There's no doubt that after a dozen SES conferences over the past 3 years, there's a bit of diminishing returns. Certainly, there's a lack of motivation to attend as many seminars as I should, particularly since I've seen many of them several times and this combines with the increase in online coverage of the industry and the sheer number of events to make for a less discovery-intensive journey. However, for first timers, or even second timers, my feeling is that the value here has increased since last year. There's a higher concentration of people, and the conference is less spread out. There's also a confluence of a lot of great minds - yesterday's organic listings forum (of which I was the white-hat of the bunch) brought a lot of terrific questions, both high level and basic.
On the social front, the parties in London are a bit smaller and more intimate, but no less enjoyable. Scott & Rebecca have been out until 2-3am at the hotel bar, carousing with London's finest (and drunkest). Last night featured my first-ever bottle of Dom Perignon (an engagement present from that chap who makes clawfoot tubs), a drunken arm wrestling contest, a lot of congratulatory handshakes, and plenty of needling about creating the most "linkbaity" wedding proposal in history (it will be many conferences before Messrs Naylor & Boser stop giving me a hard time). I admit to getting a wee bit pissed off by the folks who think it was a "marketing scheme" or "fake," but I suppose that comes with the territory.
On the SEO tactics front, I've had a couple discussions with folks here that have provided some value. Last night, Frank (Aussiewebmaster) and I got to chatting about the GoogleBomb prevention algo and we've got a fairly good idea of how it works (at least, a good theory). It goes something like this:
- If lots of links pointing to a page all contain the same anchor text, run it through this filter
- If the links contain anchor text that does not appear on the page, continue this process
- If the correlation between the relevancy of the terms contained on the page and the anchor text links are low, continue this process (obviously, we're not sure what the exact limit might be)
- Remove the anchor text influence of the links with "bombing-pattern" terms (we're not sure, but we think the other link factors - PageRank, trust, et al remain in place)
In addition, I had some conversations about how universally applicable linkbait could be, particularly for industries that have absolutely no tech-focus whatsoever. Of course, when I saw this on the top of Digg, I figured I can rest my case. There's nothing less Digg-centric than Lobster fishing, but this guy's bait doesn't just include chum.
More goodies?
- MSN has a booth at the exhibition hall, but for the first time in recent memory, neither Google nor Yahoo! have booths.
- Richard Zwicky tracked more than 200 million search queries through Enquisite, and the oddest trend emerged - Yahoo! has been slowly gaining market share since December.
- The British have a sense of humor that I'm unable to penetrate, but I am considering throwing some of these into my presentation to help out.
- The ghost of Danny Sullivan was in the keynote this morning - during Chris Sherman's talk with Matt Cutts, two of the banners fell off the wall - one for Incisive Media and another for SearchEngineWatch. It felt eerily ominous.
Sounds like you had a good time. Apparently if you want a link bomb to work you have to at least partially use some of text on the page you're pointing to. That's why "failure in the whitehouse" still works while "miserable failure" doesn't. Although it's easier and even more annoying to rank a "you company sucks" page as opposed to a traditional link bomb. Plus it's completely legitimate and the rankings last a long time.
That's what I was thinking.
Rand,
glad to hear you've had a quicker jetlag recovery... although insomnia based posts are always fun to take in!
I would imagine that at your level now and with so many shows under your belt, the real value probably comes from the chance to connect personally with other leaders in the industry. That kind of connectivity is hard to match, even in this always connected online world.
Well, in the immortal words of Oscar Wilde...
Besides, what prompts talk more than envy anyway?
cheers
With regards to the Googlebomb defusal, wouldn't it make sense to have a timeliness flag for link accumulation?
Perhaps comparing:
That is, the first part of Rand's theory should be:
"If lots of links pointing to a page all contain the same anchor text, compare the historical rate of link accumulation with current rate of link accumulation."
If this is tripped, then move on to the next part.
This could help explain why "Click here" remains as a googlebomb - the accumulation rate of "click here" link text to Adobe/Flash etc appears natural and consistent.
Shor - brilliant! That's a really excellent addition to the theory. You're worth your weight in gold, mate. Maybe we can get you to author some posts here one day :)
WRT GoogleBombing: My two cents on this were on Matt's post about it - "if the target URL has tons of off-page optimization for a certain keyphrase, but very little (or no) on-page optimization for that same phrase, then it might fit the signature of a GoogleBomb and lets look a bit closer at it." which echo's your analysis too.
Since you seem to enjoy corner cases Rand, I asked a followup question about what if the target page itself is not spiderable (i.e. via robots.txt, etc.) Yes, Google index's non-spiderable pages by inferring relvancy via inbound links,DMOZ listings, etc. ... but not having access to the on-page content would seem to defeat this algorithm (?)
WRT to "getting a wee bit pissed off by the folks who think [your engagement] it was a marketing scheme or fake" ... wellllll gosh Rand, you do seem to categorize anything that is interesting/useful/entertaining/etc. as linkbait ... so they do seem to be calling the kettle black?!? ;-)
Regardless, my sincere congrats on your engagement and a job very, very well done!
Canine Freestyle?
And I'm missing you guys here in Seattle. Matt's still grumpy, Gillian's still trying really hard to get cell reception in the office, and Jane's still a Kiwi.
Canine Freestyle... Dugg!
However, I'm a horrible digger. Thus, I doubt that it'll climb (or descend?).
Good luck sir!
"If the links contain anchor text that does not appear on the page, continue this process"
This would not only make sense for preventing the "bombing" but also be a usability factor.
The way links worked is ... if 10 people around you say (anchor text link says Johny) that your name is Johny and you say that your name is Mike (content says Mike) ... search engines will believe that you're Johny.
Rand,
I assume your speaking of the drunken arm wrestling contest between the Russian guy from the casino site and our own DaveN.
Dave told me about it the next day before our SEM Toolbox gig. Very, very funny story.
Turns out the guy got fired for his performance that night and the previous 2. (but Dave said he bragged about having 50m in his bank account so he probably doesn't mind...lol)
Rand,
You kicked the bar up so far of course some people are going to hate on you. But don't hate the playa, hate the game... Anyway, I bit the bullet and showed my wife the vids and she bought it and even cried. I figured it would be best if I brought it up instead of letting her find it on her own.
But really dude, if it's bugging you that much you probably aren;t drunk enough.
The Yahoo trend doesn't really suprise me. I know a lot of geeks switching over and they tell the normies what to use... Google has had a serries of PR disasters over the last year. Small stuff, but it all adds up. I guess they can't handle the glare of the spotlight. I expect Google will level off at 60% of the Market, Yahoo 20%, Live 6% and all other players will share the rest... but we'll see.
I am suprised Google and Yahoo don't have booths. But since they didn't MS would have to have one.
As for British humor, read some Terry Pratchet. That guy is hillarious no matter what "English" you speak!
Hi Rand,
Great explanation on GGBombing filters. You made it a lot clearer to me.
However, I'm not sure I understand "Remove the anchor text influence of the links with "bombing-pattern" terms (we're not sure, but we think the other link factors - PageRank, trust, et al remain in place)"
Cheers,
Your French friend Laurent
Oi, don't joke about the Hoff. <3
If you need help on the comedy front, you may want to check out Little Britain and Top Gear (SE903).
I'm looking forward to more reports on SES London. I hope you have a good time after daily sessions as well. Even though lots of people from the UK say they wouldn't want to live in London, it's a nice night out in any case. =)
Rand,
Concerning those funny pictures from safenow.org, I would suggest only using one or two if you decide to go that path. You don't want them to steal the show since they're so hilarious.
Rand,
Good to see you're all enjoying yourself. Shame I couln't be there to chat but I was let out my cage last week to go to an exhibition in London (Technology For Marketers). I don't think my body could handle a trip to England twice in 2 weeks :o(
If you're doing a presentation for your session tomorrow, it would be great to get hold of a copy.
Sorry to hear you think our humour is hard to get. Drop in a joke about 'David The Hoff' Hasselhoff and you'll be on easy street.
Ditto!
Hey Rand,
I was at the forum seminar yesterday; it's been the highlight so far. And it was extremely apparent you were the only "white hat" guy on the panel.
P.s. loving your yellow "sneakers"
Thanks Rahman. I thoroughly enjoyed that panel as well - I hope that analytics tomorrow is equally engaging.