Looking for a term
Michael Sattler
I'm looking for a term, and in case, it does not exist yet, I'd like
to introduce it with your help.
It's the ratio of a site's google position and the total amount of
sites, containing that search term.
For example:
A position #12 out of 29600 sites would yield a ratio of 1:2467 or
0.041%.
A position #37 out of 150000 sites would give a ratio of 1:4054 or
0.025%, which is in fact a better result despite the lower ranking.
The value could be an indicator for the quality of SEO.
One could also roughly predict the chances of SEO, looking at the
amount of hits with a particular search term.
One could also calculate an average "something something" of one's 5
or 10 most important search terms.
From my experiences 1:10000 or 0.01% is easy to achieve.
1:40000 / 0.0025% is already pretty good.
But to climb even higher, getting linked is becoming more and more
important.
But how shall we call the "baby"? Suggestions welcome.
It would also be interesting to compare one's values with each other.
Regards,
Michael
Ansgar
>It's the ratio of a site's google position and the total amount of
>sites, containing that search term.
>
>
yaset = yet another search engine term ...
>A position #12 out of 29600 sites would yield a ratio of 1:2467 or
>0.041%.
>
>A position #37 out of 150000 sites would give a ratio of 1:4054 or
>0.025%, which is in fact a better result despite the lower ranking.
>
>
which means that #37 would be better than #12? the aim is #1 - no matter
if there are 200 or 20000 results. #1 to #10 are on first page. maybe a
listing on second page is of interest as well - but what good would be
#37? you should take that into consideration as well ...
>The value could be an indicator for the quality of SEO.
>One could also roughly predict the chances of SEO, looking at the
>amount of hits with a particular search term.
>One could also calculate an average "something something" of one's 5
>or 10 most important search terms.
>
>
and what about luck? by great luck you could be #2 or anything ... ;o)
regards,
Ansgar
William Tasso
> hi michael,
>
> >It's the ratio of a site's google position and the total amount of
> >sites, containing that search term.
> >
> >
> yaset = yet another search engine term ...
>
Let's call it binary.
You're either on the first page at google for your search phrase
- yes 1 on
or you're not.
- no 0 off
--
William Tasso - The road to hell is littered with fallen webmasters.
http://www.tbdata.com/hosting - ASP web site hosting + SQL Server
http://www.tbdata.com/cabling - Cat 5/6 network cabling installations
Paul
<misa3...@gmx.de> wrote:
>It would also be interesting to compare one's values with each other.
Some that I can boast:
travel - 88th out of 49,800,000 - 0.00018% - http://aardvarktravel.net
travel sites - 9th of 4,080,000 - 0.00022% - http://aardvarktravel.net
lake district - 4th of 1,710,000 - 0.00023% - http://cumbria.uk.com
cumbria - 3rd out of 527,000 - 0.00057% - http://www.cumbria.uk.com
corkscrews - 2nd of 54,300 - 0.0037% - http://www.bacchus-anitques.com
Paul
http://www.the-dedicated-partnership.com - promoting tourism
http://www.aardvarktravel.net - the world's best travel search engine
(dedicate at dedicate dot co dot uk should you wish to reply by e-mail...)
Michael Sattler
>yaset = yet another search engine term ...
Are there some others, I should know about?
>which means that #37 would be better than #12? the aim is #1 - no matter
>if there are 200 or 20000 results.
Of course, we all want to be number 1.
But the statement "I am #1" or "I will make you #1" is useless
without knowing the reference set.
When a person says, "I am the richest man of my hometown", you should
ask him, where he lives.
So if somebody posts here, "My site is currently at #17", I'd ask him:
"#17" out of how many?"
#17 out of 10,000? Then the #1 is within reach.
Or #17 out of 1,000,000? That's a real challenge.
>and what about luck? by great luck you could be #2 or anything ... ;o)
Luck is, to get listed in Yahoo or to be reviewed in a popular
magazine.
The rest is knowledge and hard work.
Regards,
Michael
Michael Sattler
>>It would also be interesting to compare one's values with each other.
>Some that I can boast:
>travel - 88th out of 49,800,000 - 0.00018% - http://aardvarktravel.net
>travel sites - 9th of 4,080,000 - 0.00022% - http://aardvarktravel.net
>lake district - 4th of 1,710,000 - 0.00023% - http://cumbria.uk.com
>cumbria - 3rd out of 527,000 - 0.00057% - http://www.cumbria.uk.com
>corkscrews - 2nd of 54,300 - 0.0037% - http://www.bacchus-anitques.com
Hats off!
You know your business.
Regards,
Michael
The Dedicated Partnership
<misa3...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>travel - 88th out of 49,800,000 - 0.00018% - http://aardvarktravel.net
>>travel sites - 9th of 4,080,000 - 0.00022% - http://aardvarktravel.net
>>lake district - 4th of 1,710,000 - 0.00023% - http://cumbria.uk.com
>>cumbria - 3rd out of 527,000 - 0.00057% - http://www.cumbria.uk.com
>>corkscrews - 2nd of 54,300 - 0.0037% - http://www.bacchus-anitques.com
>
>Hats off!
>
>You know your business.
Thanks, Michael... I don't know about that but we try hard! :)
Paul
http://www.the-dedicated-partnership.com - promoting tourism
http://www.aardvarktravel.net - the world's best travel search engine
(Replace antispam.com with dedicate.co.uk to reply by e-mail...)
The Dedicated Partnership
<misa3...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>which means that #37 would be better than #12? the aim is #1 - no matter
>>if there are 200 or 20000 results.
>
>Of course, we all want to be number 1.
Should we not also be considering the frequency/popularity of the
search term? Being #37 for a search for 'sex' or any other very
popular search term could, potentially, be of great significance.
>But the statement "I am #1" or "I will make you #1" is useless
>without knowing the reference set.
>
>When a person says, "I am the richest man of my hometown", you should
>ask him, where he lives.
Or ask him if you can borrow $500...? ;-)
The Dedicated Partnership
Dedicated Partnership) wrote:
>On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 09:58:41 +0200, Michael Sattler
><misa3...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>>>travel - 88th out of 49,800,000 - 0.00018% - http://aardvarktravel.net
>>>travel sites - 9th of 4,080,000 - 0.00022% - http://aardvarktravel.net
>>>lake district - 4th of 1,710,000 - 0.00023% - http://cumbria.uk.com
>>>cumbria - 3rd out of 527,000 - 0.00057% - http://www.cumbria.uk.com
>>>corkscrews - 2nd of 54,300 - 0.0037% - http://www.bacchus-anitques.com
>>
>>Hats off!
>>
>>You know your business.
>
>Thanks, Michael... I don't know about that but we try hard! :)
>
>Paul
I've just noticed - I neglected to mention a few that are better than
all these:
dedicated - 1st out of 8,960,000 - 0.000011% -
http://www.dedicate.co.uk
travel search - 1st out of 5,160,000 - 0.000019% -
http://aardvarktravel.net
travel search engine - 1st out of 1,480,000 - 0.000068% -
http://aardvarktravel.net
Personally, I'm not at all convinced that these measures are all that
meaningful given that it doesn't take into account the frequency of
the term being searched for, but can anyone beat this? :)