Anyone heard of RedlineSeo?

Hi,

I am still looking around for a company to handle our SEO and I am willing
to pay $500 - $700 a month to get a top 10 position for 'web site hosting'
on Google (I'd also like Yahoo as well) but there are a lot of companies out
there and I don't want to pay initial consultancy fees and then 3 months
fees to find they can not do the job. So if you don't mind I will run a
couple of companies by you to see what you guys think or even if you have
heard of them. I hope thats OK.

First Company is;-

Redline SEO
http://www.redlineseo.com

The person I have had contact with is Hugo Guzman, I normally wouldn't have
named names but it seems that people are often more regarded than companies
in this industry so maybe he is known to some of you.

I appreciate any knowledge of the company, especially from people /
companies that have used them / him in the past.

--
_________________

Dan Pickard
Fast-trak.net
-------------------------------
http://hosting.fast-trak.net
http://design.fast-trak.net

Dan Pickard <daniel.pickard@NOSPAMfast-trakDOTnet> typed:

I am still looking around for a company to handle our SEO and I am
willing to pay $500 - $700 a month to get a top 10 position for 'web
site hosting' on Google (I'd also like Yahoo as well) but there are a
lot of companies out there and I don't want to pay initial
consultancy fees and then 3 months fees to find they can not do the
job. So if you don't mind I will run a couple of companies by you to
see what you guys think or even if you have heard of them. I hope
thats OK.

I'd definetly say so, but even if it's the top guy you hire, success is
never guaranteed, is it?
btw: what is your aim, ego to be on top for 'web site hosting' or generating
quality traffic. If it's the traffic (and business) you're hunting for, I
personally would not concentrate on one single query but rather go for
optimization in your biz-area so you get high rankings for related keywords,
not just for a single term.
Haven't heard of the company you named, but that doesn't mean nothing, since
I've never been into names...

greets,

jan

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:29:21 +0100, "Dan Pickard"
<daniel.pickard@NOSPAMfast-trakDOTnet> wrote:

Hi,

I am still looking around for a company to handle our SEO and I am willing
to pay $500 - $700 a month to get a top 10 position for 'web site hosting'
on Google

It doesn't really work like that. Assuming we're talking about organic
SEO, you pays your money, a fixed fee preferably some scope for
leeway, and you wait a few months to see what effect it has on our
site's rankings. I did a company a while back, took six months for
them to get somewhere good but they had several no. one positions for
keywords in varoius engines including Google. I was just paid the
initial fee. That was all I asked for. If I'd been paid on a mothly
basis, what more could I have done? Not a lot.
If you're talking Pay-Per-Click though, yes you'll be paying regularly
and I'd not be surprised to see you spending rather more than what you
have in mind. And STILL not getting anywhere particular.
Bitch of a market to be competing in.

BB

(I'd also like Yahoo as well) but there are a lot of companies out
there and I don't want to pay initial consultancy fees and then 3 months
fees to find they can not do the job. So if you don't mind I will run a
couple of companies by you to see what you guys think or even if you have
heard of them. I hope thats OK.

First Company is;-

Redline SEO
http://www.redlineseo.com

The person I have had contact with is Hugo Guzman, I normally wouldn't have
named names but it seems that people are often more regarded than companies
in this industry so maybe he is known to some of you.

I appreciate any knowledge of the company, especially from people /
companies that have used them / him in the past.

Looking at the USA competition you are going to have difficulty getting into
the top #10.
#1 has PR8 and 22,000 incoming links, #10 has PR7 and 4500 incoming links.

If you are aiming for UK based web site hosting then it looks feasible, but
it would help to have your hosting rack room physically in the UK, rather
than Texas USA, and to have UK IP addresses for everything, including your
promotional website.

Do you own the rack room in the USA or are you just leasing capacity on
someone else's equipment?.

Regarding your fast trak site, I think that ww w.sc riptwiz.c om may be
spamming your site as you have 92 incoming links all from that site alone -
and no other incoming links listed. This looks suspicious to me. Have you
been zeroed in Google for this? I think you would do better with two or
three links from different web sites.

Best regards, Eric.

Thanks Jan,

With talking to a couple of SEO services we have been looking at 20+ key
phrases to try and generate some quality traffic. I hope this will give us
a good start.


"Jan Harders" <janh (AT) hitservice (DOT) net> wrote

Dan Pickard <daniel.pickard@NOSPAMfast-trakDOTnet> typed:
I am still looking around for a company to handle our SEO and I am
willing to pay $500 - $700 a month to get a top 10 position for 'web
site hosting' on Google (I'd also like Yahoo as well) but there are a
lot of companies out there and I don't want to pay initial
consultancy fees and then 3 months fees to find they can not do the
job. So if you don't mind I will run a couple of companies by you to
see what you guys think or even if you have heard of them. I hope
thats OK.

I'd definetly say so, but even if it's the top guy you hire, success is
never guaranteed, is it?
btw: what is your aim, ego to be on top for 'web site hosting' or
generating
quality traffic. If it's the traffic (and business) you're hunting for, I
personally would not concentrate on one single query but rather go for
optimization in your biz-area so you get high rankings for related
keywords,
not just for a single term.
Haven't heard of the company you named, but that doesn't mean nothing,
since
I've never been into names...

greets,

jan

Very tough market, but we have to try to compete and this will hopefully put
us on the map a little. We have experimented with Pay-per-click and found
that we have broken even, just, as the top places are ridiculous prices per
click. Not a route we want to go down again, though we still have several
campaigns running that bring in a slight profit and cost us around £5 - £8
per day.

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:29:21 +0100, "Dan Pickard"
daniel.pickard@NOSPAMfast-trakDOTnet> wrote:

Hi,

I am still looking around for a company to handle our SEO and I am
willing
to pay $500 - $700 a month to get a top 10 position for 'web site
hosting'
on Google

It doesn't really work like that. Assuming we're talking about organic
SEO, you pays your money, a fixed fee preferably some scope for
leeway, and you wait a few months to see what effect it has on our
site's rankings. I did a company a while back, took six months for
them to get somewhere good but they had several no. one positions for
keywords in varoius engines including Google. I was just paid the
initial fee. That was all I asked for. If I'd been paid on a mothly
basis, what more could I have done? Not a lot.
If you're talking Pay-Per-Click though, yes you'll be paying regularly
and I'd not be surprised to see you spending rather more than what you
have in mind. And STILL not getting anywhere particular.
Bitch of a market to be competing in.

BB



(I'd also like Yahoo as well) but there are a lot of companies out
there and I don't want to pay initial consultancy fees and then 3 months
fees to find they can not do the job. So if you don't mind I will run a
couple of companies by you to see what you guys think or even if you have
heard of them. I hope thats OK.

First Company is;-

Redline SEO
http://www.redlineseo.com

The person I have had contact with is Hugo Guzman, I normally wouldn't
have
named names but it seems that people are often more regarded than
companies
in this industry so maybe he is known to some of you.

I appreciate any knowledge of the company, especially from people /
companies that have used them / him in the past.

Hi Eric,

"Eric Johnston" <eric.johnston (AT) blueyonder (DOT) co.uk> wrote

Looking at the USA competition you are going to have difficulty getting
into
the top #10.
#1 has PR8 and 22,000 incoming links, #10 has PR7 and 4500 incoming links.

Very tough terms to compete with, but the slightly lower placed top 10 ranks
have a lower amount of links so we are hoping that 4,000 - 5,000 will push
us high enough to make a difference. As long as we can justify the cost, we
will just continue with the development until we are able to climb higher to
the top 4 which is our ultimate goal.

If you are aiming for UK based web site hosting then it looks feasible,
but
it would help to have your hosting rack room physically in the UK, rather
than Texas USA, and to have UK IP addresses for everything, including your
promotional website.

Do you own the rack room in the USA or are you just leasing capacity on
someone else's equipment?.

Our servers are all based in the US and we rent them from EV1. I did not
know the IP address location made a difference to the possible rank of a
page / site? But then again I am very new to this.

Regarding your fast trak site, I think that ww w.sc riptwiz.c om may be
spamming your site as you have 92 incoming links all from that site
alone -
and no other incoming links listed. This looks suspicious to me. Have
you
been zeroed in Google for this? I think you would do better with two or
three links from different web sites.

We have a link from the site to us, I guess the way his site works is that
the link is added to every page. Will this harm our rankings? If so, I
will ask him to remove it.

Best regards, Eric.

Thanks for the comments Eric, I appreciate the input.

"Dan Pickard" <daniel.pickard@NOSPAMfast-trakDOTnet> wrote

Hi Eric,

"Eric Johnston" <eric.johnston (AT) blueyonder (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:ncDxc.40136$B63.39162 (AT) doctor (DOT) cableinet.net...
Looking at the USA competition you are going to have difficulty getting
into
the top #10.
#1 has PR8 and 22,000 incoming links, #10 has PR7 and 4500 incoming
links.

Very tough terms to compete with, but the slightly lower placed top 10
ranks
have a lower amount of links so we are hoping that 4,000 - 5,000 will push
us high enough to make a difference. As long as we can justify the cost,
we
will just continue with the development until we are able to climb higher
to
the top 4 which is our ultimate goal.


If you are aiming for UK based web site hosting then it looks feasible,
but
it would help to have your hosting rack room physically in the UK,
rather
than Texas USA, and to have UK IP addresses for everything, including
your
promotional website.

Do you own the rack room in the USA or are you just leasing capacity on
someone else's equipment?.

Our servers are all based in the US and we rent them from EV1. I did not
know the IP address location made a difference to the possible rank of a
page / site? But then again I am very new to this.

If you want a page listed in UK searches then I think it is helpful if the
site IP address is from a block of IP addresses allocated to the UK, if the
site is physically in the UK and if the site url is like myurl.co.uk. I
have tried without success to break this rule for a particular page
targetting Australia, by putting a header line like <meta
http-equiv="Content-Language" content="en-au"> but it does not seem to work.
I believe the UK equivalent is "en-gb".

Regarding your fast trak site, I think that ww w.sc riptwiz.c om may be
spamming your site as you have 92 incoming links all from that site
alone -
and no other incoming links listed. This looks suspicious to me. Have
you
been zeroed in Google for this? I think you would do better with two or
three links from different web sites.

We have a link from the site to us, I guess the way his site works is that
the link is added to every page. Will this harm our rankings? If so, I
will ask him to remove it.

There is clearly something strange going on since all your 92 incoming links
from this site have PR=4 yet your site is PR=0. Your home page site should
be about PR=5 and I wonder why not. I would be happy with just one or two
links from a site like this. Make sure they use the correct anchor text.
"Special Offer Web hosting" would be better modified to include "site", if
you are promoting "Web site hosting"

Your home page title is "UK Web Hosting, Why Pay More?". If you do this
you **must** have hosting physically in the UK, otherwise your customers
will be very unhappy.

I hope you find an SEO person with time to spare who can help you.

Best regards, Eric.

Best regards, Eric.



Thanks for the comments Eric, I appreciate the input.

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:31:49 +0100, "Eric Johnston"
<eric.johnston (AT) blueyonder (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

If you want a page listed in UK searches then I think it is helpful if the
site IP address is from a block of IP addresses allocated to the UK, if the
site is physically in the UK and if the site url is like myurl.co.uk. I
have tried without success to break this rule for a particular page
targetting Australia, by putting a header line like <meta
http-equiv="Content-Language" content="en-au"> but it does not seem to work.
I believe the UK equivalent is "en-gb".

If I recall correctly you used to have to have the server physically
located in the UK to show up for UK specific searches, but that
doesn't seem to be true anymore.

My sites are on dedicated servers located in the US, this site-

http://www.classic-literature.co.uk/

Can be found with a specific UK search.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...UK%7CcountryGB
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...%7Ccount ryGB

My .com sites hosted on the same server as the above are not found for
a specific UK search.

Having a .co.uk URL is enough to get you in the UK only database.

Previously having a .com site hosted on a UK server would also get you
in the UK database, and it looks like that is still the case.

So if you want to be found for country specific searches you need your
site to be either located physically in that country or have the
country TLD.

David
--
http://www.seo-serps.com

www.seo-serps.com wrote in
<acegc05gdgp4eq6n1g4v374mgbfr18e9qc (AT) 4ax (DOT) com>

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:31:49 +0100, "Eric Johnston"
eric.johnston (AT) blueyonder (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

If you want a page listed in UK searches then I think it is helpful
if the site IP address is from a block of IP addresses allocated to
the UK, if the site is physically in the UK and if the site url is
like myurl.co.uk. I have tried without success to break this rule
for a particular page targetting Australia, by putting a header line
like <meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="en-au"> but it
does not seem to work. I believe the UK equivalent is "en-gb".

If I recall correctly you used to have to have the server physically
located in the UK to show up for UK specific searches, but that
doesn't seem to be true anymore.

My sites are on dedicated servers located in the US, this site-

http://www.classic-literature.co.uk/

Can be found with a specific UK search.


http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...UK%7CcountryGB

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...%7Ccount ryGB

My .com sites hosted on the same server as the above are not found for
a specific UK search.

Having a .co.uk URL is enough to get you in the UK only database.

Previously having a .com site hosted on a UK server would also get you
in the UK database, and it looks like that is still the case.

So if you want to be found for country specific searches you need your
site to be either located physically in that country or have the
country TLD.

To add a little to the mix, I've a .ie (ireland TLD) site which is hosted in
the US. For the same search term, it is:
No 1/3,850,000 on google.com
No 1/3,500,000 on google.ie for a "Search the web"
No 481/220,000 on google.ie for a "Search pages from Ireland".

I think this may not chime with your findings

And, come to think of it - where are the 350,000 pages that are shown on
google.com that don't get shown to google.ie users who choose "search the
web"?

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.