Category Archives: Stuff

+How to win the New Year SEO predictions game

It’s that time of year again when everyone who’s anyone in SEO takes it upon themselves to prove how clever they are by predicting what’s coming next year and confirming that smartness by reviewing their predictions from last year.

Here’s my guide to making completely accurate predictions for next year. To get the full effect you’ll need to predict now and review in a year. Then every year, as you review and get almost all your predictions right, your reputation as an SEO genius will increase exponentially.

1. Start with some obvious stuff that you’re sure won’t be wrong. Keep the language vague too, just in case.

Google will continue to clamp down on bad linking practises, continue to improve entity search and will reward good mobile experiences.

That’s your baseline taken care of. Remember, when you come to blog next year, people won’t read the whole article. You want to make sure the first few predictions are hits and they’ll leave thinking you’re really, really clever.

2. Predict something vague but guaranteed to happen to some extent but which can be twisted and spun next year to make it sound like you knew what you were talking about. This is similar to the classic cold reading techniques used by mediums and other charlatans.

I predict a major acquisition by a big advertising player of a large digital agency.

Big companies buy smaller ones, that’s what they do. Some will do this next year, guaranteed. The bigger the better for me but the words “major” and “large” are relative so I can’t lose.

3. Predict that something that hasn’t changed in a long time still won’t change.

Bing and other search engines will not make any major inroads into Google’s dominance. Google’s main source of income will continue to be advertising. I’ll even go further and predict that the amount of space in SERPs taken up by paid results will increase too (also see #7).



photo credit: henribergius

4. Predict an increase in a meaningless statistic which is likely to increase anyway but will sound to some like evidence of a shift in the industry that you’ve been pushing.

Content marketing/inbound marketing/negative SEO will continue to rise in popularity as judged by search volume on Google Trends.

5. Think of some areas of SEO in which most SEOs don’t partake for good reason and predict no growth in this area.

There will be no growth in optimising for myspace/blekko/digg search.

No, there will not.


photo credit: Gwenaël Piaser

6. Find an area of innovation that major social networks have all included recently and predict more of it. Make it difficult enough to prove either right or wrong that no-one will ever bother.

Better and increased use of video features on social networks for smartphone users.

Video features are always improving and there’s a long way to go. A no-brainer this.

7. Check what Google’s been doing over the last few years, predict they’ll keep doing more of that.

1. Increased focus on trying to understand data from webpages. This will include encouraging webmasters to use more structured data.

2. Google will provide more answers on its results page whilst providing less traffic to the actual sites. Sites will become more annoyed by this.

The second sentence of the second prediction here is an added bonus. In reality, who wouldn’t be annoyed when a search engine takes your content, uses it to answer their user’s question and generate advertising dollars but gives you nothing in return?

8. Make some predictions that can never really be proven correct or incorrect anyway. Come the end of the year you can argue you’ve seen a big shift towards them without fear of any serious questioning.

Google will increase the use of negative Morris Equations and military grade eigenvector calculations in its algorithms.



photo credit: Jeffrey

9. Find a technology which has been becoming commonplace over the last 6 months and predict that this is “its year”.

This is the year of the “internet of things”.

It might be or it might not. What’s guaranteed is that next year you’ll be able to find enough evidence that you can claim at least a partial win. Also, it’s late in your article and no-one will be reading by now anyway.

10. Just repeat what everyone else has been predicting for months.

Video is going to be huge for online marketing.

If it’s right then great, if not at least you’re not alone and hey, you got all your other predictions right!


If you’re coming back to this article a year on in order to help review last years predictions, you’re on a winner because you already know that you totally stacked the cards in your favour. Just go through them, ticking off their correctness and confirming your cleverness. Be careful not to go too far though, drop in a few “I got a bit lucky with this one…” and “I’ll not take credit for this because…” just to appear humble. It’s cool, everyone will think you actually deserve credit for being really clever anyway.

Well done, you’re now well on your way to becoming a true rockstar SEO guru.


Will SEO affect IPOs in 2014?

Recent high-profile loss of search engine exposure for RapGenius and Expedia got me thinking again about the effect that low-quality or short-term strategy SEO might have on a business.

  • Expedia’s share price recently fell by 4% when it became clear that they had lost around 25% of their expected natural search traffic from Google.
  • Rap Genius have Andreessen Horowitz as investors to the tune of $15m USD. I doubt whether they would have received this sort of investment had their natural search tanked by around 60% in the days before the deal went through.
  • Online comparison site have had problems caused by link buying in the past. As recently as last year they lost a lot of visibility in natural search. The company played it down at the time and the story didn’t make big waves outside of the SEO community, however it was damaging. The correlation between search visibility and share price can be seen below. It seems the price recovered but perhaps more damage was done that can’t be seen in a graph?
Moneysupermarket search visibility v's share price.’s share price took a temporary hit at the same time as their natural search visibility dropped.

It’s not just breaking Google’s guidelines that can affect the value of a business from an SEO point of view either. There are numerous ways that poor decision making can kill natural search traffic to a site. If I were investing in a website that relied heavily on search traffic, I’d pay keen attention to their infrastructure, staff skills and competence. A simple “noindex” accidentally added to the homepage, a badly planned migration or removal of key pages can easily have a major effect on search traffic and therefore revenue.

It’s widely reported in investment / financial circles that a large number of both high street and pure play (wholly online) companies are looking at launching on the stock market (known as an Initial Public Offering or IPO) in 2014.

House of Fraser has wanted a return to publicly traded stock for some time and is among a growing list which includes,,, Pets at Home and Fat Face. 

A successful IPO can provide a company with expansion capital to drive the business forward but relies on attracting enough investors who believe the stock is a good investment.

Logically, the larger the potential investment, the more analysis of the business the investor should make. This due diligence can involve all areas of the company and it’s future potential. A company which expects to drive much of its revenue growth via the internet can expect to have all areas of its online marketing scrutinised. This is where things become interesting from an SEO point of view.

Link development

Google’s algorithms have historically been weighted heavily towards link based signals. In very simplistic terms, the more quality links pointing to your site or page, the better it will rank. This fact has been exploited by SEO companies for years and unsurprisingly, Google has put a huge effort into ensuring any “unnatural” links are not counted and regularly penalises sites which ignore (or deliberately misinterpret) its guidelines. In the last couple of years, large numbers of well known companies have had rankings removed by Google’s spam algorithms or by manual reviewers. The resulting loss of revenue can be huge and tends to happen swiftly and unexpectedly.

I took a look at some very basic metrics from publicly available tools to see what further analysis someone planning to invest might want to make. The tools I used were:

SearchMetrics - I’ve only used their visibility tool for a quick overview of how each site has performed and to spot potential issues. For more information on how it works click here.

Link Research Tools - I’ve used their Link Risk tool which provides a figure for the level of risk based on an analysis of the sites linking to yours. More information. - Gives a nice breakdown on where a site gets it’s traffic. I’ve taken the percentage of total traffic coming from search. More information.

I cannot vouch for the accuracy of any of these tools and in fact am quite aware that there are shortcomings with all of them (note the conflicting information between Similar Web and Searchmetrics for They all rely on the automatic collection and analysis of large amounts of data and should not be interpreted as definitive. In the case of Link Research Tools, its measure of toxicity throws up false positives regularly. Where high levels of risk are found, this serves purely as a suggestion that further, manual analysis by an expert is required. To put the scores from Link Research Tools in perspective, I looked at the figure for a large retail site which I know for a fact has never done any link building, the score was 266.

Finally, it’s worth mentioning that the Link Research Tool is based on factors which are not necessarily aligned exactly with the sort of thing Google might penalise. Despite being far from perfect it attempts to identify links which are potentially dangerous and a high score is not something that should be ignored.

I have not dug any further than the top-level publicly available information that I’ve presented here and am not suggesting that any of the companies have done anything untoward.

Let’s have a look at some of the potential UK IPO candidates: / appears to have carried out a migration from to in August 2013. This doesn’t appear to have gone well according to the visibility graph below taken from Natural search rankings appear to have been almost completely killed and presuming the tool is accurate, it’s hard to imagine this won’t have seriously affected their revenue figures. That said, the figures don’t match up with the % of traffic from search ( which is 20% before the migration and 44.5% after.

Prior to the migration, had doubled their natural search visibility in a year but receives the highest LinkResearchTools risk factor of all the sites I looked at at 1580 which is scarily described by LinkResearchTools as “Deadly”.

Conclusion: There’s a lot going on here and it all needs a much more thorough investigation before reaching any conclusions.

Risk Risk Score High Risk 671 Deadly Risk 1580
% of traffic from search Natural Visibility Paid Visibility 44.5 4257 97 20 19428 4716 has seen strong, consistent growth in natural search visibility over the last 2-3 years. There are no obvious signs of historic penalties and the link risk score not high (“moderate” by LinkResearchTools standards). Their reliance on natural search is fairly high at 38.57%.

Conclusion: On the face of it, everything looks hunky-dory. However, given the reliance on natural search it would be prudent to analyse the SEO strategy to indentify what has driven that growth.
Risk Risk Score Moderate Risk 404
% of traffic from search Natural Visibility Paid Visibility 38.57 77503 1124

The Hut’s visibility graph is interesting with spurts of growth up to October 2012 but general decrease since then and drops of varying sizes over the whole period. These drops could indicate penalties or being on the wrong side of an algorithm change but may also indicate a reliance on a few really big terms – dropping from #1 to #3 on a big traffic/revenue term may show as a big drop in visibility.

On the plus side, the link risk score is not huge and natural search traffic is a small percentage of their business.

Conclusion: Natural search and paid search are not major factors for I’d want to find out what caused those drops but more interestingly, their business has a high level of referral traffic (38.21% according to, suggesting a reliance on affiliates. A look at that side of the business is where I’d start.

Risk Risk Score Moderate Risk 384
% of traffic from search Natural Visibility Paid Visibility 13.64 7177 356

HOF shows solid growth in natural search visibility up until March 2013 where it levelled off. The risk score, at 637 is concerning and the percentage of traffic from natural search, at 54% is high.

Conclusion: I’d be interested to find out why the growth has levelled off and as with any site showing consistent growth over a long period, I’d dig deeper to find out what exactly drove it. I presume HOF’s revenue comes mainly from offline sales though so it’s likely that performance there will be more important to investors than any online marketing problems.

Risk Risk Score High Risk 637
% of traffic from search Natural Visibility Paid Visibility 54.15 189212 14970

Pets at Home shows solid, consistent natural search growth with low paid search visibility. The percentage of traffic from search is the highest I found at 65% so there’s a heavy reliance of natural search traffic. Their link profile receives a high risk score (“deadly”).

Pets at Home most likely drive most of their revenue from offline sales though, so this may not be as important as it would be for a pure play retailer.

Conclusion: Based on the high levels of natural search traffic and link risk score, investors would be well advised to investigate the backlink profile and overall online marketing strategy. As with HOF however, this may not be as important in the grand scheme of things as the company has strong offline sales too.

Risk Risk Score Deadly Risk 1191
% of traffic from search Natural Visibility Paid Visibility 65.1 44390 241

There are no smoking guns or definitive conclusions from the brief analysis above but definitely a number of starting points for anyone considering investing in stock. How big an issue this might be I don’t actually know and will leave for discussion.


What [insert random topic] taught me about SEO

Why SEO is like roller derby

Inspired by forthcoming home of shit online marketing articles,,  I’ve been having some fun searching Google for what might politely be called SEO standards. You know, “What licking my own elbow taught me about SEO” or “How SEO is Like Making Scrambled Eggs on Toast”. You are welcome to both of those ideas.

“What [insert random topic] taught me about SEO”

I’ve not necessarily read all of these articles, some of them might actually be good. They all have somewhat entertaining titles though.

What Whitney Houston Taught me about SEO

Whitney, they say her biggest hit was her last one. So what did the troubled singer teach the writer of that article about SEO? Basically, nothing. I’ve had the displeasure of reading this article and all I think is why does it hurt so bad?

What Drycleaning taught me about SEO

This article is in 3 (three) parts. I bet you are intrigued…

What Selling Knives Taught Me About SEO

That there’s more money in SEO?

What Bruce Springsteen Taught Me About SEO

That it’s easy to be The Boss? gedditt??

What Part-Time Jobs Taught Me About SEO

What Steve Jobs Taught Me About SEO

These two come as a set, I think.

What Being an Indie Rapper Taught Me About Being an SEO

I’m almost tempted to look at these slides.

What Waterless Urinals Taught Me about SEO

I have a sneaking suspicion that I might be missing out by not reading this. You’d have to be confident of your content to give such an off-putting title, right?

So that’s “What [fill the blank] taught me about SEO” covered in all its glory. What next?

How about,

“How SEO is like [add term which is nothing like SEO]“?

How SEO Is Like Construction

Yes, how indeed, you may ask? Plan it, build it, maintain it, basically. But wait, from the writer who brought you “How SEO is Like Construction”, here’s…

How SEO is Like Running a Marathon

How? Training (learning SEO), thinking long term and keeping going. Inspiring stuff.

Taking his own advice, the same writer noticed how…

SEO is like Dieting

Keep it natural and monitor your results apparently.

How SEO is like a 401k Portfolio

401K is American for pension. I think this one is saying diversify your investments/links.

How SEO is like Real Estate

I couldn’t bear to actually read it. Sorry, I’m a bad blogger.

How SEO is like NASCAR

It isn’t really.

How SEO is like buying a new house


How SEO is like the Hunger Games

Come on, this is getting silly now.

How SEO is like Ikea

Full of flatpack furniture and meatballs? Probably not.

Incredibly, it gets worse…

How SEO is like the Nile

Just no.

Why SEO is like using Shampoo

Words fail me.

Why SEO is like farming but not the genetically modified kind


Why SEO is like roller derby

Roller derby is butch girls pretending they’re in the movie Rollerball

Why SEO is like your high school child

But I didn’t have a child at high school, honest!

Why SEO is like making love to a beautiful woman

Actually, I just made that one up.

Well if you got this far, I’m sorry but that’s a few minutes of your life you’ll never get back. Thanks for sticking with it.

If you bothered to read the ones that I obviously didn’t and found them useful or especially if you found anything even funnier in the actual article, please comment below.