Comments on: SEO… Snake Oil or Magic Bullet?

By: Lawrence Kramer

Lawrence Kramer — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:39:26 +0000

One SEO issue you have not mentioned is how Google AdWords treats content when you are placing an ad to drive traffic.
Google AdWords checks three things when it decides whether to allow your ad.
They are:
1. landing page content
Google like the words in the ad to be the subject of the landing page.
2a. display URL shown in that ad
Google requires that the content reference be reachable with no more than one click from the landing page.
2b. hidden URL link to the landing page the ad directs to
Google requires that the displayed URL and the linked to URL have the same start,
ie if the display says:
MYsite.com/forums
then the link is OK to be:
MYsite.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=2
3. Google requires that the landing page load time be reasonable

So with the default version of PHPBB3,
here’s what you get when Google grades your ad:
Quality score 2/10
Keyword relevance: Poor
Landing page quality: No problems
Landing page load time: No problems

The sad implication of this is that Google charges a LOT more for poor quality ads, and is a lot less willing to show the ads. I can’t pay these ultra-high penalty rates of over $1 per click for traffic.

The ads I’m using are for the forum subject areas by name.
The subject area terms show up in the breadcrumb routing near the top of the page.
But Google seems unable to see them.
The subject area terms do not show up in meta keywords, meta description, or the link itself (as your example also covers).

So what’s a newbie PHPBB forum webmaster to do?
I’m used to the meta keywords and meta description filling automatically based on a dynamic database query to pull the correct content into meta keywords (the breadcrumbs would be great) and meta description (the listed forums on the page would be great).

What do you guys and gals do when you are building a new forum website to address this issue?

Thanks in advance for your ideas.

Best Wishes,
Lawrence Kramer (aka TVwas)

I also posted in the MODS support forum of PHPBB, but got no response there.

By: Dave Rathbun

Dave Rathbun — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 01:11:16 +0000

It was supposed to be a funny follow-up to the “tastes great, less filling” reference I made in the first paragraph. Apparently it failed.

By: Dog Cow

Dog Cow — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 18:43:38 +0000

No, I wasn’t that offended, just more surprised to see that kind of video here, especially since I still don’t get how it relates to the blog entry.

By: Dave Rathbun

Dave Rathbun — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 04:34:00 +0000

I’m not sure what to say to that. You clearly have not seen much TV in Europe. You can see as much (if not more) in PG rated movies. I’m not defending it, exactly, just saying that it is what it is. The morals today are clearly different from what they were fifty years ago when Lucy and Ricardo slept in twin beds to avoid even the implication that they slept together… as a married couple.

I apologize if I offended you, it was not my intention.

By: Dog Cow

Dog Cow — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 20:05:35 +0000

I’m rather appalled that just because something is broadcast on network TV in the US, you think then that it is not explicit. I personally think that the FCC ought to be censoring out quite a bit more swearing and other naughtiness than they do at present. I hardly ever bother to watch the television these days, but when I do, I generally regret it. And to take this tangent out even further, I also think that they ought to flat-out ban ALL drug/pharmaceutical commercials from the television, just like how you never see cigarette ads on TV.

Well, I still don’t believe in it.

By: Dave Rathbun

Dave Rathbun — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:41:49 +0000

The video was a commercial broadcast on network TV in the US, so it’s hardly that explicit. If my memory is correct, it was a Superbowl commercial several years ago. Search youtube for “less filling” or “tastes great” and you’ll likely find a whole bunch of commercials from the campaign.

From what I understand, Google has an API that you can query to determine your page rank. They just don’t tell you how it’s calculated.

By: Dog Cow

Dog Cow — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:15:23 +0000

Good Lord, that video was rather explicit! @_@

Nice to see you mentioned me. I’ll admit, I had seen people give references to phpbb.com being well-indexed in the past and didn’t think a think about it. But I thought about it again just a month or two ago, when Marshalrusty posted, and now I realize that it’s completely immaterial to just about every board owner.

I think that this Page Rank thing is bogus too. Or at least, the sites/services who claim to be able to figure it out for you. No one really knows how the Page Rank figure is computed; everyone’s really just making shots in the dark about it. What I do know is that if your web stats program provides a list of frequent keywords which people used to find your site, then you should analyze them and see what you can do to provide additional content in those subject areas. This is my current SEO method.