What REALLY makes a site rank 1

[1DMF]

I'm still a little confused as to why a site gets a top search engine ranking.

I've read that good , semantic, clean code is essential , so how come the no.1 top spot for the following search on google : independent mortgage advice

shows a site with 83 code errors!

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.unbiased.co.uk/fa/mortgage-advice.asp

no.2 slot has a site with 27 code errors!

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.mortgages-online.co.uk/

it seems odd that so much emphasis on SEO and basic community accepted standards is placed on semantic and valid code yet top ranking sites have attrocious code.

one has to deduct it doesn't actualy make that much of a difference if your code sucks?

So what does really matter above all else, popularity linking?

and if so how can you compete if a site has 1 million links from other sites because its been in business for the last 6 years, how does a new commer to the market get anywhere?





"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[Foamcow]

It's all to do with the number of puppies you hide in the code.

But don't tell anyone I told you that.


Clean code isn't what makes a site rank.

Look at the following... possibly in this order or importance.

Backlinks
Page Titles
Headings
Link Text
Body Text
Alt tags attributes


Backlinks and Page Titles are critically important.

<honk>*:O)</honk>
Designease Ltd. - polyprop folders, ring binders and creative presentation ideas
Earl & Thompson Marketing - Marketing Agency Services in Gloucestershire

 

[1DMF]

Backlinks - this is that dreaded popularity links thing right?

I think i'll ring the RSPCA and get a load of puppies, easier to get them than backlinks me think!



I should make this thread no.1 in google by your reckoning!!! ;-)




"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[Foamcow]

so much emphasis on SEO and basic community accepted standards is placed on semantic and valid code yet top ranking sites have attrocious code.

It isn't.

There was a recent thread on this but I can't seem to locate it right now.

Coding to standards is not the reason why a site will rank well, but it stands to reason that someone that will take the time to code a site to conform to W3C standards will also most likely care how it performs in an SE and so also optimise the site.
It's just as possible to create a standards compliant site that ranks poorly as it is to build a non standards site taht ranks well.


<honk>*:O)</honk>
Designease Ltd. - polyprop folders, ring binders and creative presentation ideas
Earl & Thompson Marketing - Marketing Agency Services in Gloucestershire

 

[1DMF]

all the online checkers I've used do a semantic check on your code.

I guess i'll wait for the PIPEX experts to get me up the rankings with their wonderful SEO package!

While i do down the pub and rake in the profits, or is it drown my sorrows, never sure on that one!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[ChrisHunt]

The reason all the online SEO checkers emphasise validation is that it's easy to measure by computer. You'll notice that accessibility checkers do the same. They bang on about how many automated checks their tool does, and how long it would take you to do them by hand, and miss out the fact that there are lots of more important things that it takes a skilled human to test.

That's not to say that you shouldn't validate - it can help you find problems in your code that you might not pick up otherwise - but take claims of its earth-shattering importance with a lorry-load of salt.

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd

 

[1DMF]

I was starting to wonder!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[1DMF]

would anyone recommend this tool, or is it just another load of false claims made by the multitude of SEO companies ?

http://www.axandra-web-site-promotion-software-tool.com/start-download.htm

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[ChrisHunt]

IBP helps you to get top 10 rankings on Google, Yahoo, MSN and other major search engines. You'll get more visitors, more customers and more sales.

Sounds like snake oil to me. Looking at the features listed at

http://www.axandra-web-site-promotion-software-tool.com/index.htm

I didn't see any that I couldn't find for free somewhere online. I might be prepared to pay a few quid for the convenience of having them all in one place, but not the kind of money they're asking for.

I should stress, though, that I haven't used the product and I'm not a professional SEO. Someone who could tick those boxes might give you better feedback.

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd

 

[1DMF]

What I find hard to beleive with all these companies making these sweeping claims is this...

if a 1,000 sites purchase this software, all selling the same thing and wish to be found with the same keywords, how can 1,000 sites all get a top TEN listing.

ok lets make it even simpler and realistic, if ELEVEN sites use this software (now that is probable), how can 11 sites all be top 10

I smell a rat!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.