Līve Ambitions

The much anticipated Windows 7 operating system is finally here!  I’ve not tried it myself, but based on many reviews, there are major improvements over the previous versions.  For many PC users, Windows Vista was a huge disappointment.  Hopefully, Microsoft can redeem themselves with Windows 7.

You can get Windows 7 at various online retail stores such as Microsoft Store, Amazon and Newegg.  However, the cheapest price I found was at Memory America.

In the past, it was common to see websites without logo links.  Websites used to have a simple menu with a “Home” link in a prominent location.  Websites of today have become more advanced in design and some conventions have even changed, although the concept of simple browsing has not.  Nowadays, it’s more common to see websites using their logo as the primary link to their homepage.  As websites advanced, Internet users have adapted, and it seems to be the convention to use the logo as the homepage link.

So, the question is: Should you link your logo to your homepage?  Well, there is no right or wrong answer to this.  However, you should think about the useability and navigation of your website before answering this question.  Is the “Home” link in a prominent location within your menu and is it simple to navigate your website?  If so, a logo link may not be necessary, although it probably won’t hurt to use it.  However, if your website does not have a “Home” link anywhere in the menu, then you should definitely consider utilizing your logo as a homepage link. 

I’ve seen many “old school” websites that miss this simple functionality.  The homepage link serves a greater purpose than a simple browsing tool for your visitors.  It also allows search engines to better crawl your website.

Just make sure you’re not over-linking to your homepage.  Two links to your homepage from any given page should be sufficient.  One from the logo or menu, and another from the footer area.

Registrar: Namecheap

Registered Date: 12/17/2008

Expiration Date: 12/17/2009

The 1st comment on this post takes the domain.  Free push via Namecheap account.

I just read about a class action lawsuit from Rust Consulting in which they propose a settlement against Yahoo search marketing.  The lawsuit alleges that “Yahoo breached its contract with its customers by allowing Yahoo ads to be displayed in spyware, domain name parking sites (bulk registration sites), pop-ups, pop-unders and typosquatting sites.”  Here’s the settlement page: https://secureweb.rustconsulting.com/inreyahoosettlement/

Ok, that’s all fine and dandy, but if you read a bit deeper, you’ll see some startling details.  To be eligible for the measly $20 settlement, the advertiser must be out of business.  But that’s not the worst part.  The lawyers representing the case will be paid a whopping $4,170,000 – plus a reimbursement expense fee of $100,000.  What kind of nonsense is this?  The people that were directly hurt by Yahoo’s wrong-doing only get $20, while the lawyers get the bulk of the deal.  This is not just a slap in the face, but also represents loopholes in the legal system which allows lawyers to feed their greed and file bogus lawsuits.

I know about these bogus lawsuits 1st hand because I was involved in a couple of them before.  One was against LendingTree and the other was against CommissionJunction.  I didn’t receive a penny in either case because the bulk of the settlement went to the lawyers.  And, the story seems to be the same in nearly every class action lawsuit – the members don’t receive squat!

I believe companies like PayPerPost and Text-Link-Ads are killing the SEO industry.  Why do I think this?  Because they openly advertise their services to the world. 

Google has always been opposed to paid links.  But now, with these paid linking services out in the mainstream, it would only be natural for search engines to react with stricter guidelines on passing link juice.

I’m sure these companies could care less about what they are doing to the SEO industry.  Why would they?  They’re making money by exploiting the system.

SEO is still important and effective, but companies like PayPerPost and Text-Link-Ads only add fuel to the fire.  Can you imagine what would happen if one day Google decided to remove backlinks as an algorithmic criteria for ranking websites?  It would pretty much kill the SEO industry as we know it, and all the link building that has been done in the past would be worthless.  Yes, there other factors of SEO besides link building, but it’s undeniable that link building is the biggest service market in SEO.

One should keep in mind that Google can easily cut off the link juice from any website or blog.  This means that you’re taking a greater risk when you buy links from a ”known” link seller.  PayPerPost and Text-Link-Ads exposes these “known” link sellers.

From what I can see, Google has penalized Text-Link-Ads.  When you run a search for “text link ads,” they are no where to be found.  But why isn’t PayPerPost.com penalized yet?  Their business model is based on the same concept as Text-Link-Ads.  I guess PayPerPost has a bigger problem to worry about.  The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has made it mandatory for bloggers to disclose when they are getting paid for posts.  This means that everyone will know exactly who is selling blog posts.  Those who do not disclose payment information risk getting fined by the FTC.

This is a follow-up to my previous post regarding the FTC’s intention to fine bloggers who do not disclose payment information for product or service endorsements.  According to information from Mashable, the FTC may fine bloggers up to $11,000 for not disclosing information about getting paid for product or service endorsements.  It seems like a hefty fine, and I think it will be enough reason for people to start disclosing how they are compensated by sponsors or advertisers.

Most of us are all for protecting the public interest.  But, shouldn’t there be certain boundaries that should not be crossed?  It seems that the FTC is giving too much weight to blogs.  Blogs are opinions.  Blogs are about perspectives.  Not every blog is considered ”authority” or a reliable source, and I think most readers have the sense to know that.  When you start policing what and how people talk about things, then you’re infringing on peoples’ right to freedom of speech.  Let the readers determine how much credence should be given to blogs and the content within.

If you want to endorse or review a product based on your personal experience, then you should have a right to without having to disclose whether or not you’re benefiting from it.  It is none of anyone’s business.  If a visitor reads your review, and decides to buy based on your suggestion, then it’s their prerogative.  It’s not practical to baby-sit every buyer or shopper out there.  It is ultimately the shopper’s responsibility to do their homework or research before spending money on anything.

What do you think?

Ever since Bing’s search deal with Yahoo, everyone’s been talking a lot about search engine market share.  Most articles I’ve read talk about Bing’s increase in market share, while others talk about its loss in market share.  So, who do you believe?  It’s hard to say because it comes down to the accuracy of the data.

Currently, there are 3 main sources of data for search engine market share: ComScore, StatCounter and Nielsen.  When you compare the data between the 3 sources, you’ll notice that there’s pretty significant discrepancies in the market share data.  Take for example the US search engine market share for August 2009. 

For the month of August, ComScore reports 64.6% for Google, 19.3% for Yahoo and 9.3% for Microsoft. 

StatCounter reports 77.83% for Google, 10.5% for Yahoo and 9.64% for Bing. 

For the same month, Nielsen reports 64.6% for Google, 16% for Yahoo and 10.7%  for Microsoft. 

As you can see, those numbers are pretty drastically different.  At numbers of this magnitude, every percentage counts.  StatCounter and Nielsen reported gains for Google, while ComScore had Google losing .1% of market share from July to August.  However, all agreed that Microsoft/Bing increased its market share.

The discrepancy comes not only from the methods in which the companies collect their data, but also from which web properties they collect the data for.  Google, Yahoo and Microsoft all have various web properties from which they receive significant traffic from, so if the data is not uniform, then you’re pretty much comparing apples to oranges.

According to Web Guild, ComScore collects their data from Internet usage:

• Personal demographics (age, gender, education, etc.)
• Internet usage status
• Connection speed
• Census region
• Household size
• Computers in home
• ISP
• Operating System
• AOL usage
• Work usage

StatCounter collects their data from tracking codes installed in nearly 3 million websites around the world.  From this raw data, they are able to analyze every hit referred by search engines.  In July 2009, StatCounter recorded 136 million referrals made by search engines.

Nielsen utilizes data collected from nearly 100 million blogs, social networks, groups, boards and other consumer-generated media platforms.  They also use consumer panels to supplement their data.

Remember the days when it was common to see a PR5 or PR6 site?  Prior to the BigDaddy update in early 2006, Google was more generous about giving out PageRank.  Nowadays, you’d be lucky to get a PR4.  Even authority websites have a tough time reaching PR5 or PR6.

Google has changed the landscape of the SEO industry.  Shortly after the BigDaddy update, link buying slowed down because so many websites, blogs and directories lost their PageRanks.  Then, webmasters realized that most websites were affected by the PR update, and began to adapt to the trend.  The game has changed.  Today, webmasters are still buying links, but with less regard for PR.  PR3′s and PR4′s are the PR5′s and PR6′s of the pre-BigDaddy days.  I believe the prices of links have adapted to the change as well.

There’s another hurdle for the SEO industry.

Google has become more savvy about detecting paid links.  Buying links for SEO seems to be a hit and miss situation.  Some links count towards PR juice, while others don’t.  It’s no secret that Google has had the capability of discounting certain blocks of links from any website.  Here’s what Matt Cutts had to say regarding backlinks: “Do not assume just because you see a backlink that it’s carrying weight.”

The traditional way of checking for backlinks in Google was to run a search query like this: link:www.domain.com

Unfortunately, the traditional way won’t give you an accurate measure of your backlinks because most of the results are filtered out.  Based on speculations, Google supposedly only shows PR3 links and above using their link query.

Google does, however, offer a more accurate backlink tool via their Webmaster Tools section.  You will need a Google account, and you are limited to websites you own or have access to.

If you check Yahoo’s index tool using Site Explorer, you’ll see some drastic differences in the number of backlinks.  Unfortunately, Site Explorer counts some internal links as backlinks too. 

No backlink tool is 100% perfect.

By keeping SEOs in the dark, Google hopes to deter link buying as much as possible.  We must admit, it has worked to some degree.  There are webmasters who have stopped selling links from their website due to fear of getting penalized or banned by Google.  While others have adopted the “nofollow” tag policy for all paid links.

Google has finally confirmed it.  As I wrote in this post, in May, it turns out that meta tag keywords and descriptions are not factors in Google optimization.  However, meta tags may still be useful for Yahoo and Bing optimization.

You may also use meta tag descriptions to show in the search results if you are not satisfied with Google’s description of your website.

Update:  All the major search engines do not use meta keyword tags, not even Yahoo.  Yahoo confirmed it a few months ago.  However, meta descriptions may still be used as the displayed description text within SERP results.

Patrick Swayze was a talented actor.  He was someone I grew up watching, much like Michael Jackson.  Patrick Swayze is one of those rare celebrities who never forgot who they were and where they came from.  He stayed humble despite his success and fame.  He stayed a dedicated family man despite so many temptations.  Rest in Peace, Patrick Swayze.