Web Position Gold 2

[Deverill]

Hi gang,

I own Web Position Gold 2 and have heard many many conflicting things about it. Everything from it will let you walk on water to it will get you banned from every search engine in existance.

 

My questions are:

 

1. Does the reporter cause any harm? I had one nationally renowned SEO pro tell me that automated queries were risky and I could get penalized for using them.

 

2. The page generator is probably bad to use because it is aimed at cheating the SEs. Right?

 

3. Submitter - automated submissions should never be done, right?

 

4. Page Critic - is it worth the anual renewal fee? How good is their advice really?

 

I'm not really too interested in their other features. Well any comments are welcome. Thanks!

[SEO]

From Google's own mouth:

 

Quality Guidelines - Basic principles:

 

Make pages for users, not for search engines. Don't deceive your users, or present different content to search engines than you display to users.

Avoid tricks intended to improve search engine rankings. A good rule of thumb is whether you'd feel comfortable explaining what you've done to a website that competes with you. Another useful test is to ask, "Does this help my users? Would I do this if search engines didn't exist?"

Don't participate in link schemes designed to increase your site's ranking or PageRank. In particular, avoid links to web spammers or "bad neighborhoods" on the web as your own ranking may be affected adversely by those links.

Don't use unauthorized computer programs to submit pages, check rankings, etc. Such programs consume computing resources and violate our terms of service. Google does not recommend the use of products such as WebPosition Gold™ that send automatic or programmatic queries to Google.

 

 

It is very, very rare that Google singles out an individual company by name... that should say something (and does). I have read through their material since their early days, they used to be big proponents of doorway pages and other techniques that are considered all out spamming today.

 

I have always approached SEO from a logical point of view. If I am uncomfortable about a technique I do not use it. I think in terms of 'if I was Google'. Even if the technique reaps benefits, if it does not 'seem right', I do not recommend it.

 

To answer your questions more specifically:

 

1. Yes, you can get penalized.

 

2. Correct.

 

3. Correct.

 

4. I always say that 'results' do not lie. How good are they, look and see? Do they get 'real' results? Meaning do they get sites high rankings using the most relevant search engine phrase? How do they rank with the most relevant search engine phrase?

 

Proof is always in the pudding.

 

[i.e. stay clear]

[Deverill]

Thanks for that quote and the comments! I just ignorantly believed that a program that's getting rankings is like a browser so what's the harm. I knew the submissions were bad but didn't think it was so for the ranking stuff.

 

You are right, of course, that for Google to single out a particular company is pretty telling of their attitude about it. I guess I'll delete that sucker now and not risk it.

 

Do you or anyone know of a good way to find site ranking? "I'd hate to have to go to google and enter my search term and count 1...2...3... ... 1,355, 1,356 AHA! I'm at 1,356 which makes me on page ... oh shoot! page 1... page 2... " Of course after about page 2 or 3 it doesn't matter.

 

Maybe we can start a good thread about SEO tools available that help out. I know the link popularity ones come to mind immediately as do the "what's my best keyword" tools.

[SEO]

I have not found any that are both free and accurate.

 

Here is one example that is free (but not real accurate):

 

www.rankpilot.com

Edited November 3, 2003 by dsdemmin