Page 2 - Looking for SEO consultant

Sorry Randfish - I would believe this is more short-sighted than sound advice.

No matter how hard you try - you are stuck competing with 9 other pages for position on the first page for every query.

The highest caliber SEO aggregate clients in niche industry segments and use the collective value of all to leverage everything from 'collective buying power' to free & easy to obtain link exchanges to collective copywriting.

In hindsight - no matter how you look at it the web and search engine optimization is about mutual benefit - or leveraging what you have to acquire what you don't have.

Conflict of Interest from a SEO vabtagepoint would be NOT disclosing a current competitive arrangement. But once disclosed - both party [or many] can grow farther & faster than either alone...

If I was a client - I would rather give away #1 position spot to a mutually supportive competitor and capture #2 spot far earlier [often 3 times faster] than invoking a non-competitive clause and take 3 times as long to acquire the same results.

I know of no client that would say "Mr. SEO - we don't care how long it takes - we just don't want any help"... that is the laymans terms for what a non-competitive clause.

What about directory listings and link exchanges? The best links are from domains of your topic - ignore them because you are helping a competitor?

Mine, mine, mine... produces less, less, less and takes longer.

I have merchants [working together] where they all had hobby sites... each in now $1/4 million dollars a year enterprise - which took 3 1/2 months - the CAVEAT ignore rank results [who's #1] and concentrate on conversions.

I can't see us employing another SEO at our Online Casino if he/she is not experienced in the SEO of the Online Casino industry. Industries are different and for an SEO to be able to compete these days, the SEO needs to know the industry. We'll probable see SEO's specialising in specific industries someday. (That is if there isn't some that are already specialising)

If you look - there are tons of them.

It's a better business model for both the SEO and for the clients.

The client gains direct control over non-supportive competitors who happen to hire another SEO and attempts to out-rank them.

So as an example clients A, B, C hires SEO X and all gain supportive successes using each others leveraging powers.

Thereafter competitor Company D hires SEO Y and Company E hires Z... and both start climbing the results.

SEO X informs Company A,B,C there are new kids on the block - and collectively these company work together to retain their current positioning....

Company D / Company E WANTS those positions but because they are totally segregated - they independently must spent more to generate the same return.

Which is better?

You guys are correct. We don't do it and we won't, but our clients are in very specific niches and we are taking a percentage of revenue and managing their whole site - design, development, hosting, etc. so for us it wouldn't work. I can certainly see where it can be advantageous to have experience.

RE:



RE:



Ya I wasn't commented that you are wrong in your way of instilling client trust... just that 'non-competitive agreements' limit your ability to induce returns at a far greater cost... and this was in the context of the original poster and not your clientele.

That said - this really doesn't have anything to do with size of segment [niche] but cost of return, amount of return, and time to develop fruition... in any industry, segment or niche.

Randfish, I am more apt to agree with you and your initial analysis. It is one thing to have an industry specific specialists. That is entirely understandable and I believe to any clients advantage depending on the skill of the service provider. However, the minute you have a KW phrase that competes with an existing client, you have a conflict of interest and client has a problem.

As a client, I am paying you, typically a good bit of money, to make me #1 for that search term no matter how minor you may think it is. Not #2, #3, #7, behind your other clients, but #1. By working both ends of the KW Phrase you are doing a huge dis-service to both your clients as there can only be one #1. If I hire someone else with no other interests in my market, they will fight for my position, how can you? The more clients you have targeting that phrase, the bigger your conflict of interest is going to be and in my opion, your liability exposure will expand.

This is the importance of KW anaylsis and review with any prospective client. The client should choose the targets based upon relevent traffic related to the market and business model of the company, they choose to target, you provide the guidance. You simply cannot give impartial feedback with a conflict of interest. Now, if you fully disclose and If they don't choose a competing KW Phrase, or are willing to forego in exchange for another and discount, only then do you not have a conflict of interest. However, a client would be foolish to continue negotiations. Business models can change and as they do, what happens when they, or the other party, chooses to move into existing KW phrases of similar markets. SEO is continual and good SEO involves good client relationships and protecting the interest of every client.

This must have been a lesson intended for you guys. (At least if I understand where this conversation originated concerning KW Phrases and clients) Only because it came out of the Blue as I don't solicit third party SEO.

I had someone call me Monday wanting me to build his established, but floundering business wise, charity organization. Now, if I were to take on that project using their web domain, as wanted, and standard SEO, I would have to make a choice between his site ranking #1 or mine ranking #1 for certain KW phrases. How do you make that choice? You can't.

I proposed a partnership and ownership interest in the corporation in exchange for the rankings and traffic I already have and developing any additional back end partnerships I felt necessary to bring it all together. My thinking was a vested interest in the success of the corporation. That and it would pay a significant amount more (easily low 6 figures) than the site generates. (yes, I could go out and easily apply for one with the IRS but then I'd have the headache of building the back end, managing it, employees, HUD compliance qualifying, legal, and actually working among many other things a brick and mortar business requires...lmbo) He declined, no biggie. We never talked $ so he may have run at the standard SEO I would charge anyway...but I digress as usual.

Now, would I take on that project as a site? Absolutely not. It would compete directly with a site I own even if he was willing to pay the minimum 15K I would charge to do it.

So this again leads to the question as a third party SEO, what gives you the right to make that decision for your clients on what they may or may not make from their traffic and the traffic drop from position one to position two to position three so on down the line when you are being paid to deliver a service and specific rankings for KW that are relevant to a clients marketing plans?

So it is, as is everything, a matter of balance. In any industry there is a time when conflict of interest should out weigh the temptation of another client or the paycheck that results. KW Phrase conflicts must absolutely be disclosed along with traffic dropoff resulting from ranking disparity between positions for relevant sites before ever taking on that type of project. To me, it's to much liability for both the client and you and I personally wouldn't do it no matter how tight your contract protections is.

This one cost you a whole nickel! ;)

Cheerios.

This is a great thread... lots of good thinking and very professional exchange. Nice job!

Here is some additional stuff to stir in... maybe you have opinions here....

If I am your long time client and have been paying for SEO for long time, I have through that financed your experience and expertise in my industry. The newcomer to your service now benefits from that at no cost to himself.

I fully agree with the benefits of cooperative work between competitors and this works extremely well when both have hobby sites that are trying to grow. But how does this work when one client is established and the other a newcomer with little resources or traffic to chip in.

Finally, I feel that integrity is a major factor here as well. I would feel comfortable entering this type of agreement with those who are discussing in this thread. But I think that one must be very careful about this type of arrangement as your partner could become your competitor at some point.

I can most certainly see the benefit as well in working with the competitors and sharing the wealth. I'm not to greedy As far as the newcomer...god knows as I have no experience with online site partnering.

The most constructive way to control relationships would be a no-compete. I have had to sign not less than 3 in the last 7 years but did so with certain legal knowledge courtesy of a family of attorneys...lol Given the below example, it could still create or infer obligation to respect an agreement. I myself never did because they are market specific. Meaning I cannot make a living in the market I reside.

The problem with a no compete agreement is livelyhood. When one's ability to make a living is at stake, they simply won't hold up in court no matter how tight a lawyer thinks they are. A contract cannot constrain an individual from making a living in a skilled profession in any state whether that living is attained online or around the corner.

How do you think the last contestant got out of paul simons contract (American Idol) when they left? This new one will get out of it to. A skilled attorney will present that argument and it will void the contract.

In the end Egol, it comes down to integrity and working with those that have it. Sometimes it's just hard to know who does and who doesn't and you typically won't until the dollars are at stake. One usually leaves a relationship, as I have, when the dollars start flowing yet aren't equitably distributed. At that point the value of any partnership no longer exists.

Cheerios

Lots of good ideas with point/counterpoint. I spent 20 years as a consulting/salesperson (commercial real estate brokerage). I used both arguements. Hire me because I have experience in the field and am working with others like you...and hire me because my other clients don't compete with your best interests.

Its one thing to be great at getting residential real estate sites to the top in various markets. Its another thing to represent 5 different competing residential real estate brokers/firms all competing for the term "St Louis real estate"

The potential client is best served by being well educated in the area and also evaluating the competition and where they want to be. This potential client has an understanding of the SEO business to a certain level and wants to work in conjunction with the SEO...farming out link building and possibly other elements.

Its probably in the clients best interest to interview firms with both points of view, industry expertise, and use their best judgement in choosing a firm to work with them.

With regard to testimonials, I pretty much knew if a client was satisfied and if I did a good job for them and would ask for a testimonial or to serve as a reference at the right time and place. Testimonials, references, and word of mouth are the best sources of business. Having references and testimonials makes it easy to win business. Its also great when the SEO can go back to a client and say "Hey this is working with so and so...lets try it with your site." That comes from breadth of experience.

Dave

I definetly don't agree with that....

Why not give someone some examples of your work.....

When you hire a interior designer, you can bet you'll see some past designs or remodeling photos as a resume, why not successful seo profesionals....

Before anyone gives someone access to their property or pays upfront for services they cannot actualy see for themselves, they should at the very least see or hear results of your work...

Without that, what do they have to make a decision with?


---

and I liked that advice randfish..

I agree....

You might not beleive it, but by protecting my clients I got a very unique selling point. I get a lot of new business from my existing portifolio and from web sites assosiated / affiliated with them.

If someone ask for a reference, then I explain the reason why I can't give it to them. If they still want an example then I refer them to someone else, there are relativly few SEO-consultants and a lot of clients, so I don't need the business of companies that don't agree with my policy.

Since I do my best to serve my clients, they are functioning as my sales network.

I never accept payment upfront, I do billing once a month and the due data on the invoice is 21 days from the billing date. It will give the client fair time to find out if they are happy or unhappy with my advice. If a client is unhappy with the advice for whatever reason then I do my best to fix the situation.

Also I rarly make changes to client's web sites, 95% of the time I do consulting only.