Site Reference Forums

coolslko wrote:

Webmasters and SEOs always try their best to get the top rank for their sites and they continue until they get it and try all old and advanced techniques to get it and I am also not an exception.

My question is that is having your site on top rank on major search engines is really best thing in SEO, does a top rank site always have the highest traffic?

I think its not true as often I have seen people prefer to go throgh sites that are ranked at two or three or fourth rank and only a few directly go to the site ranked at top.

I also often avoid site at the top and click on 2 or 3 ranked site for my query...........So I think having a second or third rank is better than having top rank. What do you think? I just want to know your views about it.

Thanks.........

Actually the numbers I have seen indicate the #1 spot is still the place to be. Regardless of what YOU might do as we tend to be power users...the average Joe tends to value the top spot....

We CERTAINLY want to be on the 1st page as recent research shows a full 49% don't go past that... I don't really even track rankings until they hit top 30...



and that is only getting worse as the years pass;




If we know consider blended search (universal results with other media) I can see this getting over 50% in the near future..this puts a premium on money terms and crafting a strong long-tail strategy...

So, we want to be #1... or at least Page 1......

I forget the source, but there are studies that show (for certain queries - shopping mostly), that the #1 ranking is probably not the best place to be.  This is likely due to the fact that the visitor is just starting shopping and will be looking for the best price. 

If you're in the 1st position and you don't do a good job of converting the visitor (almost immediately), then they are going to check out the other relevant search results to find what they're looking for.

By focusing on improving the conversion & performance of your site, you can offset some of that "shopper" mentality.  You have to convince the visitor that you're offering the best product, best price, etc... if you do an effective job communicating your value proposition, then they'll buy from you.

TheGypsy wrote:

As you would know white papers are white papers and data is rarely 'apples to apples' - but I have seen mostly reports that folks go for the top listing more than any others... so I still stand by that...otherwise seems counter-intuitive anyways....

I have managed SEO/Analytic on a variety of sites including some heavy traffick'd niche sites... from my experience the #1 Spot out performs the others....

I completely agree that the #1 spot is the best one to be in and that it will outperform others, due simply to the % of people who will click on it. 

If that #1 site has the best price & services as well, then that site is going to make a killing in the market.  If #1 site is missing anything in terms of conversion, then the competitors in spots #2 and #3 are going to eat up those visitors and keep them from going back to your site.

We're in agreement that #1 is the most effective spot to be in.  I just wanted to let everyone know that getting to #1 is good, but it's worthless if you can't convert.

I'm going with we're just talking about sale sites for this conversation. With that, I'm wondering what is even considered the first result - the one to three paid ads over the results, the 3-6 ads on the right of the results, or the actual results? Any studies on that one, from nonbiased sources? (I'm sure if Google did a study on this, it would guarantee the advertisers get hit first 99% of the time.)

I'm quite tired of seeing links to Ebay or some other well-known advertising places for such important "products" as "Philadelphia," "causes for World War I" - and WWII, also -  or, the all important product everyone needs "growing brussel sprouts!" On the other hand, if I am looking to buy something, the ads are where I go, if they're really related to what I want to buy. (Amazing how often they aren't related. Would bug me terribly, if I were paying for that advertising, yet it's included in a RP that isn't related to what I sell.)

Dave, reading your industry-related posts makes me feel like a sixth grader auditing a college course -- too much thinking, rereading, and searching links or definitions! I can get most of it, but takes quite some effort.

I am surprised that Google didn't come up with 99%, but I still am very critical on their stats. (Am not expecting you to know the answers to these, since you weren't working on the project -- just the questions that come to mind as I see the results.)

1. Did the subjects have to click on links they were interested in, or merely stare at a SERP? (I'm fairly certain anyone really searching would react differently to a SERP, then people whose end goal was to see the SERP.)

2. Since these were people, who were supposedly (I've joined survey panels to make some money, and have been tempted to answer incorrectly, just because I know the truth would get me disqualified) buying a car within the next 12 months, which car did they end up buying?

3. Did it show the total process of them deciding which car to buy through searching for fuel-efficient cars?

I know where my eyes rove when landing on a search page, but where I actually click depends on how much I trust the brand-name AND what the description after the title says. That they didn't even look at the snippets, makes me think they never actually clicked anything (or I'm really weird reading that stuff!)

Despite those problems I see with the research, I am thinking both, if not all three, would be the best ROI for sellers. Just not sure that the investment is as good as the study suggested. (Yes, I know the research was showing branding, but, like you said, the two are connected.) Also, seems to me, you already need a whole lot of capital to do this correctly, which kinda kills "the little guy," or, at least, puts him (or her) into some deep debt with the hope of making it big to pay off that debt.

Search Engine Optimization is the “Soul of any website” to get noticed on internet and as well as Google (I have mentioned only Google because in today’s era, most of the SEO/SEM work is being done by keeping Google in mind).

Website businesses have grown to trillion dollars on internet within a decade. Behind many reasons, one reason is: SEO friendly structure, bug free web coding, designing and marketing of website. Top ranked sites usually have high traffic as compared to other sites, because when people have their specific issues, they search them through key words or phrases. Then, they click on the site which seems to be suitable for them. Mostly top ten are considered as market leaders.  You know why? This is human nature! People think that these websites are “the best match” regarding their issue, so “Go for it”.

But this is not the end. People do visit other websites ranked after the top most and they browse at least first page of search result to find their most suitable website, because these websites are also giving them hint that “you can find your solution here too!” But mostly, CROWN goes to the top ranked sites and normally captures high traffic.

Last edited by zeeshan (2008-05-28 06:24:20)

Coolslko, thanks for your original question. I learned because of it, but never thought to ask. Probably the number one reason I visit this forum!

Hey, Gyps! Looks like it could be worse. Admittedly, I have trouble understanding your industry-related blog, but, now that SR has you as a co-writer to an SEO blog, those I do read, more often. (Either I'm getting smarter, or you're working harder at making it an easier read for us SEO-challenged folks. I suspect the later. )

Then, again, at least I read a complete thread, if I'm going to add to it! Thanks for the links and stats. Just wanted you to know, some of us took it to heart, and really considered it all. Thought that was common practice for all of us on this forum, until I just read two sales pitches that are pretending to be responses.

Search Engine Optimization is the “Soul of any website” to get noticed on internet and as well as Google  (I have mentioned only Google because in today’s era, most of the SEO/SEM work is being done by keeping Google in mind).

Hmm, at first, I assumed you mentioned Google, because of the info given using it. Then again, I also expected to learn something from your ad...errr, comment. Betcha could have done a better ad, had you read what was already written. I know part of the process of becoming known as an expert in your field is to write relevant info and answers on related forums. Ignoring the rest of the thread, especially when completely ignoring someone, who has already made his bones to be considered a true expert, as well as giving false info, has just taught me you aren't an expert. And, I know I'm SEO-challenged!

Writing relevant info and answering questions on forums does work. Writing ads in extremely thin disguises doesn't. OK, maybe it gets you more relevant links, but annoys the heck out of me!!!

this whole discussion is about the importance of your meta tag description

Huh? Where? When?