In the 128th episode of Semantic Mastery’s weekly Hump Day Hangouts, a participant asked whether one should vary the URL when building links.
The exact question was:
When building links, is it better to use 1 and only 1 variation for example www. or http:// or just abc.com. I have heard varying advice where you would use all and someone else saying use 1 everytime you build a link.
In episode 128 of Semantic Mastery’s weekly Hump Day Hangouts, one viewer asked whether Semantic Mastery can host a webinar like the Hump Day Hangout on Rank To Rent, Amazon, Shopify, Pay Per Call with their students.
The exact question was:
Can you do a Hump Day with your students who are killing it in Rank to Rent, Amazon, Shopify, PPCall etc?
In episode 128 of our weekly Hump Day Hangouts, a participant asked if one can use a private home address for a local lead gen site in Google My Business.
The exact question was:
Hi everyone, and thank you for giving us the opportunity to be part of Hangout. I’m quite new to SEO and have a question which might sound very basic, my question is : 1- Can I use a private (Home) address for local lead Gen, and have it verified by google ? 2- can I use the very same address for multiple different businesses in the same area or city? Note: I live In Denmark. Thank you for your help.
Posted by randfish
Have you thought about what your pop-ups might be doing to your SEO? There are plenty of considerations, from their timing and how they affect your engagement rates, all the way to Google's official guidelines on the matter. In this episode of Whiteboard Friday, Rand goes over all the reasons why you ought to carefully consider how your overlays and modals work and whether the gains are worth the sacrifice.
Click on the whiteboard image above to open a high-resolution version in a new tab!
Howdy, Moz fans, and welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. This week we're chatting about pop-ups, overlays, modals, interstitials, and all things like them. They have specific kinds of interactions with SEO. In addition to Google having some guidelines around them, they also can change how people interact with your website, and that can adversely or positively affect you accomplishing your goals, SEO and otherwise.
So let's walk through what these elements, these design and UX elements do, how they work, and best practices for how we should be thinking about them and how they might interfere with our SEO efforts.
So, first up, let's talk specifically about what each element is. A pop-up now, okay, there are a few kinds. There are pop-ups that happen in new windows. New window pop-ups are, basically, new window, no good. Google hates those. They are fundamentally against them. Many browsers will stop them automatically. Chrome does. Firefox does. In fact, users despise these as well. There are still some spammy and sketchy sites out there that use them, but, generally speaking, bad news.
When we're talking about a pop-up that happens in the same browser window, essentially it's just a visual element, that's often also referred to as an overlay. So, for the purposes of this Whiteboard Friday, we'll call that an overlay. An overlay is basically like this, where you have the page's content and there's some smaller element, a piece, a box, a window, a visual of some kind that comes up and that essentially says, maybe it says, "Sign up for my email newsletter," and then there's a place to enter your email, or, "Get my book now," and you click that and get the book. Those types of overlays are pretty common on the web, and they do not create quite the same problems that pop-ups do, at least from Google's perspective. However, we'll talk about those later, there are some issues around them, especially with mobile.
Modals tend to be windows of interaction, tend to be more elements of use. So lightboxes for images is a very popular modal. A modal is something where you are doing work inside that new box rather than in the content that's underneath it. So a sign-in form that overlays, that pops up over the rest of the content, but that doesn't allow you to engage with this content underneath it, that would be considered a modal. Generally, most of the time, these aren't a problem, unless they are something like spam, or advertising, or something that's taking you out of the user experience.
Then finally, interstitials are essentially, and many of these can also be called interstitial experiences, but a classic interstitial is something like what Forbes.com does. When you visit Forbes, an article for the first time, you get this, "Welcome. Our sponsor of the day is Brawndo. Brawndo, it has what plants need." Then you can continue after a certain number of seconds. These really piss people off, myself included. I really hate the interstitial experience. I understand that it's an advertising thing. But, yeah, Google hates them too. Not quite enough to kick Forbes out of their SERPs entirely yet, but, fingers crossed, it will happen sometime soon. They have certainly removed plenty of other folks who have gone with invasive or overly heavy interstitials over the years and made those pretty tough.
Well, it turns out timing is a big one. So when the element appears matters. Basically, if the element shows up initially upon page load, they will consider it differently than if it shows up after a few minutes. So, for example, if you have a "Sign Up Now" overlay that pops up the second you visit the page, that's going to be treated differently than something that happens when you're 80% or you've just finished scrolling through an entire blog post. That will get treated very differently. Or it may have no effect actually on how Google treats the SEO, and then it really comes down to how users do.
Then how long does it last as well. So interstitials, especially those advertising interstitials, there are some issues governing that with people like Forbes. There are also some issues around an overlay that can't be closed and how long a window can pop up, especially if it shows advertising and those types of things. Generally speaking, obviously, shorter is better, but you can get into trouble even with very short ones.
Can that element easily be closed, and does it interfere with the content or readability? So Google's new mobile guidelines, I think as of just a few months ago, now state that if an overlay or a modal or something interferes with a visitor's ability to read the actual content on the page, Google may penalize those or remove their mobile-friendly tags and remove any mobile-friendly benefit. That's obviously quite concerning for SEO.
So there's an exception or an exclusion to a lot of Google's rules around this, which is if you have an element that is essentially asking for the user's age, or asking for some form of legal consent, or giving a warning about cookies, which is very popular in the EU, of course, and the UK because of the legal requirements around saying, "Hey, this website uses cookies," and you have to agree to it, those kinds of things, that actually gets around Google's issues. So Google will not give you a hard time if you have an overlay interstitial or modal that says, "Are you of legal drinking age in your country? Enter your birth date to continue." They will not necessarily penalize those types of things.
Advertising, on the other hand, advertising could get you into more trouble, as we have discussed. If it's a call to action for the website itself, again, that could go either way. If it's part of the user experience, generally you are just fine there. Meaning something like a modal where you get to a website and then you say, "Hey, I want to leave a comment," and so there's a modal that makes you log in, that type of a modal. Or you click on an image and it shows you a larger version of that image in a modal, again, no problem. That's part of the user experience.
Conditions matter as well. So if it is triggered from SERP visits versus not, meaning that if you have an exclusionary protocol in your interstitial, your overlay, your modal that says, "Hey, if someone's visiting from Google, don't show this to them," or "If someone's visiting from Bing, someone's visiting from DuckDuckGo, don't show this to them," that can change how the search engines perceive it as well.
It's also the case that this can change if you only show to cookied or logged in or logged out types of users. Now, logged out types of users means that everyone from a search engine could or will get it. But for logged in users, for example, you can imagine that if you visit a page on a social media site and there's a modal that includes or an overlay that includes some notification around activity that you've already been performing on the site, now that becomes more a part of the user experience. That's not necessarily going to harm you.
Where it can hurt is the other way around, where you get visitors from search engines, they are logged out, and you require them to log in before seeing the content. Quora had a big issue with this for a long time, and they seem to have mostly resolved that through a variety of measures, and they're fairly sophisticated about it. But you can see that Facebook still struggles with this, because a lot of their content, they demand that you log in before you can ever view or access it. That does keep some of their results out of Google, or certainly ranking lower.
I think this is what Google's ultimately trying to measure and what they're trying to essentially say, "Hey, this is why we have these issues around this," which is if you are hurting the click-through rate or you're hurting pogo-sticking, meaning that more people are clicking onto your website from Google and then immediately clicking the Back button when one of these things appears, that is a sign to Google that you have provided a poor user experience, that people are not willing to jump through whatever hoop you've created for them to get access your content, and that suggests they don't want to get there. So this is sort of the ultimate thing that you should be measuring. Some of these can still hurt you even if these are okay, but this is the big one.
So some best practices around using all these types of elements on your website. I would strongly urge you to avoid elements that are significantly harming UX. If you're willing to take a small sacrifice in user experience in exchange for a great deal of value because you capture people's email addresses or you get more engagement of other different kinds, okay. But this would be something I'd watch.
There are three or four metrics that I'd urge you to check out to compare whether this is doing the right thing. Those are:
So those four will help tell you whether you are truly interfering badly with user experience.
On mobile, ensure that your crucial content is not covered up, that the reading experience, the browsing experience isn't covered up by one of these elements. Please, whatever you do, make those elements easy and obvious to dismiss. This is part of Google's guidelines around it, but it's also a best practice, and it will certainly help your user experience metrics.
Only choose to keep one of these elements if you are finding that the sacrifice... and there's almost always a sacrifice cost, like you will hurt bounce rate or browse rate or return visitor rate or time on site. You will hurt it. The question is, is it a slight enough hurt in exchange for enough gain, and that's that trade-off that you need to decide whether it's worth it. I think if you are hurting visitor interaction by a few seconds on average per visit, but you are getting 5% of your visitors to give you an email address, that's probably worth it. If it's more like 30 seconds and 1%, maybe not as good.
Consider removing the elements from triggering if the visit comes from search engines. So if you're finding that this works fine and great, but you're having issues around search guidelines, you could consider potentially just removing the element from any visit that comes directly from a search engine and instead placing that in the content itself or letting it happen on a second page load, assuming that your browse rate is decently high. That's a fine way to go as well.
If you are trying to get the most effective value out of these types of elements, it tends to be the case that the less common and less well used the visual element is, the more interaction and engagement it's going to get. But the other side of that coin is that it can create a more frustrating experience. So if people are not familiar with the overlay or modal or interstitial visual layout design that you've chosen, they may engage more with it. They might not dismiss it out of hand, because they're not used to it yet, but they can also get more frustrated by it. So, again, return to looking at those metrics.
With that in mind, hopefully you will effectively, and not too harmfully to your SEO, be able to use these pop-ups, overlays, interstitials, modals, and all other forms of elements that interfere with user experience.
And we'll see you again next week for another edition of Whiteboard Friday. Take care.
Video transcription by Speechpad.com
Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!
In episode 127 of Semantic Mastery’s weekly Hump Day Hangouts, one participant asked about the maximum number of separate tags one could use that would not be considered tag stuffing.
The exact question was:
With regard to tag stuffing how many separate tags would be the maximum to be safe? Is there a magic number for total words as long tail keywords obviously will run the total words up a lot faster than shorter ones? What would be the danger points to avoid to be sure you are not keyword stuffing in the tags?
In episode 127 of our weekly Hump Day Hangouts, one viewer asked if Semantic Mastery has an index or searchable database for its past Hump Day Hangouts.
The exact question was:
Do you have any kind of index or searchable database of the time stamps with topic for all of the past Hump Day Hangouts? There is so much great info here and that would be great to have.
Posted by jonoalderson
Websites, like the businesses who operate them, are often deceptively complicated machines.
They’re fragile systems, and changing or replacing any one of the parts can easily affect (or even break) the whole setup — often in ways not immediately obvious to stakeholders or developers.
Even seemingly simple sites are often powered by complex technology, like content management systems, databases, and templating engines. There’s much more going on behind the scenes — technically and organizationally — than you can easily observe by crawling a site or viewing the source code.
When you change a website and remove or add elements, it’s not uncommon to introduce new errors, flaws, or faults.
That’s why I get extremely nervous whenever I hear a client or business announce that they’re intending to undergo a "site migration."
Chances are, and experience suggests, that something’s going to go wrong.
Ouch. #ecomchat #seo http://pic.twitter.com/flgncLVJBT
— Mark Cook (@thetafferboy) February 26, 2017
As an SEO consultant and practitioner, I've been involved in more "site migrations" than I can remember or count — for charities, startups, international e-commerce sites, and even global household brands. Every one has been uniquely challenging and stressful.
In each case, the businesses involved have underestimated (and in some cases, increased) the complexity, the risk, and the details involved in successfully executing their "migration."
As a result, many of these projects negatively impacted performance and potential in ways that could have been easily avoided.
This isn’t a case of the scope of the "migration" being too big, but rather, a misalignment of understanding, objectives, methods, and priorities, resulting in stakeholders working on entirely different scopes.
The migrations I’ve experienced have varied from simple domain transfers to complete overhauls of server infrastructure, content management frameworks, templates, and pages — sometimes even scaling up to include the consolidation (or fragmentation) of multiple websites and brands.
In the minds of each organization, however, these have all been "migration" projects despite their significantly varying (and poorly defined) scopes. In each case, the definition and understanding of the word "migration" has varied wildly.
As an industry, we’re used to struggling with labels. We’re still not sure if we’re SEOs, inbound marketers, digital marketers, or just… marketers. The problem is that, when we speak to each other (and those outside of our industry), these words can carry different meaning and expectations.
Even amongst ourselves, a conversation between two digital marketers, analysts, or SEOs about their fields of expertise is likely to reveal that they have surprisingly different definitions of their roles, responsibilities, and remits. To them, words like "content" or "platform" might mean different things.
In the same way, "site migrations" vary wildly, in form, function, and execution — and when we discuss them, we’re not necessarily talking about the same thing. If we don’t clarify our meanings and have shared definitions, we risk misunderstandings, errors, or even offense.
Poorly managed migrations can have a number of consequences beyond just drops in rankings, traffic, and performance. There are secondary impacts, too. They can also inadvertently:
I should point out that there’s nothing wrong with hustle in this case; that, in fact, begging, borrowing, and stealing can often be a viable solution in these kinds of scenarios. There’s been more than one occasion when, late at night before a site migration, I’ve averted disaster by literally begging developers to include template review processes, to implement redirects, or to stall deployments.
But this isn’t a sensible or sustainable or reliable way of working.
Mistakes will inevitably be made. Resources, favors, and patience are finite. Too much reliance on "hustle" from individuals (or multiple individuals) may in fact further widen the gap in understanding and scope, and positions the hustler as a single point of failure.
More importantly, hustle may only fix the symptoms, not the cause of these issues. That means that we remain stuck in a role as the disruptive outsiders who constantly squeeze in extra unscoped requirements at the eleventh hour.
If we’re to begin to address some of these challenges, we need to understand when, where, and why migration projects go wrong.
The root cause of all less-than-perfect migrations can be traced to at least one of the following scenarios:
There’s a common theme in each of these cases. We’re not involved early enough in the process, or our opinions and priorities don’t carry sufficient weight to impact timelines and resources.
Chances are, these mistakes are rarely the product of spite or of intentional omission; rather, they’re born of gaps in the education and experience of the stakeholders and decision-makers involved.
We can address this, to a degree, by elevating ourselves to senior stakeholders in these kinds of projects, and by being consulted much earlier in the timeline.
I think that it’s our responsibility to help the organizations we work for to avoid these mistakes. One of the easiest opportunities to do that is to make sure that we’re talking about the same thing, as early in the process as possible.
Otherwise, migrations will continue to go wrong, and we will continue to spend far too much of our collective time fixing broken links, recommending changes or improvements to templates, and holding together bruised-and-broken websites — all at the expense of doing meaningful, impactful work.
Perhaps we can begin to answer to some of these challenges by creating better definitions and helping to clarify exactly what’s involved in a "site migration" process.
Unfortunately, I suspect that we’re stuck with the word "migration," at least for now. It’s a term which is already widely used, which people think is a correct and appropriate definition. It’s unrealistic to try to change everybody else’s language when we’re already too late to the conversation.
Our next best opportunity to reduce ambiguity and risk is to codify the types of migration. This gives us a chance to prompt further exploration and better definitions.
For example, if we can say “This sounds like it’s actually a domain migration paired with a template migration,” we can steer the conversation a little and rely on a much better shared frame of reference.
If we can raise a challenge that, e.g., the "translation project" a different part of the business is working on is actually a whole bunch of interwoven migration types, then we can raise our concerns earlier and pursue more appropriate resource, budget, and authority (e.g., “This project actually consists of a series of migrations involving templates, content, and domains. Therefore, it’s imperative that we also consider X and Y as part of the project scope.”).
By persisting in labelling this way, stakeholders may gradually come to understand that, e.g., changing the design typically also involves changing the templates, and so the SEO folks should really be involved earlier in the process. By challenging the language, we can challenge the thinking.
I’ve identified at least seven distinct types of migration. Next time you encounter a "migration" project, you can investigate the proposed changes, map them back to these types, and flag any gaps in understanding, expectations, and resource.
You could argue that some of these aren’t strictly "migrations" in a technical sense (i.e., changing something isn’t the same as moving it), but grouping them this way is intentional.
Remember, our goal here isn’t to neatly categorize all of the requirements for any possible type of migration. There are plenty of resources, guides, and lists which already try do that.
Instead, we’re trying to provide neat, universal labels which help us (the SEO folks) and them (the business stakeholders) to have shared definitions and to remove unknown unknowns.
They’re a set of shared definitions which we can use to trigger early warning signals, and to help us better manage stakeholder expectations.
Feel free to suggest your own, to grow, shrink, combine, or bin any of these to fit your own experience and requirements!
A broad bundling of infrastructure, hardware, and server considerations (while these are each broad categories in their own right, it makes sense to bundle them together in this context).
If your migration project contains any of the following changes, you’re talking about a hosting migration, and you’ll need to explore the SEO implications (and development resource requirements) to make sure that changes to the underlying platform don’t impact front-end performance or visibility.
*Might overlap into a software migration if the changes affect the configuration or behavior of any front-end components (e.g., the CMS).
**Might overlap into other migrations, depending on how this manifests (e.g., template, software, domain).
***Might overlap into a domain migration if the CDN is presented as/on a distinct hostname (e.g., AWS), rather than invisibly (e.g., Cloudflare).
Unless your website is comprised of purely static HTML files, chances are that it’s running some kind of software to serve the right pages, behaviors, and content to users.
If your migration project contains any of the following changes, you’re talking about a software migration, and you’ll need to understand (and input into) how things like managing error codes, site functionality, and back-end behavior work.
*Might overlap into a domain migration if you’re absorbing software which was previously located/accessed on a different domain.
Domain migrations can be pleasantly straightforward if executed in isolation, but this is rarely the case. Changes to domains are often paired with (or the result of) other structural and functional changes.
If your migration project alters the URL(s) by which users are able to reach your website, contains any of the following changes, then you’re talking about a domain migration, and you need to consider how redirects, protocols (e.g., HTTP/S), hostnames (e.g., www/non-www), and branding are impacted.
Chances are that your website uses a number of HTML templates, which control the structure, layout, and peripheral content of your pages. The logic which controls how your content looks, feels, and behaves (as well as the behavior of hidden/meta elements like descriptions or canonical URLs) tends to live here.
If your migration project alters elements like your internal navigation (e.g., the header or footer), elements in your <head>, or otherwise changes the page structure around your content in the ways I’ve outlined, then you’re talking about a template migration. You’ll need to consider how users and search engines perceive and engage with your pages, how context, relevance, and authority flow through internal linking structures, and how well-structured your HTML (and JS/CSS) code is.
*Might involve domain, software, and/or hosting migrations, depending on implementation mechanics.
Your content is everything which attracts, engages with, and convinces users that you’re the best brand to answer their questions and meet their needs. That includes the words you use to describe your products and services, the things you talk about on your blog, and every image and video you produce or use.
If your migration project significantly changes the tone (including language, demographic targeting, etc), format, or quantity/quality of your content in the ways I’ve outlined, then you’re talking about a content migration. You’ll need to consider the needs of your market and audience, and how the words and media on your website answer to that — and how well it does so in comparison with your competitors.
*Might involve domain, software and/or hosting, and template migrations, depending on implementation mechanics.
**May overlap into a template migration if the layout and/or URL structure changes as a result.
The look and feel of your website doesn’t necessarily directly impact your performance (though user signals like engagement and trust certainly do). However, simple changes to design components can often have unintended knock-on effects and consequences.
If your migration project contains any of the following changes, you’re talking about a design migration, and you’ll need to clarify whether changes are purely cosmetic or whether they go deeper and impact other areas.
*All template migrations.
**Don’t forget to 301 redirect these, unless you’re replacing like-for-like filenames (which isn’t always best practice if you wish to invalidate local or remote caches).
A change in organizational or marketing strategy might not directly impact the website, but a widening gap between a brand’s audience, objectives, and platform can have a significant impact on performance.
If your market or audience (or your understanding of it) changes significantly, or if your mission, your reputation, or the way in which you describe your products/services/purpose changes, then you’re talking about a strategy migration. You’ll need to consider how you structure your website, how you target your audiences, how you write content, and how you campaign (all of which might trigger a set of new migration projects!).
Armed with better definitions, we can begin to force a more considered conversation around what a "migration" project actually involves. We can use a shared language and ensure that stakeholders understand the risks and opportunities of the changes they intend to make.
Unfortunately, however, we don’t always hear about proposed changes until they’ve already been decided and signed off.
People don’t know that they need to tell us that they’re changing domain, templates, hosting, etc. So it’s often too late when — or if — we finally get involved. Decisions have already been made before they trickle down into our awareness.
That’s still a problem.
By the time you’re aware of a project, it’s usually too late to impact it.
While our new-and-improved definitions are a great starting place to catch risks as you encounter them, avoiding those risks altogether requires us to develop a much better understanding of how, where, and when migrations are planned, managed, and start to go wrong.
I’ve identified four common scenarios which lead to organizations deciding to undergo a migration project.
If you can keep your ears to the ground and spot these types of events unfolding, you have an opportunity to give yourself permission to insert yourself into the conversation, and to interrogate to find out exactly which types of migrations might be looming.
It’s worth finding ways to get added to deployment lists and notifications, internal project management tools, and other systems so that you can look for early warning signs (without creating unnecessary overhead and comms processes).
When brands are bought, sold, or merged, this almost universally triggers changes to their websites. These requirements are often dictated from on-high, and there’s limited (or no) opportunity to impact the brief.
Migration strategies in these situations are rarely comfortable, and almost always defensive by nature (focusing on minimizing impact/cost rather than capitalizing upon opportunity).
Typically, these kinds of scenarios manifest in a small number of ways:
All sorts of pressures and opportunities lead to rebranding activity. Pressures to remain relevant, to reposition within marketplaces, or change how the brand represents itself can trigger migration requirements — though these activities are often led by brand and creative teams who don’t necessarily understand the implications.
Often, the outcome of branding processes and initiatives creates new a or alternate understanding of markets and consumers, and/or creates new guidelines/collateral/creative which must be reflected on the website(s). Typically, this can result in:
It’s not uncommon for senior stakeholders to decide that the strategy to save a struggling business, to grow into new markets, or to make their mark on an organization is to launch a brand-new, shiny website.
These kinds of decisions often involve a scorched-earth approach, tearing down the work of their predecessors or of previously under-performing strategies. And the more senior the decision-maker, the less likely they’ll understand the implications of their decisions.
In these kinds of scenarios, your best opportunity to avert disaster is to watch for warning signs and to make yourself heard before it’s too late. In particular, you can watch out for:
*Integrations of solutions like SalesForce, Marketo, and similar sometimes rely on utilizing proxied subdomains, embedded forms/content, and other mechanics which will need careful consideration as part of a template migration.
The current website is in such a poor, restrictive, or cost-ineffective condition that it makes it impossible to adopt new-and-required improvements (such as compliance with new standards, an integration of new martech stacks, changes following a brand purchase/merger, etc).
Generally, like the kinds of C-level “new website” initiatives I’ve outlined above, these result in scorched earth solutions.
Particularly frustrating, these are the kinds of migration projects which you yourself may well argue and fight for, for years on end, only to then find that they’ve been scoped (and maybe even begun or completed) without your input or awareness.
Here are some danger signs to watch out for which might mean that your migration project is imminent (or, at least, definitely required):
*Will likely trigger hosting or software migrations.
While this kind of labelling undoubtedly goes some way to helping us spot and better manage migrations, it’s far from a perfect or complete system.
In fact, I suspect it may be far too ambitious, and unrealistic in its aspiration. Accessing conversations early enough — and being listened to and empowered in those conversations — relies on the goodwill and openness of companies who aren’t always completely bought into or enamored with SEO.
This will only work in an organization which is open to this kind of thinking and internal challenging — and chances are, they’re not the kinds of organizations who are routinely breaking their websites. The very people who need our help and this kind of system are fundamentally unsuited to receive it.
I suspect, then, it might be impossible in many cases to make the kinds of changes required to shift behaviors and catch these problems earlier. In most organizations, at least.
Avoiding disasters resulting from ambiguous migration projects relies heavily on broad education. Everything else aside, people tend to change companies faster than you can build deep enough tribal knowledge.
That doesn’t mean that the structure isn’t still valuable, however. The types of changes and triggers I’ve outlined can still be used as alarm bells and direction for your own use.
If you can’t effectively educate stakeholders on the complexities and impact of them making changes to their website, there are more "lightweight" solutions.
At the very least, you can turn these kinds of items (and expand with your own, and in more detail) into simple lists which can be printed off, laminated, and stuck to a wall. At the very least, perhaps you'll remind somebody to pick up the phone to the SEO team when they recognize an issue.
In a more pragmatic world, stakeholders don’t necessarily have to understand the nuance or the detail if they at least understand that they’re meant to ask for help when they’re changing domain, for example, or adding new templates to their website.
Whilst this doesn’t solve the underlying problems, it does provide a mechanism through which the damage can be systematically avoided or limited. You can identify problems earlier and be part of the conversation.
If it’s still too late and things do go wrong, you'll have something you can point to and say “I told you so,” or, more constructively perhaps, “Here’s the resource you need to avoid this happening next time.”
And in your moment of self-righteous vindication, having successfully made it through this post and now armed to save your company from a botched migration project, you can migrate over to the bar. Good work, you.
This turned into a monster of a post, and its scope meant that it almost never made it to print. Thanks to a few folks in particular for helping me to shape, form, and ship it. In particular:
Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!
In episode 127 of the weekly Hump Day Hangouts by Semantic Mastery, one viewer asked if it’s okay to add a link to the money site using a keyword from the text in a curated post.
The exact question was:
If you “”curate'”” content on a web 2.0 from another source, can you add a link to your $ site using a keyword from the text in the curated post? As well as linking back to the source of course?
Posted by Tom.Capper
Back in September last year, I was lucky enough to see Rand speak at MozCon. His talk was about link building and the main types of strategy that he saw as still being relevant and effective today. During his introduction, he said something that really got me thinking, about how the whole purpose of links and PageRank had been to approximate traffic.
Essentially, back in the late '90s, links were a much bigger part of how we experienced the web — think of hubs like Excite, AOL, and Yahoo. Google’s big innovation was to realize that, because people navigated the web by clicking on links, they could approximate the relative popularity of pages by looking at those links.
So many links, such little time.
Rand pointed out that, given all the information at their disposal in the present day — as an Internet Service Provider, a search engine, a browser, an operating system, and so on — Google could now far more accurately model whether a link drives traffic, so you shouldn’t aim to build links that don’t drive traffic. This is a pretty big step forward from the link-building tactics of old, but it occurred to me that it it probably doesn’t go far enough.
If Google has enough data to figure out which links are genuinely driving traffic, why bother with links at all? The whole point was to figure out which sites and pages were popular, and they can now answer that question directly. (It’s worth noting that there’s a dichotomy between “popular” and “trustworthy” that I don’t want to get too stuck into, but which isn’t too big a deal here given that both can be inferred from either link-based data sources, or from non-link-based data sources — for example, SERP click-through rate might correlate well with “trustworthy,” while “search volume” might correlate well with “popular”).
However, there’s plenty of evidence out there suggesting that Google is in fact still making significant use of links as a ranking factor, so I decided to set out to challenge the data on both sides of that argument. The end result of that research is this post.
One reasonably authoritative source on matters relating to Google is Google themselves. Google has been fairly unequivocal, even in recent times, that links are still a big deal. For example:
Then, of course, there’s their continued focus on unnatural backlinks and so on — none of which would be necessary in a world where links are not a ranking factor.
However, I’d argue that this doesn’t indicate the end of our discussion before it’s even begun. Firstly, Google has a great track record of giving out dodgy SEO advice. Consider HTTPS migrations pre-2016. Will Critchlow talked at SearchLove San Diego about how Google’s algorithms are at a level of complexity and opaqueness where they’re no longer even trying to understand them themselves — and of course there are numerous stories of unintentional behaviors from machine learning algorithms out in the wild.
It’s not difficult to put together your own data and show a correlation between link-based metrics and rankings. Take, for example:
However, these studies fall into significant issues with correlation vs. causation.
There are three main mechanisms which could explain the relationships that they show:
I’ve yet to see any correlation study that addresses these very serious shortcomings, or even particularly acknowledges them. Indeed, I’m not sure that it would even be possible to do so given the available data, but this does show that as an industry we need to apply some critical thinking to the advice that we’re consuming.
However, earlier this year I did write up some research of my own here on the Moz Blog, demonstrating that brand awareness could in fact be a more useful factor than links for predicting rankings.
The problem with this study was that it showed a relationship that was concrete (i.e. extremely statistically significant), but that was surprisingly lacking in explanatory power. Indeed, I discussed in that post how I’d ended up with a correlation that was far lower than Moz’s for Domain Authority.
Fortunately, Malcolm Slade recently discussed some of his very similar research at BrightonSEO, in which he finds similar broad correlations to myself between brand factors and rankings, but far, far stronger correlations for certain types of query, and especially big, high-volume, highly competitive head terms.
So what can we conclude overall from these third-party studies? Two main things:
At the end of the day, we’re interested in whether links are a ranking factor because we’re interested in whether we should be trying to use them to improve the rankings of our sites, or our clients’ sites.
The first example I want to look at here is this graph, showing UK rankings for the keyword “flowers” from May to December last year:
The fact is that our traditional understanding of ranking changes — which breaks down into links, on-site, and algorithm changes — cannot explain this degree of rapid fluctuation. If you don’t believe me, the above data is available publicly through platforms like SEMRush and Searchmetrics, so try to dig into it yourself and see if there’s any external explanation.
This level and frequency of fluctuation is increasingly common for hotly contested terms, and it shows a tendency by Google to continuously iterate and optimize — just as marketers do when they’re optimizing a paid search advert, or a landing page, or an email campaign.
What is Google optimizing for?
The above slide is from Larry Kim’s presentation at SearchLove San Diego, and it shows how the highest SERP positions are gaining click-through rate over time, despite all the changes in Google Search (such as increased non-organic results) that ought to drive the opposite.
Larry’s suggestion is that this is a symptom of Google’s procedural optimization — not of the algorithm, but by the algorithm and of results. This certainly fits in with everything we’ve seen.
However, at the other end of the scale, we get examples like this:
The above graph (courtesy of STAT) shows rankings for the commercial keywords for Fleximize.com during a Distilled creative campaign. This is a particularly interesting example for two reasons:
It seems that links did eventually move the needle here, and massively so, but the mechanisms at work are highly opaque.
The above two examples — “Flowers” and Fleximize — are just two real-world examples of ranking changes. I’ve picked one that seems obviously link-driven but a little strange, and one that shows how volatile things are for more competitive terms. I’m sure there are countless massive folders out there full of case studies that show links moving rankings — but the point is that it can happen, yet it isn’t always as simple as it seems.
A lot of the evidence I’ve gone through above is contradictory. Links are correlated with rankings, and Google says they’re important, and sometimes they clearly move the needle, but on the other hand brand awareness seems to explain away most of their statistical usefulness, and Google’s operating with more subtle methods in the data-rich top end.
My favored explanation right now to explain how this fit together is this:
This is very much a work in progress, however, and I’d love to see other people’s thoughts, and especially their fresh research. Let me know what you think in the comments below.
Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!
Click on the video above to watch Episode 128 of the Semantic Mastery Hump Day Hangouts.
Full timestamps with topics and times can be found at the link above.
The latest upcoming free SEO Q&A Hump Day Hangout can be found at http://ift.tt/1NZu6N2.
Bradley: We’re live. We’re back on Hangouts, guys, because webinar wouldn’t even start for us today, anyway. Hey everybody, Bradley Benner, here. Semantic Mastery, this is the Hump Day Hangouts episode 128, today is March 19th 2017, and we’ve got Chris, Hernan and Marco on with us. Adam is off running in the woods, again.
Hernan: Yeah. No. I think he was moving.
Bradley: He was moving? Is that what we’re calling it today?
Hernan: Yeah. Let’s call it like that.
Bradley: That’s cool. Chris, what’s up man?
Chris: Doing good. Right from a snowstorm here in Vienna.
Bradley: Guys, hold on, I guess Marco and Hernan you guys can chat for a minute.
Chris: Sure.
Marco: Yeah.
Bradley: Marco?
Marco: I’m good, man. We got really bad electrical storms, my electricity keeps coming in and out. If I drop off the Google police didn’t get me, the lightening storm got me. Sorry about that.
Chris: It’s cool.
Hernan: We started to think this is some kind of conspiracy, since we launched Battle Plan.
Hernan: Yeah.
Chris: We make things too easily available out there, that’s the thing.
Bradley: All right. Hopefully everybody refreshed the page, because on the event page, because you have to refresh the page for the new video to show up.
Marco: Okay. You both said it already.
Bradley: Let me see.
Hernan: Yeah.
Bradley: Yeah. Okay. All right, guys. Let’s get into it. I guess, we got probably a couple of announcements. We can stay to the actual five o'clock mark today, because we got started a few minutes early, or late guys. Anyways, let’s get into announcements. Hernan, what do we got?
Hernan: Yeah. Real quick. One of the things if you haven’t already, we strongly suggest that you get a copy of the Semantic Mastery, the SEO Domination Battle Plan. That will launch on Monday. Right now, the prices are real for the value that you’re getting and basically the coupon ends, I think it’s going to end in two hours, if I’m not mistaken. Then it’s going to double, more than double the price.
Bradley: Yeah.
Hernan: Go ahead get it. I’m going to put the link on the event page, but it’s basically battleplan.semanticmastery.com. Go ahead download it, we tried to make a really concise, simple guide, step by step document that you can come back over, and over, and over again, depending if you have each sites, new sites, YouTube videos, local websites, it’s everything in there. The way we do it. The way we implement it. That’s the main idea with Battle Plan. If you’re looking for something simple, go ahead and get it. If you’re looking for something more complex, or if you want more support, et cetera, come join the Mastermind, but that’s basically the main idea of the Battle Plan.
Bradley: There’s a couple of things that I want to mention about that. Is number one we had some people say your process cannot be simple. Well, actually it is.
Marco: It is.
Bradley: You know, that’s really what we do, guys, and that’s why I continually say on these Hump Day Hangouts that I like easy. Don’t over complicate shit, guys. If you want to make it complicated, then just stand on your head while you’re doing it. I don’t know. All I’m saying is those are the exact same services that we use, the same procedures, the process in order, in the steps that we do it in. It’s not difficult. I mean, we’ve got the infrastructure behind us, which is provided, it’s available for you guys, as well to use the same services that we use. I mean, again, some people said, well, it cannot be that simple, it’s just because I think by nature we as SEO’s and marketers typically want to over complicate shit, so that’s part of it and the other thing is, and just very quickly, let me grab the screen, I want to show you something here. You guys are seeing my screen, correct?
Chris: Yeah.
Bradley: This is the bonus site, guys. I think there’s more value in the freaking bonus site then there is in the actual PDF, so I just wanted to point this out real quick. This is something that wasn’t even mentioned on the sales page, but you get access to this bonus site that has a ton of different bonus stuff in here, and the bonus webinar section alone there’s multiple webinars, here, including on of our webinars that Marco just did, recently on iframe and java script secrets that’s a pay per view webinar of a $147.00 and that’s been included, as well. We’ve got a ton of different, you know, there’s case studies in here for Live Rank Sniper, for Rocket Video Ranker Pro, the v-mail prospecting course, which is the basic course I’m probably going to be doing a full blown course for that in the next couple months. Again, I just wanted to point out for a $20.00 PDF, there’s absolutely no reason why you guys shouldn’t pick it up for the simplicity of it, number one. Number two, because you get access to a bunch of amazing bonuses. Okay.
Marco: The bonuses are, that’s the reason why it’s going to $100.00 when it’s all said and done.
Bradley: Mm-hmm (affirmative).
Marco: Because it’s worth way more than a 100 bucks, but I mean-
Bradley: Damn right it is.
Marco: We wanted to keep it accessible to all of our members and followers, so they could actually have a plan that they could follow to achieve their success. If you want to complicate things, I mean that’s fine as Bradley said, but it doesn’t really need to be. All you have to do is just follow the step by step process. If you want to do more, then you’re more than welcome to join Syndication Academy, you’re more than welcome to come into the Mastermind and ask us as many complex questions as you want, and we’ll answer them. You have full access to us, there. If not, just follow the training step by step. That’s all you have to do. Seriously.
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: That’s it.
Bradley: I love it when somebody analysis the plan and says, oh, no, it cannot be that simple, this must not work.
Hernan: [crosstalk 00:06:05].
Hernan: Another thing that’s worth mentioning is that the bonus side that you get for free will be updated. We have a bunch of case studies that are going to be uploaded to the bonus site, so go ahead order it now, because again it’s going to 100 bucks, soon. Now, you can get it for $20.00, it’s crazy.
Bradley: Yeah.
Chris: What’s the coupon code, again?
Bradley: Missile launch.
Hernan: Yeah. It’s missile launch. Thank you, Chris. It’s missile launch, one word and it’s on the event page, again, battleplan.semantricmastery.com. That coupon is going to be available for the next two hours and then it’s going to more than double the price.
Bradley: Okay. Cool. All right. Do we have any other announcements, because if not, let’s get into it.
Marco: Let’s do it.
Bradley: All right. Cool. We’re we going to talk, we’re not talking about the next webinar, are we, yet? Marco?
Marco: No. You can just tell them what it’s going to be about.
Bradley: All right. We’re going to do another webinar in the series, Marco’s series that we’ve done three, now, and we’re about to do a fourth, which is going to be a structured data webinar, guys. We scheduled it, but I don’t know the date off hand.
Marco: It will be around April 8th.
Bradley: May. A Monday-
Marco: May.
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: Sorry.
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: May 8th.
Bradley: Monday. Excuse me Monday, May 8th. You’re right. I’m sorry.
Marco: Usual time. It will be then, if it changes we have plenty of time to let people know.
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: I’m working on that.
Bradley: You guys will get notifications via email and stuff for registration, so I just wanted to let you guys know that, that’s coming, as well. Okay. All right. Cool. I’m going to grab the screen and we’re going to get into questions. It feels weird to be back in Hangouts, man. It feels kind of like home.
Hernan: Yeah.
Chris: It’s actually working.
Bradley: It’s working, too.
Chris: Right.
Bradley: Unlike WebinarJam, for some reason. All right. Ala, I’m sorry if I’m mispronouncing your name, forgive me, he says, “Hi, everyone. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to be part of the Hangout, I’m quite new to SEO and I have a question, which might sound very basic. My question is, can I use a private home address for local lead gen?” I believe we answered this question last week or the week before, but it seems like I remember this question. Yes. Of course, you can use your private home address for lead gen. Well, I don’t recommend doing it for fake businesses, or [inaudible 00:08:29] business. What I mean by, guys, obviously, I set up generic businesses, right, generic lead gen funnels, landing pages, whatever you want to call them. Assets. But, I don’t register all of them with my home address, and I wouldn’t recommend that you do that either.
Go get a PO Box. If you’re in the United States, go get a PO Box. I know some people say that’s not working, or isn’t going to work anymore. I covered this in a Facebook live post, recently, but I’m still able to get them to work. What happens is where the problem occurs is if you try to register multiple businesses, so Google My Business pages underneath the same account using multiple PO Boxes. I’ve had that happen to me a couple times in the last few months where I’ve, in the last six months, where I’ve had, I’ve tried to register two different PO Boxes within the same Google My Business owner account, profile, essentially, and I’ve gotten it flagged and I had to reverify.
In one case, I just abandoned it all together, and re-registered a new business under another profile, because it there was no way for me to verify it. I basically lost that one, but it’s not a big deal, it happens, guys. The way the work arounds so far to this point has been just to register one Google My Business profile per, or excuse me, My Business Account per profile, so that you essentially have a different account owner for each one. That’s the way I’ve been able to get around it, again, they may crack down on that at some point in the very near future, maybe so, but until then I’m going to continue exploiting it. That’s what I recommend you do.
You can also hire, rent virtual mailboxes from other places other than the PO box, but those are the cheapest and so far they are still working for me. Okay? Again, I do not recommend that you register a bunch of businesses to your home address, I mean, you can, but I wouldn’t do it. All right? The other thing is you don’t want to share the same address for multiple businesses. Guys, that’s part of the reason I like to use PO boxes, because they’re cheap enough, where even if I’ve got 10 businesses in the same, like I got 10 different lead gen funnels, let’s say 10 different industries and it’s in the same damn city, I can have 10 different PO boxes, because the deal is the address is going to be street address of the PO office and then you’re going to get a box number.
People have asked me before, do you continue to rent the PO box after you’ve received the PO box, or excuse me, the verification card? Yes. I do. I pay for everyone of those. I’ve got PO boxes that I’ve been paying for, for years, guys, I renew them every year, it’s only happened to me twice in my entire digital marketing career that I’ve had to reverify via postcard, a business listing, it’s only happened twice in six or seven years, now.
However, when it happens, if it happens I have the ability to retrieve the postcard, because I renew the boxes every year and it’s a nominal fee, guys. In the less populated areas I can get a PO box for a year for about 60 bucks, or $64.00 something like that. So, $64.00 per year, roughly. Okay? For the more populated areas it cost me $128.00 a year. It’s so inexpensive, it’s such a small cost of doing business that I just pay for it. Okay?
Okay. Anyways. “Can I use the very same address for multiple, different businesses in the same area, or city. Note, I live in Denmark. Thank you for your help.” I guess I should answer that, I don’t know about Denmark, I cannot speak for anything in any foreign country, guys. All I can talk about specifically for local is within the United State, but I’m quite sure that if I can get away with doing what I’m doing in the US you could probably get away with it in Denmark. You probably would get away with a hell of a lot more in Denmark, I’m sure. In which case you might, you could possibly use one address and then just put that unique identifier like dash A, dash B, dash C, you could probably get away with that in Denmark, again, I don’t know. I don’t have any experience in that market, but in the US it’s a little bit stricter, typically, and that’s why I just use unique address for each location, like in other words a unique, it gets a unique box number, which makes it unique. Okay? All right. Cool.
Toby [inaudible 00:13:18], he says, “Can you do a Hump Day Hangouts with your students who are killing it Rank to Rant, or Amazon, Shopify, PayPerCall et cetera, or PayPerCall, et cetera?” I asked him this question yesterday, I guess, because I was trying to clarify, he said, yeah, by the way if you’re watching Toby, what’s up, he says, yes. “Should we bring on guest presenters?” We do that in the Mastermind, Toby. We bring guest presenters on in the Mastermind. We had Clint Butler on two weeks ago, which was awesome, because he did training on PageSpeed, which was awesome, because some of our Mastermind members implemented what he trained for that session and were able to reduce the page load times to under a second. I think it was like three quarters of a second, which was awesome.
Marco: Yeah. Then, we’d also have to be careful about giving away the niche, or any of that information, because actually I had someone do that in the RYS Facebook group and when he posted the URL, directly after that, a couple of days later, he got hit with a ton of spam, so we know that it was someone from our own RYS Academy that went and did that. I don’t know why they would do that to someone who is trying to help and show how he’s doing it, but it’s one of the reasons why we try to protect it, and keep it inside the Mastermind where we know most of the people are trustworthy.
Bradley: Yeah. I totally agree. That’s why that’s in part why we do stuff like that on the Mastermind, guys, because it’s a very, very tight group, like an intimate group, so it makes it a lot easier. It doesn’t mean that there’s not people there that can be malicious, as well, because there certainly can be, but it’s less likely.
Okay. Doctor Brain McKay, he says, “When building links is it better to use one, and only one variation? For example, dub, dub, dub, or just HTTP, or just a domain.com. I have heard varying advice where you would use all and someone else saying use one every time you build a link.” You know, honestly, I’ve used variations, if I were to be using spam tools, which I don’t anymore, at all. I don’t ever run them, myself, but I would always use variations.
Here’s a good example, Brian, in the recent weeks I’ve done several case studies for different YouTube tools, they’re all in the bonus site that I just showcased a minute ago. One of them being Live Rank Sniper and the other one being Rocket Video Ranker Pro, and there has been some spinning and all that for the video descriptions and that kind of stuff, which is pretty typical for any sort of spam work, and those are in my opinion they’re both spam tools, they can be used to not spam, but the way that I used them was very intentionally to spam, and because of that I just started doing a lot of spinning and stuff like that again in the last few weeks, which I had gotten away from for a while.
When I create the links that go in the video description to where I want to direct people to, I like to use all the different variations as you just laid out here. HTTP, if there’s HTTPS as well, if the SSL protocol is available then I’ll go ahead and add that one in, as well. I’ll use the trailing slash with and without the trailing slash, I’ll use dub, dub, dub and non dub, dub, so I use all variation of them so that it adds variety and diversity to the video description. In other words, if we’ve got 15 videos in the same channel, I want the URL, the call to action URL to be a variation all the time, if possible. Just because it gives more diversity to the thing. Now, as far as the SEO purposes, since they all resolve to the same location, I don’t think it makes much difference, but I’d like to hear Marco and Hernan’s input on this, please.
Marco: It’s just acrotex variation, that’s why you do that. The destinations is usually all the same, but also you want to keep that, you might, people don’t all link the same way. They-
Bradley: That’s right.
Marco: If you go throughout the web, like you get 100 people they’re all going to link to a website a different way. Some will use a dub, dub, dub. I particularly don’t anymore, because I know it will resolve to the dub, dub, dub anyway.
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: I use them all simply because that’s what people do on the web. It makes absolutely no sense, and whoever is advising only one variation is actually misguided.
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: Because that’s not the way that people type.
Marco: And, the URL should be whatever shows-
Bradley: Shows in Google My Business.
Marco: Yeah. To link to the website, where they say website, and you click on it, that’s the version that you should use in that one particular case.
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: Yeah.
Hernan: Yeah. This case, I totally agree with Marco. That’s why we keep saying that you need to validate the entity on one of the main, you know, when your website is popular, or you’re trying it to appear to be popular, you need to emulate as much as possible human behavior that’s why you need to do things differently from time to time. I mean, different URLs people will mention your website differently, maybe they will spell it wrong. As long as the link is the link, you know, we had, I think we had Gary, Doctor Gary, came to a Mastermind and he showed how you can get links from really powerful websites just because they’re misspelled. You know?
Bradley: Yeah.
Hernan: As long as the URL is pointing correctly to your website, the anchor text could be misspelled, you know, it can be Semantic Mastery or something else, or Semantic Master as long as the hyperlink is pointing to semanticmastery.com. You know? Yeah. Vary it a little bit, that would be my intake on it.
Bradley: Very good. Okay. Ala, is up again, he says, “Hi. When the first three to four sites on the Google organic search are not the same ones as in Google three pack,” so the maps pack, “does that mean that it’s easy to rank in the three pack map, or the first page of the organic search for that specific niche? Thanks for the help.” It doesn’t meant that it’s going to be easy to rank in the map, it’s just means that the maps listings aren’t, the ones that are ranked in maps they’re on page for their sit isn’t as good, is not good enough to be on the first page.
In other words, and it doesn’t have to be just be the on page, it could be the combination of on page, or on page and off page, but typically the organic results, it’s a different algorithm. There’s a lot of overlap between the local algorithm and the organic algorithm, now, it’s a lot more closely related now than it used to be. That was particularly where a lot of that marriage occurred was the Pigeon update, if you guys remember that. That was, shit, that was probably two years ago, now. Amazing how time flies. There is some overlap there, but for example Ala, I don’t ever, I don’t care at all about organic rankings anymore for lead gen, or for local stuff, when I have a physical location available, even if that means I have to black half the physical location using a PO box. Right?
I don’t care about organic anymore at all for lead gen and local stuff, only because I know from all my lead gen assets is that my call volume drops for stuff that was organic only. My call volume dropped 60%, because of the new SERP layout. Right? When I say new, it’s not new anymore, but the SERP layout as it stands today, which is four ads, typically four ads and a maps pack, so you end up going past seven freaking listings before you ever get to the first organic. I can tell you right now, the reason why I’m telling you this is because I have multiple lead gen sites all over the place that are ranked in maps, but they might be on page two or page three in organic. I don’t care.
It doesn’t bother me, because the phone calls are coming from the maps pack, or from AdsWords, excuse me AdWords. I’m either getting calls from my ads, or I’m getting calls from the maps pack. I don’t get calls from organic, very, very rarely do I get calls from organic when a map is displayed for a search query. Right? Most search queries are going to display. Now, I will still target organic for lead gen and local, like if I’m doing video campaigns, for example, because you cannot get a video, well, I say you cannot, it’s unlikely to get a video above the maps pack, anymore, for a local term. Okay?
I still will do spamming with YouTube and stuff like that for organic rankings, but when it comes to websites, and stuff, I personally don’t care if there’s a maps pack that shows for the search query, then I’m going to try to rank in the maps pack, not the organic. Okay? Typically, when there’s a difference between what’s showing in maps, and what’s showing in organic it’s because the site that’s ranking in maps, but not in organic is speaking, or it’s more congruent with what the map’s algorithm was.
If that makes sense. But maybe not as much for the organic. Like I said, it could be a, I found that’s often times more an on page issue, than an off page issue, but it could be both. I’m just saying personally when I’ve been able to identify issues where I’m not ranking as good organically as I should be based upon my maps ranking, it’s a lot of the times, at least in my experiences it’s been because of on page issues, either over optimization, which triggers Panda, again, it’s just Panda in general. Thin content, over optimization, things like that. You guys got any input on that?
Bradley: Mm-hmm (affirmative).
Marco: Right? I’m thinking he wants, the way that you do that is entity. You do the entity. You validate it, then you push trust, and authority, and relevance up to the entity, it’s called RYS Academy, by the way. That’s how you force all of that up to the entity and over to the destination and you could actually do both. Rank in maps and organic.
Bradley: Yeah. That’s what I would do. All right. Cool. We’re going to keep moving. Let’s see who is next Balint, sorry if I mispronounce that, he says, “Thanks for last weeks input I was rather asking about how to make both RSS and YouTube syndication to work for the same network. My idea, I upload a video, unlisted to YouTube, I have it transcribed to make a post to my main site with the additional content, the video is embedded and the title is different. That post with transcription gets syndicated via RSS trigger. I make the video public a bit later on, because it’s public now the sole video gets syndicated via YouTube upload trigger, too. Maybe not to the main blog, though. Would that work, or still count as duplicate spam?” No. That would work, Balint. That’s absolutely fine.
I’ve said that in previous Hump Day Hangouts, that question has come up several times, Balint, so you’re not the first to ask it. It’s okay to post both the video to your channel and to your blog, and have them both syndicate to the same network, that’s absolutely fine. Where the problem occurs is when people have both their YouTube channel triggering their network and their blog, and they upload the video, which syndicates to their network, and then they just take the video and go embed it in a post on their blog with the same title, and usually not much different in the video description, either, and then they post that, because here’s the problem it won’t hurt your money site, your blog, and it won’t hurt your YouTube channel.
Where it can cause problems is on the network itself, the syndication network, because now you’ve got two posts that look nearly identical to your network properties, because it’s the same title, which ends up being the same title, and then you have the same video, so especially for Blogger, Tumblr, and WordPress where there’s embeds, because that’s basically, it’s going to look like the same post, basically, other than perhaps maybe some slight differences in text in the description area. But, if you’re going to change the title and usually make the title more like blog specific, right, because usually blog post, guys, are going to have more, you know, longer conversational, natural speech pattern type titles than a YouTube video, because YouTube videos are going to usually be synced keyword different type titles. Right, guys?
But, blog titles are generally going to be more like natural speech patterns. Right? So, if you’re going to take your video and also post it to your blog and have both syndicating to the same network, then it’s absolutely fine to do so if you’re going to make a different title, and if you’re going to have that video transcribed, you’re going to have a much longer description, so it’s not going to look like duplicate content on the web two properties. If that makes sense. That’s absolutely perfectly fine, Balint. I’m sorry if I misunderstood your question last week.
Roy says, “Got the Battle Plan reviewed it, question, just got a dental client and had to rebrand his practice, dissolved partnership,” okay, “So, the main practice name has changed to a new name, he then purchased another practice in a different city, I rebranded his practice website as ABC Dental Group with the two city locations. Do I just create one Google Plus page for the group.com, or different for each location?” No. You create a different Google page for each location, Roy. Well, I mean, let me rephrase that. If you’re creating a Google brand page, then you can have one brand page and reference both locations, but I understand that if you’re talking about, I’m sure you’re talking about Google My Business, a locations page. In which case you want a different page for each location. Okay?
There are brand pages and there are locations pages, and actually locations pages are no longer Google Plus pages at all, they’re maps pages. They’re not even part of Google Plus, anymore. Does that make sense? If you go in your Google My Business dashboard you access your maps data through maps, and your Google Plus page, which is now just a brand page, there is no local version of the brand page anymore that I’m aware of, anyways, because you edit your details on maps. Okay? Anyways, there might still be a locations Google Plus page, but I don’t know what the use of it is for, I don’t how it’s valuable at all anymore, to be honest with you, everything is now being, for the local part of it, it’s all being handled through maps. Okay? So, for that, yeah, go ahead and create a different locations page for each.
“Do I need to modify the Battle Plan for the purchase practice since it already has G-Plus established? I’m a bit confused on how to apply the Battle Plan to the situation.” I’m not sure I understand what you mean, the purchase practice since it already has a G-Plus established, I mean, if it’s already got a locations page, you’re going to have to rebrand all that stuff. Right? I mean, I think that’s what you’re saying, you said, he rebranded his practice with the two locations, Roy, I’m not really following all of the parts of this question, but if you the other business that he purchased had a Google My Business page, already, and now he purchased it, if he’s rebranding everything, what I would recommend, especially if that other business was established and had any sort of decent rankings in Google and/or maps. Right? If it was ranking.
You’re going to have to rebrand it, if it’s rebranded, I’m assuming it’s going to have to be rebranded, in which case what you’d want to do is don’t, I wouldn’t set up a new listing, because it’s going to have the same address unless the phone number changed, the name and the phone number, and the website, like if all of those data points change, then yes I would set up a new business. I would close, say that the other business was permanently closed then create a new listing, but you’d have to make sure that the only thing that was the same out of all the data points between name, address, phone number, and URL is the address. Right?
I recommend, highly, that you go, if you guys can get the link ready, it’s http://ift.tt/2bbLT53, that’s L-O-G-A-N-I-X. That is a citation clean up service there that can handle that for you, well, provided that it’s in the US, they may do it in other areas, but I don’t know. Loganix citation cleanup service in the US is really, really good. You get about a 70% success rate, and they’re very, very thorough. That’s what I would recommend doing. Like I said, if you’re going to rebrand it and you get a new URL, and you’re going to change the phone number then I would set up a new listing all together, because that’s going to be a lot less of a headache than trying to fix old citations, that’s just a real pain in the ass, and that’s why I just outsource that all the time. All right. We’re going to keep moving.
Hernan: Sorry, Bradley, but it’s on the events page, http://ift.tt/2bbLT53.
Bradley: Okay. If you want to followup, Roy, with us in one of our groups Facebook or something with some more detail, like where it can be explained a little bit further we might be able to help you out a little bit better. I feel like I wasn’t able to answer that question, properly, because I don’t have all the details. Mark’s next, he says, “Hi, guys. Hope all is well. My question is about your Local Kingpin product, I’m starting to get somewhere now with SEO, but it does take forever, and that’s okay, I accept that’s how SEO goes and just get on with it, but I like the idea of starting with AdWords and then adding SEO lead gen later. I’m not asking for AdWords advice that’s what the training is for, and I’ve bought your products before, so I know it will be legit. My question is how did, or how is it going? Are you able to generate enough quality leads for your client? I work with contractors, if that helps, not looking for specific advice, just your opinion on how well AdWords works.” I’m crossinated with AdWords, guys, I mean, yeah, my profit is a lot smaller on my AdWords leads because I pay for the clicks and everything, but they’re so much easier to set up, and I can, I mean, that’s what Local Kingpin is about, Mark, is about setting up like literally you can set up a lead gen funnel and have traffic, and be receiving leads within 48 hours.
I mean, you could do it within a day, but I say within 48 hours because it usually takes me two days to set up a lead gen asset. Well, it used to take me two days, when I was new, but now I’ve got a lot of stuff, templatized, like I’ve got Click Funnels, funnels that are already all set up. They’re generic funnels. I can just clone the funnel and then go in and swap out details, and I’ve got working procedure’s setup for a lot of stuff, now, so I have check lists that I can go through. That kind of stuff that makes it just really simple for me to set up a funnel, a lead gen asset, and turn on ads, and it’s like literally within a few hours of you submitting your first ad you can start generating traffic.
The main thing, Mark, if you go through Local Kingpin, which I highly recommend, especially for contractors, because that’s my market, is contractors. I mean, I love being able to generate leads with AdWords, now. I don’t know why I was so scared of AdWords for so long, but now I absolutely love it, because the speed in which I can generate, and here’s the thing, what I love about setting up AdWords funnels, guys, is I can determine right off the bat, right away, where my money keywords are. The 80/20 rule 100% applies to AdWords, and there’s a book by Perry Marshall called, The 80/20 Sales and Marketing. Go get the damn book. By it on Kindle, whatever. Pick it up, read it, because it is absolutely 100% correct when it comes to AdWords, especially for the local lead gen funnels. 80% of your traffic is going to come from 20% of your keywords. That’s it. All this shit that we do in SEO, where we scrap hundreds of keywords, and we build silos, and we have to do all this content, and we have to properly silo the content, we got to do all this internal linking, all that’s great it can pay off there’s no doubt, but so many of those keywords, or long tail and stuff like that where you’re going to get very little to no traffic from them.
Now, cumulatively they all build to make your site stronger and more relevant, which will generate more traffic, so there’s certainly a reason to do all that, but my point is we go through harvesting these great big keyword lists and all that stuff, and with AdWords, especially the way that I show how to do it using alpha beta campaign structure you can literally go in, do your keyword research in about a half an hour.
The main point for that is generating, or building a negative keyword list, because you ought to already know what your main money keywords are for the project that you’re working on. Really the keyword research is about building a negative keyword list, but then you plug in your money keywords, you add your negative keyword lists, use modified broad match, and then you let AdWords tell you where your money keywords are, and within a month you can identify your top keywords where 80% of your traffic is going to come from, and I guarantee you it will be 20% of your keywords.
Then, those are the keywords that you focus your SEO efforts on. As I mentioned, I think in the Local Kingpin training, I’m not starting any SEO projects from scratch anymore. I’m not starting new projects with SEO as my main promotional type, anymore. I’m not doing it, unless it’s YouTube spam, because I’m just not going to do it. From now on, I’m doing AdWords first to prove my keywords and prove that it’s converting and that kind of stuff, and then I’ll invest my time and effort into SEO for the keywords that I’ve identified as my winners.
Hernan: Yeah.
Bradley: Does that make sense?
Hernan: Yeah. I really like that approach, Bradley. The fact that you’re getting speed, that you’re getting, I mean, each rating on a project and you’re failing fast.
Bradley: Yeah.
Hernan: You’re finding out, you’re weeding out the keywords that are not going to work, that they’re not going to convert, and then you’re focusing on the keywords that are, and I think that’s really the key when it comes to paid advertising, is that you get data so much faster that your business can grow a lot more, because if you have to be waiting six months to get data on your business, it’s money, time is money.
Hernan: If you’re doing SEO and waiting all of that time, then you’re spending all of that money that you could be earning, because you’re failing fast on your project. Once you have that, once you have the process in place you can still do SEO and you know that it’s going to pickup three to six months down the road, maybe a year down the road and you still do SEO, so that when that hits, or when you’re getting a decent amount of organic traffic, you know that the funnel is converting.
Bradley: Yeah.
Hernan: There’s basically no top to how much you can scale, it all depends on the market that you’re in. The market will tell you how much you can scale, or sell a product, or sell a service, whatever that is, but that’s basically why I like paid advertising combined with SEO, because again you don’t want to put all of your eggs in one basket.
Bradley: That’s correct.
Hernan: Like, one way or the other.
Bradley: Yeah. Here’s the thing, guys, think about this, you could spend months working on a project, and find out for SEO I mean, you could spend months working on trying to build the SEO for a project, set of keywords, whatever, and find out that it’s just not profitable. It’s not working. Now, you’ve spent months of effort and time on it, and probably money, as well. With AdWords you can prove it very, very quickly, whether it’s going to be profitable or not. If you can make it profitable when you’re paying for the clicks, then it will be profitable for SEO, there’s no doubt, because you won’t be paying, I mean, you do pay for those clicks with time and effort, and somewhat money, too. You know what I mean? It’s indirect. You’re paying indirectly, not directly for clicks.
Again, that’s number one. Number two, the other part of that, Mark, is why I love AdWords for local lead gen now is because if you do register a mailbox and it can be a PO box, it doesn’t even have to be verified, guys. You can register local addresses and set up AdWords campaigns and use the location’s extension. Are you hearing this? You don’t even have to have a verified address and it will still show the location’s extension in your ad and it will also, if you’ve got your ads set up properly and you’re at the top of the search, or the top of the ads pack, which as to do with quality score, you’ll end up in the maps, an ad in the first maps position. Not necessarily in the three pack.
On mobile devices, if you have call only ads set up you can show up in the three pack on mobile devices, but on desktop, I haven’t seen, I haven’t been able to get any of my ads to show up in the three pack on desktop, but I have been able to get almost virtually all of my ads to show up in the first position in maps, so when somebody clicks on the more results, it will show my ad at the very top of the results when that page expands. If that makes sense.
That’s the thing, and again with location extensions you don’t even need to verify the address. I know that, because one of the lead gen funnels I set up for Local Kingpin, Google was not sending me the verification postcard, so I went ahead and said, screw it, I’m going to continue with the project and I went ahead and added the location’s extension and you have to link it to your Google My Business profile, and then select whatever page, and I linked that page to it and I thought well, let’s just check it and see if it works, and damn if it didn’t show my maps extension in the ad, even though it was an unverified address, which is awesome. Right? I just wanted to give you guys that little nugget. Local Kingpin, guys, is a great, great course if you’re doing lead gen and you’re not using AdWords, you’re crazy, in my opinion. Okay.
All right. Herovic, he says, “Hi. I have a question regarding the Battle Plan, how is it different than the IFTTT Academy, RYS, or the Mastermind? Does it add something new, or is it a blueprint that incorporates all of them? Thank you.” Well, a $20.00 PDF certainly cannot incorporate IFTTT, RYS, and the Mastermind. It would be nice if it could, but it would be an awfully big PDF if we did.
Hernan: Yeah. [inaudible 00:41:58] depth of Semantic Mastery and the three years-
Bradley: Yeah.
Hernan: In Mastermind. I know all of the nuggets that are RYS, it’s going to be longest.
Bradley: Yeah. That would be very, Herovic, the Battle Plan is basically, the process is that we use for working on any digital assets, whether they’re established or they’re just being launched. It’s the same, it’s just the series of steps that we take for setting up the networks, and link building, and citations, and press releases, and like all of the different steps in the order that we do them. It’s the same process that we’ve used for years, now.
All we did was put it in a simple format, including links to the products and services that we use for that kind of stuff, which most of them are our own services, anyways, because we developed all of those services specifically because we use them. We only made our services available to others, because we kept getting asked for it. We had developed our services, for us, originally. Okay. That’s all it is. It’s very, very simple. It doesn’t need to be complicated. Some people wished it was more complicated, and that’s why I said, you know, I don’t know, stand on your head while you perform the tasks. I don’t know.
Bradley: Please, do.
Marco: Yeah. Our Battle Plan is a blueprint. A blueprint is used to build a house.
Bradley: Right.
Marco: The blueprint does not build the house for you, you have to follow the blueprint and go and build a house, using whatever tools are necessary for the construction of whatever it is that you want to make of that house according to the blueprint that you’re using. I mean, I cannot put it any clearer, or plainer than that. Get a blueprint on what you’re supposed to do and how you’re supposed to do it, not why you’re supposed to do it, and definitely it’s not going to get done for you. I hope that clarifies-
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: Everything.
Bradley: Again, it’s very simple Herovic, it’s the process that we use, and I like simple, that’s why we made it simple, because it doesn’t need to be overcomplicated. If you want to learn more about Syndication Academy, and syndication networks, you’re certainly welcome to join, RYS, as well, Mastermind is our top level coaching group, and that you’re certainly welcome to join that, as well.
Next question, “How does the Rocket Video Ranker differ from Live Rank Sniper? Can we emulate its functionality and do it manually? What’s the principle behind it?” Yeah. They’re two different things. Live Rank Sniper, is really a keyword poking tool, and Peter Drew, the developer even calls it that, so it’s not like that’s a secret. It’s mainly a poking tool. You can use it to identify keywords, to test keywords with YouTube schedule of live events. You don’t even need to have a video. Right?
Live Rank Sniper doesn’t even require you to have a video, it’s just a software that automates the process of setting up YouTube scheduled live events, because of their indexable schedule with live events, they will index without even a video, they’re just place holders in the index, and then once you have identified keywords you can, if you want, stream directly to those scheduled live events through Live Rank Sniper. It’s a manual process, and it takes time. I say, manual, it’s semi automated in that you only have to click the mouse a couple times for it to start doing its thing, but then you have to wait for the software to run to stream the video, and it will end and then you have to stream, you know, click the mouse a few times to go stream to the next scheduled live event that’s ranking. I don’t recommend it for that. I recommend using it specifically for identifying keywords, using it as a poking tool. Okay? If you want a tool that works seamlessly with Live Rank Sniper I would say Hangout Millionaire, which is Peter Drew’s upgrade, like that’s his top level, well, it’s currently his top level SEO video marketing software, but he’s coming out, well, I’m not going to say anything else. That’s a great tool, as well, though, it works really good with Live Rank Sniper.
Rocket Video Ranker is a different animal all together. Rocket Video Ranker is freaking fabulous. It’s a loophole as far as I’m concerned. The way that it works, but basically you upload, you just do uploads with Rocket Video Ranker, but it automates uploading multiple videos at one time very, very quickly in a very unique fashion. The way that it works, it’s very unique, I don’t know how long it’s going to last, or even why it works the way that it does, but it works really, really well, right now. I know, because I used a shit ton, I used a lot of it. I used it a lot, excuse me, over the last two weeks, and the case study, by the way, just so you know, the case study in here, look, this is it, guys, I mean, I’ve got 11, there’s got to be two and a half hours worth of content in this case study, alone. Exactly how I use it, and it’s great because you can set up digital assets.
All right. I only got about eight minutes left, so let’s roll through these next few. Ivan, says, “Hey, guys. I embedded a Google My Maps in an article on my website and I shared it to my tier one network. If I had something in the iframe will it syndicate automatically on the network, or do I have to resubmit my article via my RSS feed?” Yeah. No. Well, wait a minute. Yeah. If you’re updating the iframe, it should update everywhere, because it’s the same iframe. Am I correct, Marco, or no?
Marco: That’s correct. The iframe will show whatever is in the source.
Bradley: Okay.
Marco: But, hang on, if he’s changing the iframe that it’s structured in the website, it’s not going to update everywhere else.
Bradley: Yeah.
Hernan: But, I think, well, Ivan, if you’re listening, maybe you can comment, but I think that what he’s saying is if he adds something, well, yeah, I know, if he adds something to the code that’s not going to resyndicate, but if you change what’s within the iframe-
Bradley: Right.
Hernan: Then it could, like if you change something within the Google My Maps, you know, like if you add another marker for example, that will automatically show everywhere, but if you add, I don’t know, whatever, a piece of code to that iframe, that’s not going to resyndicate. Am I correct? Am I right?
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: That’s correct. You would-
Bradley: [crosstalk 00:49:18] past the closing iframe tag, then that’s not going to update across the properties. Right?
Hernan: Right.
Bradley: Right. If that’s what you mean, Ivan, if you’re trying to add stuff like beyond the closing iframe tag, then no. You’d have to issue a new, or publish a new post. Here’s the thing guys, you cannot publish a post and have it syndicate to your network, and then go back and edit the post on your money site, and then expect it to edit all the posts that it was syndicated to, as well. It doesn’t work like that. You’d have to go delete the original post and then basically republish the post as a new post in order for it to trigger the RSS feed to syndicate, as a new post. Right? There is a plugin that you can use in WordPress, it’s called, Republish Old Posts, funny enough. Right?
Republish Old Posts, and I’ll say WP, or WordPress, that’s it right there. This plugin right here, you can use this plugin to republish old posts, it will reinsert them into your RSS feed, which will trigger a new syndication, you can do something like that if you wanted. But, yeah, if you’re changing something within the iframe, it’s going to update everywhere that the iframe was syndicated to, if you’re changing something outside of the closing iframe tag, then no, you’d have to force the syndication all over again. Okay? He says, “By the way, my comment on Semantic Mastery sales page, wow, I was surprised it’s like having a page one, position one on Google.” That’s awesome. Thanks, Ivan.
David says, “When creating a branded network, is it necessary to use proxies for any account work, once a network is in place. How much lift does using stacks of interlinked Google properties add?” First of all, is it necessary to use proxies for any account work? No. It’s not necessary. I recommend if you’re building a ton of networks that you have at least five dedicated proxies, any ways, that you can cycle through. I recommend, and this is covered in the training, David, but I recommend never trying to create more than two accounts with the same IP within 24 hours. Okay? Again, you can do it with your own IP, it’s fine you don’t need any proxies at all, as long as you’re not, and when I say, I mean, don’t try creating two accounts on the same account platform.
“Once a network is in place, how much lift does using stacks of interlink Google properties add?” It depends, David. It depends if the Google stacks are created properly. It depends on how they’re done. It depends on which keywords, there’s just so many variables there, if they’re done correctly you can expect a substantial increase in rank. Okay? But, if you don’t do it correctly then, you know, I cannot speak, it might not help at all, in fact it might even cause problems. I don’t know. It just depends if they’re done right, or not.
Marco: It also depends on how much risk he’s willing to take, as far as, hammering the drive stack properties.
Bradley: Yeah. Okay. Ken, says, we’re almost done, guys, we only got a couple minutes left. He says, “I’m looking for clarity on ranking for local. I have a client that is a franchise. There are four locations within seven to 10 miles of each other, so I don’t think it would be reasonable to try to rank all of them for the same keyword. Franchise name, city, state.” For the same keyword. I’m sorry guys, I was just rereading that. “Since I would be competing against myself in each location, I can just see it now the management in each location would be pissed off if I wasn’t ranking them at the top of the three pack. I do understand that there would be overlap, and so do they. The only differentiating factor to each location is different zip codes, it’s a minor overlap.” Oh, wow, so it’s the same city and everything. “[inaudible 00:53:54] don’t show any search volume for franchise name, city, state,” yeah, I mean it probably wouldn’t. Well, if it’s franchise, yeah, maybe, because it has a franchise name. Right. But, what about the keyword? Instead of franchise name. Anyways, “I don’t think, so do I go ahead and only focus on franchise city, state, zip code, for each location and big G will pick up the fact of the search’s location? How would you suggest going after this? What would you do?”
Ken, that’s a really good question. I’ve never had to experience that, so it would take me some thought, we don’t have time for me to go, I mean, I’d literally have to think about it. Is Ken in any of our, he’s not in our Mastermind is he? I don’t think he is. Ken, this would be an awesome question for us to dissect in Mastermind, I sure wish you were in there, buddy. Let me think about this one a little bit, Ken, and we can revisit it next week. Sorry, if you cannot wait until then, because otherwise join the Mastermind, because we’ve got a Mastermind tomorrow, this could be a great question to dissect, but otherwise you are going to have to wait until next week, and I’m going to make a note right now.
Marco: If I could just add that right now the main factor for a three pack, or for what appears to search is proximity, I mean, that’s without question what the main factor, I mean-
Bradley: Especially for mobile.
Marco: [crosstalk 00:55:19]. If you are mobile, yeah, and you’re talking about nearly 70% of people right now who are searching on mobile, but I was just doing something on that last week, and sharing it with someone that-
Bradley: Yeah.
Marco: Proximity seems to be the overriding factor. I mean, before anything else Google will pick up proximity.
Bradley: Yeah. So, Ken, again, if you’re in Mastermind, or if you want, you should join, and I’m not saying that for any other reason other than this would be a really good question to really dig into, but otherwise, I’ve got a note, I’ll think about this a little bit, maybe consult with Marco a bit, and then we’ll have kind of a concise answer for you next week. Okay? All right. I’m just going to read Wayne’s comment, really quickly, then we’ve got to wrap it up, guys, because I’ve got to go. He says, “Word on the street is that you are sharing something tomorrow on Mastermind that will elevate our business. Is something special planned for the next Mastermind?” Why, yes. It’s this guy named Wayne Clayton, who’s going to be on tomorrow sharing some of his expertise in prospecting and dealing with clients and his process of determining how much money they have to spend, what their goals are, and all that kind of stuff.
I was super impressed with a post that he made in one of the Facebook groups, one of our Facebook groups about a particular method that he uses whenever he’s prospecting and pitching clients, or at least asking questions of the clients, of prospects, excuse me. It was really detailed and I was super impressed, so I reached out to Wayne and asked him if he’d come on and be a guest presenter for the Mastermind, to share some of his stuff, and so I’m actually really looking forward to it. In part, because we are, in Semantic Mastery, we’re really ramping up something on the side that we’re working on that’s going to be requiring a lot of prospecting work.
Maybe in the near future, there’s going to be a full on, full blown prospecting course coming out from us, because that’s something that I’m working on right now, so I’m really anxious to hear what Wayne’s got, because some of that might even get included in what will be coming out with our prospecting course, in the future. Anyways, hopefully anybody that’s not in our Mastermind, it would be a good time to join, so go to mastermind.semanticmastery.com if you want to find out more about that, otherwise, we’ll see everybody next week.
Marco: Sounds good.
Bradley: Thanks, everybody. We’ll see you all later.
Hernan: Bye guys.
Bradley: Bye.
