Well, that would depend on what search engine you’re using! 
Obviously, on the one that matters the most, I’m not even on the front page of the results. Update: I just checked again, and I am indeed on the first page of Google results! W00t! But, interestingly enough, I am either on the first page or right at the top of the organic results for the key phrase “blog consulting” on the rest of the big ones. So, which search engine sucks at providing accurate results?
Microsoft Live Search
Ask Search – The One that Really Doesn’t Matter
Yahoo! YEAH, NUMBER ONE, BABY!
Google: Thanks for Playing, You can Go Home Now
One of these things is not like the others
Let’s say I took the results of these searches and reformatted them so you couldn’t tell who they came from. If you looked at them and saw that at least 3 search engines had me on the front page for “blog consulting” (one of them even at #1) and only one didn’t, which search engine would you think is broken?
That is definitely interesting. I had to go all the way to the end of page 3 before I found your site in the “broken” search engine. I do not know much about SEO, but I would say that warrants a call to the fine folks in Mountain View, CA.
I would have guessed Ask. That wouldn’t mean it’s “broken,” however. In my experience, Ask typically has an incongruence in its search results and I’ve often found top listings in the other three SEs that were not on page 1 in Ask. It has to do with how they weigh the ranking factors.
MSN many times is the first to crawl a website and index. Other times, it is last. I can’t figure out what they are doing over there. They are perhaps the least consistent of the top 4. For that reason, this doesn’t surprise me at all.
@Dave: You know, I had ‘em on speed dial for a while there, but then it was “blocked caller this” and “restraining order that” and blah, blah, blah.
@Allen: Yes, I’ve noticed the same thing generally. And who knows how it will change over time? And not that much time, either, since I just made a buncha Squidoo lenses and HubPages mini-sites. The Squidoo lens I made for Gateway Blogging is already helping.
Michael – all I know is you’re tops in my book!
Just getting started with squidoo myself so I’m off to check your out – thanks for the link!!
Michael – just had to come back and tell you I loved your lens and stumbled it to get more to see it – great job as always you inspire me!!!
@Cyndee: Thank you kindly for saying that. Makes my day!
Cool lens Michael. I have intended to establish one myself, but I don’t want to do it until I know for sure that I can devote the time to make it great – I hate mediocrity! I like the Gateway Blogging concept.
@Allen – Thank you. I think I probably spent an hour-and-half on it, overall (and not all at once). Although Squidoo has more clout than HubPages, I gotta say that HubPages interface is WAY easier.
I think in trying to make their algorithm “the best” for finding accurate results, in addition to being extra top secret about the rules of the algorithm “broke” Google. It may not be as accurate.
I heard once that a Google representative said that SEO didn’t exist, and that web designers should just focus on creating the most relevant content and best usability for the user, and leave the search engines up to them. Ha. I guess the Yahoo! guy was laughing hysterically in the background. I would have really loved to see that…
Great post! Thanks!
Erica, Google isn’t broke. There was a time when SEO didn’t exist. The profession came about because Google was so good at producing accurate results. In the late 90s no one could beat them.
I think what happened is Google reached a point of diminishing returns. They simply can’t keep up with all the spam out there that is knocking the socks off of the people doing what Google has said to do all along – just create good, relevant content. In a way, they created the rules that led to the strategies spammers are using to kill relevant results. If Google did anything wrong, it’s “let the cat out of the bag” about what their algorithms were based on. But even if they hadn’t, I think we’d still be in the same situation because all it took was a few smart people doing some testing to figure what worked and what didn’t. After that, it was a matter of information traveling.
Very good SEO Michael! Nice.
@Nathan – You know, it’s funny. If I passed myself off as an SEO, I would be a fraud. Real SEO gurus like Glen Allsop or Tad Chef could eat my lunch with this amateur poking around that I do. I’m learning new stuff all the time, trying to remember the basics, and trying it, is all I can say. Perhaps I know a small thing or two specifically regarding blog SEO, but that’s all I’ll admit to.
Not bad
@Tad – Thanks. I’m kinda surprised, myself.
Seriously this is bad!
Michael, the problem is with the anchor text, if my guess is right. In Google, they place more importance to anchor text than the others. While yahoo takes all the link pointers and then scans your page for the content, Google takes deviations all the time to make sure there are no formulas people can guess.
I can understand why you are on top for Yahoo and others but not for Google. Had you got some incoming links with the anchor text “blog consulting” I think youd’ve definitely made it to the top.
At one point or the other, it is real – The monster is broken.
@Mani – Thanks for your comment. I am doing better on Google already (page 3 last time I checked, although different results for “consultant” vs. “consulting”). I’ve had several prospective clients say they found me via Google search. Google does place importance on anchor text… perhaps too much, since everyone tries to game this aspect. It’s not hard. Hell, I can even link to myself in my own blog all the time, every time I use the phrase blog consulting. Just like that.