I recently was asked to write an article for Wordtracker about finding sources of keyword inspiration. I tried making it fun. Let me know what you think of it.
However, it seems that the majority of traffic for most sites I've worked on really does come from a core group which are usually the most simple and straight-forward.
Do you think there is really value in adding so many key-phrases and spending so much energy in doing so?
Well, this article seems to be a very good explanation of a keyword research. But I think you forgot something. For SEOs it will be useful to look at a number of pages in a SERP, PageRank of pages in top10 and their backlinks to improve keywords research for their site optimization. Because I think the main use of Wordtracker is a SEO use :)
Aaron,
Excellent post! Best I've read so far.
Here's another simple way I use. You mentioned looking at competitive site's content and linkage. I also like to look at their meta tags to find what KWs they view as most valuable.
Does anyone notice that Wordtracker states they're data accounts for 0.63% of all searches when they're stated metric says different? WT says they're data comes strictly from Metacrawler and Dogpile. They use Net Applications as a metric for projecting their "Predict" volumes. If you check Net Applications "Search Engine Market Share" reprot, you'll see that Metacrawler and Dogpile combined account for 0.49%. To be sure I did a search on WT and projected the Predict number using WT's same equation ((Count / .0063) / 90 = Predict) and the numbers matched up. Basically, that tells me that WT is either getting data from another source in addition to Metacrawler and Dogpile and not telling us or they haven't updated they're equation for projecting the Predict volumes.
Am I missing something or is Wordtracker publicly contradicting themselves and providing inaccurate data (inaccurate by their own metric - obviously keyword volumes are never 100% accurate)?
Improve your rankings, traffic, and profits today. The SEO Book training program offers you:
Over 100 training modules, covering topics like: keyword research, link building, site architecture, website monetization, pay per click ads, tracking results, and more.
An exclusive interactive community forum
Members only videos and tools
Additional bonuses - like data spreadsheets, and money saving tips
Every order comes risk free, and with the best selling SEO Book as a free bonus
comments
Login or Register to post comments.
Great list of tools, but you forgot keyworddiscovery.com ;)
Hi Aaron,
I enjoyed the article a lot. Definitly gave new good ways to do some keyword research.
Khalid
I think the article was great and very creative.
However, it seems that the majority of traffic for most sites I've worked on really does come from a core group which are usually the most simple and straight-forward.
Do you think there is really value in adding so many key-phrases and spending so much energy in doing so?
Its very good, easy to read article. Wordtracker users will appreciate your advice.
I thought some of the suggestions were excellent, especially the one about junk mail.
I would have liked to seen about more about serious testing.
But very useful.
Great Work Aaron! I enjoyed the article and I am sure many people will take away valuable keyword knowledge for it.
Well, this article seems to be a very good explanation of a keyword research. But I think you forgot something. For SEOs it will be useful to look at a number of pages in a SERP, PageRank of pages in top10 and their backlinks to improve keywords research for their site optimization. Because I think the main use of Wordtracker is a SEO use :)
Aaron,
Excellent post! Best I've read so far.
Here's another simple way I use. You mentioned looking at competitive site's content and linkage. I also like to look at their meta tags to find what KWs they view as most valuable.
Does anyone notice that Wordtracker states they're data accounts for 0.63% of all searches when they're stated metric says different? WT says they're data comes strictly from Metacrawler and Dogpile. They use Net Applications as a metric for projecting their "Predict" volumes. If you check Net Applications "Search Engine Market Share" reprot, you'll see that Metacrawler and Dogpile combined account for 0.49%. To be sure I did a search on WT and projected the Predict number using WT's same equation ((Count / .0063) / 90 = Predict) and the numbers matched up. Basically, that tells me that WT is either getting data from another source in addition to Metacrawler and Dogpile and not telling us or they haven't updated they're equation for projecting the Predict volumes.
Am I missing something or is Wordtracker publicly contradicting themselves and providing inaccurate data (inaccurate by their own metric - obviously keyword volumes are never 100% accurate)?
I'll use this tips and help me to get new keyword. After visit website in this article i found 4 good keyword. Thank you.
Login or Register to post comments.