What is the feeliing of "Here's where our site can help" text links used for conversions?
-
If you have an ecommerce site that is using editorial content on topics related to the site's business model to build organic traffic and draw visitors who might be interested in using the site's services eventually, what is the SEO (page ranking) impact -- as well as the impact on the visitors' perceptions about the reliability of the information on the site -- of using phrases like "Here is where [our site] can help you." in nearly every article. Note: the "our site" text would be linked in each case as a conversion point to one of the site's services pages to get visitors to move from content pages on a site to the sales pages on the site.
Will this have an impact on page rankings? Does it dilute the page's relevance to search engines? Will the content look less authoritative because of the prevalence of these types of links?
What about the same conversion links without the "we can help" text - i.e., more natural-sounding links that stem from the flow of the article but can lead interested visitors deeper into the ecommerce section of the site?
-
Hi Will
The only problem I see here is why you are writing these articles in the first place. It's not uncommon for an eCommece site to write helpful articles about problem-solving then offer a solution by adding a link to one of their products or services.
If the article is well written and optimised then it makes sense that if ranked for a particular problem the addition is a link could drive traffic to your money pages.
However, equally valid is you building a reputation for problem-solving without trying to sell at every opportunity. We SEOs post on MOZ, in forums, in our own Facebook groups and other places, but very rarely will you see a direct contextual link back to our services. Building a reputation takes time and effort and it needs to be done gently without feeling the necessity to sell a product or service at any opportunity.
The upshot is that I would temper this activity. Produce genuinely interesting and useful content and your reputation will grow. People will then want to follow you because you offer sound advice. If one in four articles have internal links then cool, but presumably if they are on your site reading your stuff they are aware that you sell as well.
Retail sites can be really bad at this - blog post after blog post just sharing products - complete waste of time, they never rank and only work for email purposes, well you know what - stick them in an email - tell your acolytes but don't clog up the site with tosh.
Anyway that's my spin - if you try and oversell you can end up not selling - people get bored very quickly and a post with buy-me written all over it is doomed to fail.
Cheers Nigel
-
Bottom line, should the opportunity for conversion be readily available at all times? Absolutely! Should you ever flood links across your websites pages for the purpose of increasing the likeliness they will click the link most likely as a result of human error?
Absolutely not, don't do that. I'm probably misinterpreting the question my bad if I am, but just on the off chance I'm clarifying of coarse! I find that you will get tremendously more value than rushing the monetization. Any sales technique that is initially viewed and interpreted to be a sales gimmick, will most likely fail out the gate..
What my sales training taught me when working for a multi million dollar bank that invested thousands into my education of moving their products and services is that selling complete garbage that offers literally nothing can easily be done! (Nothing horrible just credit card insurance haha.)
About 5% of my sales with that bank came from drive by pitches. So incentive wise, I didn't do so hot in the first 3 months. However, Once I learned the true powerhouse/weaponry, the one two punch of sales was RAPPORT/Rebuttal. Once you refine those 2 skills, It was game on!
On the internet if you master this craft, which most certainly I have not, it is a process that can be entirely automated after much trial and tribulation. MY boy is a Ecig Vape juice vendor, he tells me he actually gets 25% of his sales by literally hitting people up in the chat box when they land on his site. And he gets another 25% from hitting them up AFTER they've made a purchase, which causes many to buy tons more stuff!
In conclusion, gain their trust, get them to humanize you and your products first, sell second. Spam always fail!
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Does an EAT score on my YMYL site impact my rankings?
I've read some conflicting information on YMYL and EAT. If the Google Quality Raters are out there reviewing YMYL pages and scoring them on EAT, does that site's score have an impact on that page's/site's ranking?
Algorithm Updates | | BFMichael0 -
Do the back-links go wasted when anchor text or context content doesn't match with page content?
Hi Community, I have seen number of back-links where the content in that link is not matching with page content. Like page A linking to page B, but content is not really relevant beside brand name. Like page with "vertigo tiles" linked to page about "vertigo paints" where "vertigo" is brand name. Will these kind of back-links completely get wasted? I have also found some broken links which I'm planning to redirect to existing pages just to reclaim the back-links even though the content relevancy is not much beside brand name. Are these back-links are beneficial or not? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
How to build ( Linked domains )
I need help can someone tell me how to build Linked domains from pinterest.com,plus.google.com,facebook.com,twitter.com,linkedin.com to my website muller-designs.com all my competitors are ranking very well and have thousands of dollars of organic traffic and am not talking about the big fishes here are some examples mybarnwoodframes.com or www.framemymirror.com , this are one of my competitors, i have analize well all websites and the major difference we have are the Linked domains i have a couple of hundreds and they have thousands can someone help me anttel how can i create ( Linked domains ) o tell me what's going on with my website i spend a lot of money and time but just don't have good results i appreciate any tip of someone that already have ranked well a website THANK YOU
Algorithm Updates | | alexmuller870 -
SEO Myth-Busters -- Isn't there a "duplicate content" penalty by another name here?
Where is that guy with the mustache in the funny hat and the geek when you truly need them? So SEL (SearchEngineLand) said recently that there's no such thing as "duplicate content" penalties. http://searchengineland.com/myth-duplicate-content-penalty-259657 by the way, I'd love to get Rand or Eric or others Mozzers aka TAGFEE'ers to weigh in here on this if possible. The reason for this question is to double check a possible 'duplicate content" type penalty (possibly by another name?) that might accrue in the following situation. 1 - Assume a domain has a 30 Domain Authority (per OSE) 2 - The site on the current domain has about 100 pages - all hand coded. Things do very well in SEO because we designed it to do so.... The site is about 6 years in the current incarnation, with a very simple e-commerce cart (again basically hand coded). I will not name the site for obvious reasons. 3 - Business is good. We're upgrading to a new CMS. (hooray!) In doing so we are implementing categories and faceted search (with plans to try to keep the site to under 100 new "pages" using a combination of rel canonical and noindex. I will also not name the CMS for obvious reasons. In simple terms, as the site is built out and launched in the next 60 - 90 days, and assume we have 500 products and 100 categories, that yields at least 50,000 pages - and with other aspects of the faceted search, it could create easily 10X that many pages. 4 - in ScreamingFrog tests of the DEV site, it is quite evident that there are many tens of thousands of unique urls that are basically the textbook illustration of a duplicate content nightmare. ScreamingFrog has also been known to crash while spidering, and we've discovered thousands of URLS of live sites using the same CMS. There is no question that spiders are somehow triggering some sort of infinite page generation - and we can see that both on our DEV site as well as out in the wild (in Google's Supplemental Index). 5 - Since there is no "duplicate content penalty" and there never was - are there other risks here that are caused by infinite page generation?? Like burning up a theoretical "crawl budget" or having the bots miss pages or other negative consequences? 6 - Is it also possible that bumping a site that ranks well for 100 pages up to 10,000 pages or more might very well have a linkuice penalty as a result of all this (honest but inadvertent) duplicate content? In otherwords, is inbound linkjuice and ranking power essentially divided by the number of pages on a site? Sure, it may be some what mediated by internal page linkjuice, but what's are the actual big-dog issues here? So has SEL's "duplicate content myth" truly been myth-busted in this particular situation? ??? Thanks a million! 200.gif#12
Algorithm Updates | | seo_plus0 -
Puzzling Penalty Question - Need Expert Help
I'm turning to the Moz Community because we're completely stumped. I actually work at a digital agency, our specialism being SEO. We've dealt with Google penalties before and have always found it fairly easy to identify the source the problem when someone comes to us with a sudden keyword/traffic drop. I'll briefly outline what we've experienced: We took on a client looking for SEO a few months ago. They had an OK site, with a small but high quality and natural link profile, but very little organic visibility. The client is an IT consultancy based in London, so there's a lot of competition for their keywords. All technical issues on the site were addressed, pages were carefully keyword targeted (obviously not in a spammy way) and on-site content, such as services pages, which were quite thin, were enriched with more user focused content. Interesting, shareable content was starting to be created and some basic outreach work had started. Things were starting to pick up. The site started showing and growing for some very relevant keywords in Google, a good range and at different levels (mostly sitting around page 3-4) depending on competition. Local keywords, particularly, were doing well, with a good number sitting on page 1-2. The keywords were starting to deliver a gentle stream of relevant traffic and user behaviour on-site looked good. Then, as of the 28th September 2015, it all went wrong. Our client's site virtually dropped from existence as far as Google was concerned. They literally lost all of their keywords. Our client even dropped hundreds of places for their own brand name. They also lost all rankings for super low competition, non-business terms they were ranking for. So, there's the problem. The keywords have not shown any sign of recovery at all yet and we're, understandably, panicking. The worst thing is that we can't identify what has caused this catastrophic drop. It looks like a Google penalty, but there's nothing we can find that would cause it. There are no messages or warnings in GWT. The link profile is small but high quality. When we started the content was a bit on the thin side, but this doesn't really look like a Panda penalty, and seems far too severe. The site is technically sound. There is no duplicate content issues or plaigarised content. The site is being indexed fine. Moz gives the site a spam score of 1 (our of 11 (i think that's right)). The site is on an ok server, which hasn't been blacklisted or anything. We've tried everything we can to identify a problem. And that's where you guys come in. Any ideas? Anyone seen anything similar around the same time? Unfortunately, we can't share our clients' site's name/URL, but feel free to ask any questions you want and we'll do our best to provide info.
Algorithm Updates | | MRSWebSolutions0 -
We recently transitioned a site to our server, but Google is still showing the old server's urls. Is there a way to stop Google from showing urls?
We recently transitioned a site to our server, but Google is still showing the old server's urls. Is there a way to stop Google from showing urls?
Algorithm Updates | | Stamats0 -
Member's Badge as Link Building to Homepage or Internal Pages?
Providing members and embeddable badge is a well known link building tactic. Is it better to have the badges from hundreds or even thousands of members link back to the homepage of a website, or a lot of different inner pages? The inner pages would the their individual's profile which sits under a category (such as a service and organisation by location). Member's websites would be related to the content of the website generally. What are the advantages of each? 1. Links to homepage make it easier to rank for competitive keywords on the homepage? If the types of websites were to vary a lot, say a carpet cleaning website and a web designer website, if they all linked to the homepage, would it cause some confusion for the link profile?
Algorithm Updates | | designquotes0 -
Has Google problems in indexing pages that use <base href=""> the last days?
Since a couple of days I have the problem, that Google Webmaster tools are showing a lot more 404 Errors than normal. If I go thru the list I find very strange URLs that look like two paths put together. For example: http://www.domain.de/languages/languageschools/havanna/languages/languageschools/london/london.htm If I check on which page Google found that path it is showing me the following URL: http://www.domain.de/languages/languageschools/havanna/spanishcourse.htm If I check the source code of the Page for the Link leading to the London Page it looks like the following: [...](languages/languageschools/london/london.htm) So to me it looks like Google is ignoring the <base href="..."> and putting the path together as following: Part 1) http://www.domain.de/laguages/languageschools/havanna/ instead of base href Part 2) languages/languageschools/london/london.htm Result is the wrong path! http://www.domain.de/languages/languageschools/havanna/languages/languageschools/london/london.htm I know finding a solution is not difficult, I can use absolute paths instead of relative ones. But: - Does anyone make the same experience? - Do you know other reasons which could cause such a problem? P.s.: I am quite sure that the CMS (Typo3) is not generating these paths randomly. I would like to be sure before we change the CMS's Settings to absolute paths!
Algorithm Updates | | SimCaffe0