We were discussing how amazed our clients are when they see how detailed our website search engine optimisation reports actually are.
Well, following on from this, we have decided to offer a free report on your website as an example - should you choose to ask!
Our only stipulation is that you are are a UK based company as colloquial differences can catch us out (Brits and Yanks can't even agree on how to spell optimisation/optimization - it just wouldn't work for us to get involved!)
I'm not sure how long we are going to run this offer, but we will try and accommodate all who do contact us.
Tuesday, 4 December 2007
Thursday, 1 November 2007
It only takes 30 seconds
If you have a website that isn't doing very well on the search engines, there is probably a good reason why!
It takes us just 30 seconds to see if a website is ever going to be successful, don't wait years to find out what we can see in half a minute.
Get in touch and we will carry out a free appraisal.
Active Internet Support
It takes us just 30 seconds to see if a website is ever going to be successful, don't wait years to find out what we can see in half a minute.
Get in touch and we will carry out a free appraisal.
Active Internet Support
Friday, 19 October 2007
Retro Spam
Still getting spammed with emails from drugs companies, but the tactic has gone back to clearly stating what they are trying to sell you.
We used to be inundated with spam offering cheap VIAGRA, but because users set spam filters stopping emails that contain the word VIAGRA, the emails would be sent out offering cheap VI@gra, V1_agra, and a ever increasing range of combinations in order to get past the spam filters.
Not sure what the actual success rate is for this type of spam, but i am assuming that anyone who has setup their spam filters to stop VIAGRA will not suddenly wish to buy the product just because it is now called VI@GRA.
I might be wrong about this, but I have never met a VIAGRA spammer to ask them!
Just recently we seem to have come full circle and the email title is saying "Cheap VIAGRA" again, this seems like a good marketing strategy to me, if you are after VIAGRA, you are sure to notice the email - therefore the spammer has reached his target audience.
I would like to name this return to the good old ways, as Retro Spamming.
Keep your eyes peeled for Retro Spam, coming to a email box near you!
We used to be inundated with spam offering cheap VIAGRA, but because users set spam filters stopping emails that contain the word VIAGRA, the emails would be sent out offering cheap VI@gra, V1_agra, and a ever increasing range of combinations in order to get past the spam filters.
Not sure what the actual success rate is for this type of spam, but i am assuming that anyone who has setup their spam filters to stop VIAGRA will not suddenly wish to buy the product just because it is now called VI@GRA.
I might be wrong about this, but I have never met a VIAGRA spammer to ask them!
Just recently we seem to have come full circle and the email title is saying "Cheap VIAGRA" again, this seems like a good marketing strategy to me, if you are after VIAGRA, you are sure to notice the email - therefore the spammer has reached his target audience.
I would like to name this return to the good old ways, as Retro Spamming.
Keep your eyes peeled for Retro Spam, coming to a email box near you!
Monday, 1 October 2007
10 Downing Street - twice in one week!
Writing about 10 Downing Street twice in one week reminds me of the old saying about having to wait for buses. You wait ages for one and then a couple come along together!
A good friend brought the following incredible revelation to my attention and "absurd" does seem to be the best way to describe it.
See what you think;
If you agree, you are invited to add your support to the petition. If you don't agree, you are still invited to join the petition. Whatever has happened to British pride? The world-famous Red Arrows have been banned from appearing at the 2012 London Olympics because they are deemed "too British".
Organisers of the event say that the Arrows military background might be "offensive" to other countries taking part in the Games. The display team have performed at more than 4000 events worldwide, but the Department of Culture, Media and Sport have deemed the display team "too militaristically British". Red Arrows pilots were said to be "outraged", as they had hoped to put on a truly world class display for the Games, something which had never been seen before. Being axed from a British-based event for being "too British" is an insult - the Arrows are a symbol of Britain .
The Red Arrows have been excellent ambassadors for British overseas trade, as they display their British-built Hawk aircraft all over the world.
The Arrows performed a short flypast in 2005 when the winning bid was announced, but their flypast at the Games was to have been truly spectacular.
It is to be hoped that common sense prevails If you disagree with this decision, sign the petition on the link
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/RedArrows2012/?ref=redArrows2012
I would have understood if it was the Chinese Olympics they were talking about!
I'll be interested to see how many names accumulate, there is a lot of time left between now and 2012.
A good friend brought the following incredible revelation to my attention and "absurd" does seem to be the best way to describe it.
See what you think;
If you agree, you are invited to add your support to the petition. If you don't agree, you are still invited to join the petition. Whatever has happened to British pride? The world-famous Red Arrows have been banned from appearing at the 2012 London Olympics because they are deemed "too British".
Organisers of the event say that the Arrows military background might be "offensive" to other countries taking part in the Games. The display team have performed at more than 4000 events worldwide, but the Department of Culture, Media and Sport have deemed the display team "too militaristically British". Red Arrows pilots were said to be "outraged", as they had hoped to put on a truly world class display for the Games, something which had never been seen before. Being axed from a British-based event for being "too British" is an insult - the Arrows are a symbol of Britain .
The Red Arrows have been excellent ambassadors for British overseas trade, as they display their British-built Hawk aircraft all over the world.
The Arrows performed a short flypast in 2005 when the winning bid was announced, but their flypast at the Games was to have been truly spectacular.
It is to be hoped that common sense prevails If you disagree with this decision, sign the petition on the link
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/RedArrows2012/?ref=redArrows2012
I would have understood if it was the Chinese Olympics they were talking about!
I'll be interested to see how many names accumulate, there is a lot of time left between now and 2012.
Thursday, 27 September 2007
The day that Gordon Brown didn't visit my wife!
The Labour Party conference started on Monday in Bournemouth. Each year one of the major political parties uses Bournemouth as its venue and apart from giving the "Bournemouth International Centre " a wide berth, because of the hold-ups that are encountered due to the additional security, the nearest we get to being involved is watching the coverage on the news to check that the weather is still promoting the "Sunny Bournemouth"image that the town has been nicknamed!
My wife is a primary school teacher (a very good one, although she will be too modest to agree) at a local school. The friday before the conference started, the school received a phone call out of the blue, to say that it was 90% likely that "someone very big" would be coming to view the school on the following Wednesday and for security reasons this should be remain confidential until the day. There followed a stressful week-end where my wife's mind ran wild with images of how controlling 30 reception year kids ( 4 year olds, who had only just started school a few weeks earlier) could go so horribly wrong!
At the beginning of the week, the Labour party press office arrived and did the tour and asked a host of questions and sprang the news that there was also a possibility that, Gordon Brown may choose to visit a Secondary School instead.
Yep, you guessed right, it was the secondary school that he did visit!
My wife had lived the stress, psyched herself up for the media, prepared a lesson that was least likely to end in disaster on live TV, and all to no avail.
I Can't help wondering why he chose the secondary school instead?
Was it the thought of lots of 4 year old pulling his tie or how he might be asked the type of question that 4 year olds ask that even a media hardened politician can not prepare for, or the task of trying to look sensible for the cameras whilst sitting on a mini chair at a mini desk for the photo shot of the PM "getting involved"!
As the saying goes; never work with children or animals!
Or might the reason for not visiting have been that there are still 30 kids in each class (the maximum), the fantastic IT suite and electronic whiteboards in the classes were paid for by parents through fund-raising activities, the etc, etc ....
When we watched conference coverage on the TV in the evening, the sound bites from the education minister Ed Balls, were of how Labour had already managed to reduce class sizes and improve facilities in schools and would continue to prioritise and target education with its resources.
Am I being cynical again, or just maybe, my wife's school wasn't visited because it would be a little too tricky to show where the money had been spent!
My wife is a primary school teacher (a very good one, although she will be too modest to agree) at a local school. The friday before the conference started, the school received a phone call out of the blue, to say that it was 90% likely that "someone very big" would be coming to view the school on the following Wednesday and for security reasons this should be remain confidential until the day. There followed a stressful week-end where my wife's mind ran wild with images of how controlling 30 reception year kids ( 4 year olds, who had only just started school a few weeks earlier) could go so horribly wrong!
At the beginning of the week, the Labour party press office arrived and did the tour and asked a host of questions and sprang the news that there was also a possibility that, Gordon Brown may choose to visit a Secondary School instead.
Yep, you guessed right, it was the secondary school that he did visit!
My wife had lived the stress, psyched herself up for the media, prepared a lesson that was least likely to end in disaster on live TV, and all to no avail.
I Can't help wondering why he chose the secondary school instead?
Was it the thought of lots of 4 year old pulling his tie or how he might be asked the type of question that 4 year olds ask that even a media hardened politician can not prepare for, or the task of trying to look sensible for the cameras whilst sitting on a mini chair at a mini desk for the photo shot of the PM "getting involved"!
As the saying goes; never work with children or animals!
Or might the reason for not visiting have been that there are still 30 kids in each class (the maximum), the fantastic IT suite and electronic whiteboards in the classes were paid for by parents through fund-raising activities, the etc, etc ....
When we watched conference coverage on the TV in the evening, the sound bites from the education minister Ed Balls, were of how Labour had already managed to reduce class sizes and improve facilities in schools and would continue to prioritise and target education with its resources.
Am I being cynical again, or just maybe, my wife's school wasn't visited because it would be a little too tricky to show where the money had been spent!
Saturday, 22 September 2007
Is there a safe way to save?
If you live in the UK, you can't help to have noticed the panic that surrounded the Northern Rock Bank recently. You may have even been affected.
The panic was triggered by Northern Rock Bank requesting financial assistance from the Bank of England.
There followed unprecedented scenes of individuals queuing around the block as savers rushed to withdraw their money even whilst at the same time statements were released by Northern Rock and the Bank of England, telling everyone that there was no need to panic.
I don't think that it was Northern Rocks request for assistance from the Bank of England that triggered the panic as has been widely reported.
What came to light was the fact that if the bank did collapse, a maximum limit of £2000 was all investors would be guaranteed to receive. It appears that this is the normal amount guaranteed for savings accounts throughout the industry under regulation.
Am i little naive? I seem to remember whenever I have sought advice on where to put my savings, the advice has always been that to avoid risk I should stick to a bank or builiding soceity savings account. Alternatively, If I were prepared to speculate for a higher return, I could choose something a little more risky, such as stocks and shares.
Suddenly, and I am convinced that I am not alone, I find out that money in a savings account is at risk and not safe after all!
I'm betting that this was news to most of the savers in the queue and the main reason for them withdrawing their money. After all, if you knew that your savings were safe, you wouldn't rush to withdraw them.
In the Northern Rock instance, the government stepped in, guaranteeing to underwrite the savings and thus quashing the panic. At present, there is no guarantee that the bank would act in the same way again.
Now we are aware of the 'risk' of saving, I would like to see a few changes. Firstly a method of depositing money in an institution that is 100% safe (even if the interest return is lower). Solicitors operate seperate customer accounts in order to protect money that is not theirs, I would like to see the financial institutions find a way of achieving a similar method of ensuring that when we choose the safe route to saving, the bank aren't taking risks with it and that we get back what is rightfully ours ( and a bit of interest on top would be nice too!).
Thursday, 20 September 2007
Never let a designer design your website!
Never let a designer design your website!
You may have heard of Jane Moore, the Journalist and womens author, If you dont read the sun or girly novels, you may still know her from TV as a reviewer of the morning papers on BBC's news programme Breakfast, and now on the "Grumpy Old Women" series.
I quite enjoy listening to her comments and even find we are quite like-minded in our opinions!
Unfortunately Jane doesn't know me, if she did, it would have stopped her choosing a DESIGN team that has made BIG BIG mistakes with her website.
Luckily for Jane she has enough celebrity status that her website will still be found on the search engines, but that is the only reason why!
Rule 1. If you want your website to be viewed, don't let a design team, design your website. Why? I hear you cry, it looks great! There, you have found the problem already.
Yes it looks very good to a human eye, but search engines don't have eyes, they read text content on each page of your website. Additionally, search engines weight the importance of the content found on the home page of your website (this is the first page that you see when you type in the website address). Search engines assume that you will put include the main information about your website on your home page - so this is the page that you really want to get right!!
Designers however, are control freaks, they want their designs to look as identical online as it would in a magazine. Here's the problem, text (that search engines can read) is limited to a relatively small choice of fonts. Include the text as part of the design and you are not limited by the nasty restrictions that the web imposes, and you are in full control of how everything will appear on the screen (as long as the visitor to the website is not a search engine).
Now take a look at Jane's site; www.janemoore.com
The home page (remember this is the most important page on your site) is one big graphic, saying "Click to Enter", Oh dear! WHY WHY WHY?. This page serves no purpose whatsoever.
Total amount of readable text on the home page; NIL.
(hold down your mouse and drag across the screen, you will be able to see for yourself what graphics make up each page)
Now, "Click to Enter" the site. (we have never built a website that has a "click to enter" home page, now you know why).
Repeat the hold and drag excercise on each page, even the contact page, and you will find that every page is made up of graphics with not one word of text visible for a search engine to read.
This means that the whole website is invisible to a search engine - it's the search engine equivalent of the Sun publishing Janes column in white ink on white paper.
Additionally, as text readers for the visually impaired also rely on being able to read text, visually impaired visitors will also be kept in the dark as to the content of each page as well!
Not one word of text in the entire website!
I can't even remember the last time I came across a website which was completely invisible to a search engine.
The key point here, is to use a web development company not a design team.
I might be generalising regarding designers, but the importance of a successful website is in the development.
Take a look at the Spear-Bournemouth website, where we have ensured that the page content is separated from the website design; www.spear-bournemouth.co.uk. The website user can even select how they view the page, by selecting from a choice of designs!
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say, but don't get wrapped up just on the visuals, there is a lot more to developing a website, than just uploading a pretty design!
Wednesday, 19 September 2007
Typing mistakes in spoof emails
It never ceases to amaze me how frequently basic typing mistakes appear in Spoof/Phishing emails (just in case you don't know, a phishing email is the name given to emails sent under false pretences to lure information from you - normally banking details).
It would be fair to assume that prior to committing fraud on a major scale and even if it was only to gain a higher success rate, our nasty criminal would think to run it through the spellcheck!
No matter how accurately the email design matches, a quick glance for a typo is normally all it takes to confirm that the email is a fake (that's assuming that it's masquerading as a email from a bank that I actually use in the first place - most from a banks that I don't use). It's almost as if the cyber-criminal is giving us a sporting chance of not getting caught.
Just in case you can't find a typo, always follow these steps - just in case a grammatically correct spoof email has slipped through the net!
1. never click on links and never open or save attachments.
2. see if the email includes your name not dear si, etc.
3. see if it was sent to your exact email address - a lot of spoof emails are sent with any name in front of your website address.
4. always open a new browser window and type in the website address that you want to visit. clicking on a link that says www.yourbank.com will not necessarily take you to your bank.
Incidentally, most banks and institutions have a fraud squad that can normally be reached by emailing spoof@addyourbanknamehere.com It's always worth forwarding phishing emails to this address so they can be tracked.
It would be fair to assume that prior to committing fraud on a major scale and even if it was only to gain a higher success rate, our nasty criminal would think to run it through the spellcheck!
No matter how accurately the email design matches, a quick glance for a typo is normally all it takes to confirm that the email is a fake (that's assuming that it's masquerading as a email from a bank that I actually use in the first place - most from a banks that I don't use). It's almost as if the cyber-criminal is giving us a sporting chance of not getting caught.
Just in case you can't find a typo, always follow these steps - just in case a grammatically correct spoof email has slipped through the net!
1. never click on links and never open or save attachments.
2. see if the email includes your name not dear si, etc.
3. see if it was sent to your exact email address - a lot of spoof emails are sent with any name in front of your website address.
4. always open a new browser window and type in the website address that you want to visit. clicking on a link that says www.yourbank.com will not necessarily take you to your bank.
Incidentally, most banks and institutions have a fraud squad that can normally be reached by emailing spoof@addyourbanknamehere.com It's always worth forwarding phishing emails to this address so they can be tracked.
Sunday, 2 September 2007
Optimisation or Optimization?
I follow Search Engine optimisation (SEO) practices pretty closely and would suggest that I have a pretty good understanding of the topic, but have noticed that references to SEO, always refer to the American spelling; Optimization, which differs from the correct spelling as recognised in the UK; Optimisation.
Does this mean that it could be damaging to your SEO results (assuming that your topic was SEO) to not go with the American spelling, or is our good friend Google recognising both spellings and rewarding equally?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)