of work; Discovery, Implementation, Analysis, and Adjustment. The higher costs are experienced up front as that is where the majority of the work lives, with decreasing costs over time. The cost is also dependent on the SEO's role, owner of work, educator of work, or advisor. If anyone told me that they could perform true SEO for $500.00 total, I would run in the opposite direction.
$500/hr!? I wish I would have known that when I was consulting!
My feeling is that at the $5K-$10K level, you are getting services that can tell/show you how to design and build the kind of site that can rank well for a very long time (along with suggestions on exactly where to promote and link build for short-term success).
At the $20K+ level, you should be getting that work done entirely for you by the SEO/Webdev team. The real issue I have is with Web Design/Development Agencies who charge upwards of $20K for a site and then deliver a project that's never going to rank, convert or attract, even if it does look good.
I don't know about complete SEO plan, but $500 would buy 3 hours of my time. A 90 minutes review and two 45 minutes phone would provide any web site owner with very decent SEO advice.
Im currently setting up my SEO business aiming at small/medium businesses with smaller budgets.
The annual package I'm going to offer is around £750, offering keyword support, optimistion, monitoring etc and of course valuable advice! Admittedly it is over the $500 mark, but I am offering adhoc advice/reports on keywords/optimisation/rankings/link building etc for a one off fee. Which is more affordable to smaller businesses and can help them market one landing page at a time when there budget allows.
Of course in the end it is up to them whether they act on the advice.
So SEO packages under $500 I think are possible and can provide good value for money but the business will probably have to provide more effort on there behalf.
(Hopefully my website will be available in the next week or so to showcase the services I offer...)
With the constant invention of modern algorithms, I truly wonder (IMO) if on page factors are as meaningful today as they were 2 years ago. What do I mean? If someone has a basic gift of writing, and can articulate meaningful pages of content, titles and headings, they stand a good chance of being found by the Algorithm of the month. Unless the site is completely sloppy, the content will generate solid interest and can be converted to dollars. So this lends to a new question. Does specific analysis of Meta data, navigation, site construction, deserve or warrant big dollars?
If we were talking about streaming video or music, huge shopping carts, major databases, then my answer would be yes. If we were talking about blogs, general content, and small sales sites, I would agree with EGOL, that a basic template would be sufficient.
I have pages on my popular sites that have no Meta at all and yet score very well. Some of the pages say, “new page” in the title tag, and are number 1 for there keywords. By the way, it was an experiment I did a while back to prove to myself that page content is the dominant factor of Google’s modern algorithms (minus the back links of course).
Write till your fingers bleed, and you will have all the SEO wisdom needed to succeed. I know this is oversimplification of the due process, but it definitely seems that’s the way it is.
D
Interesting post 2K. IMO basic on-page optimization can be done through a template and that can be done farily well via mass production. However, missing is the art work of Keyword Research - which terms to target for a particular topic or product - a little smarts here can make a big difference. Then it comes down to a battle of links - and that must be earned through quality content or paid for over time.
So, basic SEO can be mass produced but the targeting and linkage are the make-or-break factors.