Skip to Content
Please Click Here for Important Information Before Using This Website

Domain Headlines From Around The Web

Headlines From Domain Name News Headlines From Domain Name Wire
Domain Name News
News and Views from the Domain Name Industry
  • ICANN Further Delays .XXX Decision
    In today’s ICANN board meeting at the 37th ICANN meeting held in Nairobi, Kenya, the board postponed a decision regarding the .XXX sTLD application and directed to solicit public comment for this application within 14 days with a comment period of no less than 45 days, allowing the board to reconsider this issue at the [...]
  • ICANN nixes Expression of Interest for new gTLDs
    The ICANN board has voted down the community proposal for Expressions of Interest for new gTLD applicants, requiring a $55,000 application fee. The proposal was mainly driven by proponents and applicants for new gTLDs with the hopes of speeding up the process. (c) 2009 DomainNameNews.com Advertisement Upcoming Domain Industry Events, Conferences & Auctions
  • Colbert Report Mocks SurvivalSeedBank.With DomainTools.com Help
    DNN’s crack team of roving reporters sent us a tip that Comedy Central’s Colbert Report just gave DomainTools.com some prime placement.  In a report on SurvivalSeedBank.com, host Stephen Colbert mocks the website copy which states “If you don’t have the ability to grow your own food next year your life may be in danger” . [...]
  • Domainer Goes Road Tripping For GM & Charity- #sxswsf
    A good friend of DNN’s and domainer (and winner of DomainFest pitchfest) is participating in the GM Road Trip Challenge.   They’re competing against other teams to win money for charity.  If you want to help their team, you can do so by checking out their site at their cool domain RoadChallenge.com and contributing a comment [...]
  • Huffington Post Gets In On Top Domain Name Story
    With the buzz circulating around the upcoming Sex.com sale, mainstream press is picking up the story of  “the world’s most expensive domains”.  Several people contacted us to tell us about CNN running the Sex.com domain sale on the ticker this morning. Now HuffPo is getting in on the story with their take on the top domain [...]
  • Sedo Weekly Sales Chart topped by Guagua.com for $100,000 USD
    Sedo sold Guagua.com (several meanings possible) for $100,000. Other notable sales include risultati.it (Results in Italian) for 32,000 Euro (appx. $43,000) Gastronomie.com (gastronomy in German) for 35,000 Euro (appx. 47,500 USD) and Pepe.com for 45,000 Euro (Appx. $61,400 USD). According to Domain Name Wire, the domain name had been bought by Francois of Domaining.com on [...]
  • Retweet.com Sells for $250,000
    As reported by Mashable Retweet.com Sold for $250,000 on the Flippa.com market place. After receiving bids by 34 bidders up to $202,000, a new bidder joined the auction and bought the site domain for its listed BIN (buy it now) price of $250,000. The identity of the buyer has yet to be revealed. (c) 2009 DomainNameNews.com Advertisement Upcoming [...]
  • Social Domainers Launches, Wants to Help Local Domainers to Meet
    SocialDomainers.com, a new social network for Social Domainers has just been launched by Tony Kanakaris, a Long Island, New York based domainer. The network was set up in order to help local domainers meet and connect. For today’s launch, the site is giving away an Apple iPad for the 1,000th member to sign up for [...]
  • Nominet Considers Release of One and Two Letter Domains
    Following the course of other TLDs, such as .DE, Nominet has posted a document for their members and registrars proposing the release of single and double character domain names in the third level of the .UK domain (under co.uk, .org.uk, .me.uk and .net.uk). The release would exclude some domains that have been registered before the [...]
  • National Public Radio’s New URL Shortener Is One Of Shortest Yet
    National Public Radio now count themselves as having the tiniest shortened URL for use on Twitter and other social media sites. The organization announced their new domain N.PR yesterday on their blog. The company had been using Stumble Upon’s  Su.pr url shortener on most of their Twitter accounts. NPR will continue using npr.org as their [...]
Domain Name Wire
News and Views for the Domain Name Industry
  • Poll: How Long Until New Top Level Domain Names?
    When do you think new TLDs will be available for registration? Another ICANN meeting has wrapped up. Blows were dealt to many, but some progress was made. With EOI off the table, the focus is on settling the “overarching issues”. The intellectual property constituency, which didn’t show up to Nairobi, was perhaps the [...]
  • ICANN Board Drops Bomb on Registrars Hoping to Launch New TLDs
    Board opts for separation of registrars and registries for new top level domain names. ICANN’s board resolved today that there will be “strict separation of entities offering registry services and those acting as registrars. No co-ownership will be allowed.” However, the board left the possibility open for compromise, stating that if the Generic Names Supporting Organization [...]
  • Shocker: ICANN Nixes Expressions of Interest for New TLDs
    No Expressions of Interest for new top level domain names. I guess I’m not in the internal loop at ICANN, but I’m surprised that its board voted to completely nix the idea of “Expressions of Interest” for new top level domain names. The idea was simple. If you want to apply for a new top level [...]
  • ICANN Delays .XXX (Again)
    .XXX decision pushed until next ICANN meeting. Should we really be so surprised? ICANN’s board has decided not to act on the independent review of its decision to deny ICM Registry the .xxx top level domain name. Until further comment. Insert joke about delayed sexual gratification here. ICANN has punted. “Let’s think about this some more” is [...]
  • Company Sends Press Release After Buying $1,088 Domain Name
    Company brings new meaning to “pumping”. I’m not sure what it’s like being a company traded on the pink sheets. But a lot of them try to do whatever they can to hype themselves. Today The Amergence Group (PINKSHEETS: AMNG) sent out a press release titled “Amergence Group Successfully Bids on and Acquires PanPacific International Domain [...]
  • Domain Name Whois Privacy Has Its Limits
    Complete anonymity isn’t guaranteed with whois privacy services. Using a whois privacy or proxy service to register and set up a gripe site? Or perhaps some other web site or domain you don’t want attached to your name? Be prepared for the potential that your information will be disclosed. There are two types of whois [...]
  • MobilePhones.co.uk Tops $60,000, Auction Ends Today
    Big UK domain name to sell later today. An auction for MobilePhones.co.uk ends today on Sedo at 6:31 PM EST. The domain name has attracted 6 bidders and 18 bids, pushing the price up to 40,500 GBP — roughly $60,000 USD. Another sale in the works at Sedo is the web site and domain name Species.com. [...]
Headlines From Ezine Headlines From Domain Name Journal
Internet and Businesses Online: Domain Names Articles from EzineArticles.com
EzineArticles.com - Trusted By Millions as The Source For Quality Original Articles
  • Domain - Address to Success
    This short article explores the entry to the realm of the online world. The point will be made as to why everyone should own their personal domain. In today's dot com world this is almost a necessity.
  • How to Name a Domain - In Five Simple Steps
    How to name a domain can seem like the most complicated thing to do when starting your first online business or building a website. I know many people that spend weeks or even months trying to come up with ideas for domain name. How to pick a domain name can be down by following these 5 steps:
  • Business Domain Names
    Choosing a domain name for your business can be quite difficult, and can take a lot of time to come up with a name. We have put together a short article to help you make that decision.
  • Does Hoarding of Domain Names Slow Web Progress?
    At some stage we have all had an idea for a great new web site along with it's perfect domain to boot. The problem that comes up next is finding the domain is already registered... By a domain name squatter. This is a problem I and many other web developers face all the time, people buying out domain names and holding them in hopes of making a large return in the future.
  • Investing in Virtual Real Estate - Speculator, Investor Or Developer?
    Domains will continue to go up in value faster than any other commodity ever known to man, as the saying goes. The real world land rush of the 1800's in the Wild West of America may pale into insignificance compared to the online gold rush that had it's origins in the 1990's and has risen steadily to this very day.
  • 3 Essential Tips When Choosing a Domain Name
    So you have made the decision to buy yourself a little piece of online real estate. That is really what you are doing when it comes to buying and choosing a domain name for your website.
  • Domain Names and How the Entrepreneur Can Benefit From One
    The purpose of a domain name or web address is to have a simple, yet effective and easy to remember domain name so that it is easy for your prospects to remember it. Even if it is not written down, it will be logged in their memory so that when they are surfing on the internet be it a day or so after they have seen your web address or even a couple of weeks and months later they will be able to remember it.
  • Vital Internet Marketing Strategy in Relation to Buying a Domain Name
    In the pursuit of generating traffic to their blog or websites, most online business owners take on one internet marketing strategy after another in the hope that they will finally establish the best. But to maximize and get the best out of your promotion efforts, the secret is to work with more than one marketing tactic.
  • Tips For Choosing a Profitable eCommerce Domain Name
    If you are starting a new eCommerce internet business, one question immediately pops into mind: what name should I choose? Have you heard of the saying in property, "location, location, location"? Most associate buying property with choosing the right location and it may mean that you make or lose money. Your e-commerce domain name is no different.
  • Selecting the Right Domain Name - Increase Brand Recognition With Short, Catchy Names
    If you want to increase brand recognition, and web site traffic, choose a domain with this suffix as an option. Most users are still not comfortable using dot-net or dot-org. Selecting the right domain name for your site can be the difference between being found quickly and not being found at all. Short, catchy names that describe what the site is for or that contains your business name are the best way to increase traffic to your site.
  • Expired Domain Names
    Are you looking to get lots of traffic to your website so that it makes money for you? Then do you know that you can do that with an expired domain?
  • Domain Name - 8 Factors to Consider When Choosing a Domain Name
    I know that you have been searching on the internet for the information on how to name your domain. Are you still not sure how to name your domain?
  • Can a Domain Name Actually Help Increase Local Website Traffic? Yes, Here's How
    Can a domain name help a small business be found in their local area? How do multiple domain names effect website traffic? Do geo-specific domain names cost more? This article looks at all of these questions and provides insight into both domain name strategies and how to improve local search results.
  • 9 Tips For Choosing the Right Domain Name
    Personal branding starts with the proper choice of domain names. Usually done in hast, the proper choice, as one top online entrepreneur said "naming my domain took the same care as naming my daughter" well I guess that kinda sums it up.
Domain Name Journal - The Domain Industry Trade Magazine at DNJournal.com
Domain Name Journal - located at DNJournal.com - is the domain industry's premier trade publication. This award winning online magazine features industry news and information that is updated on a daily basis.
Headlines From Circle ID
CircleID: Domain Names
Latest Domain Names related postings on CircleID
  • .ORG: Introducing Fully Internationalized Domain Names

    ICANN, the Internet Corporation of Assigned Names and Numbers, is on a path to introduce new top level domains. At .ORG, The Public Interest Registry, we are considering this an opportunity to introduce fully internationalized domain names (IDN), bringing our long-standing best practices of managing the .ORG registry to advance the use of the Internet across the globe. A fully internationalized domain name would have the name and the .extension entirely in a specific language script. Why are we considering this? The answer is in our public interest motivation. We are not primarily commercially driven—we are driven to do what helps and protects the domain name registrant. This has us leading the way on the deployment of new services such as DNSSEC, which adds security to the existing domain name system. For IDNs, our early support sends a very strong signal of the importance to advance this technology forward, to support the various language communities in their effort to embrace the domain name system and Internet in general. We believe that the technical community should work towards advancing the use of IDNs.

    With our framework of protection for the registrant, we support the various language communities in growing and evolving the use of our IDN top level domains in a way that is most appropriate for them. We are also looking to the community to develop their language script table—a necessary element in the deployment of IDNs—which ultimately determines the most appropriate use of their language script for domain name labeling purposes.

    We believe that our community-based approach to developing and deploying IDNs will best serve the public interest of the various language communities, and we look forward to ICANN's upcoming introduction of new top level domains.

    Our approach was recently discussed in an interview with Domain Name Wire.

  • ICANN Board Meeting Spoiler Alert

    For those participants that have been working rearranged hours and participating remotely in connection with ICANN's Nairobi meeting, here is a chance to sleep in. While ICANN Board tea leaf reading is not an exact science, there is a great deal of predictability to ICANN's actions so here are my big three predictions for tomorrow.

    #1 – ICANN Board Approves the EOI

    Kristina Rosette, GNSO Counsel representative highlighted how ICANN had already announced a webinar on March 18th to talk about the new gTLD process and the EOI/Pre-Reservation process. Now while ICANN staff promptly edited this page after Kristina's statement in the public forum, to include the following disclaimer (SUBJECT TO BOARD DECISION), this appears to be preordained based on the additional facts listed below.

    #2 – Launch of the Global Communication Plan

    The Seoul meeting was interesting as it was one of the first ICANN meetings were there was an absence of artificial timelines in connection with the launch of the new gTLD process. This meeting was also largely absent of timelines, expect for those attendees that managed to sit in on the new gTLD staff briefing given by Kurt Pritz to the Registrar Stakeholder Group. While the first slides in Kurt's presentation where almost identical to the other public presentations, the last two saw the re-emergence of project times. These slides were entitled "Applicant Guidebook V4—Shortest Path" and "Expression of Interest (EOI)—Shortest Path." While this power point presentation given to the registrars is not currently available on the ICANN website, I am sure that within minutes of this article being published it will timely appear on the ICANN website much like the update to the March 18th webinar.

    #3 – Approval of the ICM Application

    Today on the ICANN correspondence website there appears a private and confidential communication submitted by ICM to ICANN to settle its dispute. Given that this "private and confidential" communication is now public is a reasonable indicator that ICANN will accept the offer. The only suspense is if ICANN approves the last 2007 registry contract posted for public comment, or if it re-opens contractual negotiations. Given that re-opening negotiations would subject ICANN to intense lobbying from certain stakeholder groups that feel rather passionately about this subject and how this might distract staff from its Brussels' deliverables, it is a safe bet to predict that ICANN just bites the bullet and executes the 2007 agreement.

    Shock and Awe

    Regardless of what actions the ICANN Board takes tomorrow it will be criticized. Therefore, given the new style leadership demonstrated by ICANN President and CEO, Rod Beckstrom and Chairman Peter Dengate Thrush, I predict ICANN goes 'all in." While it may take several years to determine whether the ICANN Board made the right decision in Nairobi, this much is guaranteed for sure, ICANN's actions represent a global economic stimulus plan for attorneys of epic portions that will be paying dividends for year to come. Let the fun begin, and let the chips fall where they may.

    Written by Michael D. Palage, Adjunct Fellow at The Progress & Freedom Foundation

  • ICANN's Board Decisions in Nairobi Will Determine Its Credibility and Respect for Years to Come

    Today is the morning of the most revered Thursday in the ICANN meetings calendar—The public forum. It is tradition personified. It is the day when the show and the showcasing really begin. It is the stage and the choreography of the open microphone that can help influence ICANN decisions one way or another and make the supposed bottom up model appear at its best. Often, it serves to inform the board of issues they may have overlooked, other times it is a pre-planned, pre-arranged and choreographed in advance by proponents aiming to influence the board like a popularity contest. This special day precedes the Friday when the ICANN board makes its decisions, in public, adopting resolutions on many vital issues.

    ICANN Nairobi carries serious expectations by the community of the ICANN Board to stand up and be counted. On the card are the .XXX fiasco, The Expression of Interest, which I and others have called the expression of "Special" Interest as well as on the New gTLDs implementation which is still littered with many unresolved overarching concerns, and not forgetting the Review mechanisms to oversee ICANN performance per the Affirmation of commitments, which may end up being loaded up with ICANN loyalists.

    However, this Thursday and this Friday are unlike any of the previous years. They represent crossroads in ICANN's path that will determine its credibility that will shape its role and influence for years to come under the Beckstrom / Dungate Thrush leaderships. The resolutions ICANN do adopt this Friday or if it chooses to defer decisions on some instead of addressing them squarely will either boost ICANN's credibility or damage them irreparably.

    By Friday 12pm Nairobi time we all should know if the ICANN board and its leadership possess the wisdom and far sightedness of a Solomon or a Joe Blog. Whether they are up to the task, challenge and responsibility bestowed on them by the Affirmation of commitments to rule over the entire global internet will also be known. By noon we will know if they have exhibited the needed leadership, diplomatic, and executive skills and the sincerity to show they can rule over the global internet in a fair, equitable and ubiquitous manner to all its stakeholders from Akron to Afghanistan, from DC to Damascus, from Beijing to Bangalore, delivering on its Affirmation of Commitments (AOC) mandate of ensuring accountability, transparency and the interests of all global Internet users as well as promoting competition, consumer trust and consumer choice.

    Most important and most compelling of all other issues in Nairobi is .XXX . No matter how the board acts ICANN's credibility will be impacted. If the board instructs staff to execute the 2007 registry contract with ICM, ICANN indirectly admits it was wrong and creates a precedent that its board decisions will be questioned endlessly and can be reversed by an Independent Review panels in the future. If the board chooses not to instruct staff to execute the 2007 contract, it raises serious concerns over the seriousness of the AOC and the review mechanisms over ICANN and the New gTLDs. The board may defer some decisions to a later date citing some excuse in order to gauge a better result and prospect.

    But this raises new questions I don't hear much in the ICANN corridors:

    A – Does or doesn't ICANN consider itself as a "Global Public Service Provider" ?
    B – Isn't ICANN a" Global Monopoly Public Service Provider?
    C – As per the AOC, what if ICANN is seen to have failed based on the AOC review panelists?
    D – What happens next?

    In a competitive market if I am a customer of AT&T and they fail me I switch to sprint or Verizon, it is also called consumer choice. But where is the choice in the ICANN role and what happens if ICANN does fails. Does the community issue statements and press releases calling on ICANN once again to improve it like we have the last ten years. This is hardly choice or competition. ICANN needs to remember the difference between the internet world dealing with it because it respects it and sees it providing a great service as a global monopoly Versus being the only game in town ( the world actually). If ICANN was a service provider in a competitive market, I wonder how many would continue using the ICANN service based on its current levels of "Constituents Satisfaction" if another one can serve them better, faster, and cheaper. Are Google or Microsoft listening, or should ITU the only one aiming at this role?

    Other bloggers / friends who are dissatisfied with ICANN wrote and what I add.

    Jonathan Zuck: "But when the Chairman backed away from that stance earlier this week in Nairobi, it became clear that we should have held our breath a little bit longer".

    I say to Jonathan: Stop holding your breath, no human can keep their breath that long, how long have the IDN communities been waiting for IDN gTLDs. ICANN's rational show a clear monopolistic style of management that knows there is nowhere for you to go and get the service you seek of ICANN anywhere else. Welcome to ICANN style of competition and choice.

    Andrew Mack: "A Little Flexibility from ICANN and We Might Just Get IDNs… for Everyone"

    I say to Andrew: The little flexibility you hope for in ICANN is like the short distance that appears between stars when you look up to the night sky. In reality these stars are light years apart. And so is ICANN on IDNs for everyone, I can speak on this matter as an expert on IDNs who has served on the ICANN President Advisory Committee on IDNs since its inception in 2005.

    I will post my verdict after Friday 12pm Nairobi Time.

    Written by Khaled Fattal, Chairman and CEO

  • .ORG to Fully Deploy DNSSEC in June

    .ORG, The Public Interest Registry to complete its final step of DNSSEC deployment by June 30, 2010

    .ORG, The Public Interest Registry (PIR) today announced plans to complete the final step to realizing full DNSSEC deployment in the .ORG registry by accepting second level signed .ORG zones beginning in June of 2010. This positions .ORG as the first generic top-level domain (TLD) to offer full DNSSEC deployment.

    All registrars can now plan to offer an additional security service to their customers. The benefits of DNSSEC include the ability to thwart the increasing predominance of attacks like pharming, cache poisoning, and DNS redirection that have been used to commit fraud, distribute malware, and/or identity theft. DNSSEC, an upgrade to the internet infrastructure, protects Internet resolvers (clients) from forged DNS data, such as that created by DNS cache poisoning.

    "This announcement coupled with recent ones by Comcast, various ccTLDs and even ICANN, is an important signal not only for application providers, ISPs, and telcos, but also for registrars to begin planning for their implementation now, to address the need for enhanced security for their customers," said Alexa Raad, CEO of PIR. "Ensuring Internet security and stability are among our highest priorities and being the first to fully deploy DNSSEC positions .ORG registrants to be amongst the first to safeguard their users from escalating security threats, especially as Internet usage continues to grow exponentially."

    Launching signed delegations, with the technical support of Afilias, is the final step in PIR's phased approach to fully deploying DNSSEC within the .ORG zone. A rigorous "friends and family" testing phase, started in June of 2008 has enabled PIR not only to thoroughly test and address operational and deployment issues related to zone management, key distribution and rollover, but also to assist registrars in the development and deployment of the service.

    "We applaud PIR's leadership in the deployment of DNSSEC in the gTLD space," said Rod Beckstrom, President and Chief Executive Officer of ICANN. "Opening up general registration of signed zones in .ORG is a major step forward."

    All interested registrars must pass a mandatory DNSSEC Certification Test. For more information regarding .ORG DNSSEC initiatives and information, please visit: www.pir.org/dnssec.

  • ICANN to Reconsider the .XXX Decision on March 12

    ICANN had previously given the domain the go ahead in 2005, but reversed the decision two years later amidst protests from US conservative groups. An independent review recently concluded that decision was unfair and that the plan should be reconsidered.

    Read full story: BBC

  • A Little Flexibility from ICANN and We Might Just Get IDNs… for Everyone

    Nobody doubts that some time in the near future there will be Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) in Chinese, Russian or Arabic scripts. The Chinese, Russian and Arabic-character-using worlds are large—encompassing hundreds of millions of current and potential users. They are politically influential blocs, with the ability to demand action in international meetings. And perhaps most importantly, they are—at least when taken together—rich. Everybody knows that access on the web in these languages is not a matter of if, but simply a question of when…

    But what about the poorer nations of the world that use scripts other than the largest IDNs and the typical Latin character set currently available on the net? What about Amharic, or Georgian, Azeri or Thai, Burmese or Cambodian? Doesn't the internet community have a goal of reaching out to them in their own languages too? The answer is yes, but I fear that despite the rhetoric, some of ICANN's policies may actually end up creating disincentives for companies wishing to fully build out the IDN space.

    To listen to the words of Rod Beckstrom, ICANN's new-ish leader, the community's goal is to help make the internet available to anyone in their own language—and in their own character set or script. And, as we heard during the Seoul ICANN meeting last year—there was actually a celebratory cocktail to usher in the new IDN age—IDNs are the future. Still, work on Chinese, Korean and the like is only the beginning. There are dozens of scripts out there.

    However, there is potentially a real flaw in ICANN's planning that threatens to upend this vision of universal IDN access, effectively leaving some scripts "out in the cold". Under ICANN's new gTLD implementation plan as presently proposed, registries operating existing gTLDs (or those hoping to operate new ones) will be required to apply for each IDN version separately… and pay full fees for each one. This directly impacts the go/no go decision for registry operators who need to make a reasonable "business case" for each script that they apply for, in order to justify the high application costs. And, while these costs might seem trivial for gTLDs in, say, Chinese or Arabic, this policy pretty much ensures that registry operators (new or old) will leave some scripts undeveloped.

    The likely upshot is that the gTLD revolution going on around the world will bypass Georgian, Burmese, and Amharic entirely… furthering the digital divide.

    There may be a solution, if ICANN has the flexibility to adjust its policies. Many of the evaluation costs in the new gTLD process are duplicated. As just one example, if a potential registry operator applies for multiple gTLDs, it is likely that most technical qualifications will only have to be evaluated once. This would lower ICANN's evaluation costs, and should lead to reduced application costs as well, leading to more competition for (and interest in) smaller scripts. And there may be other ways to lower the barriers to entry so that companies large and small will be able to make the business case for a truly, fully IDN-friendly internet.

    At every ICANN and Internet Governance Forum meeting we hear about the need to make the internet an equal- (or at least more equal-) access platform, one that respects language and culture diversity. Lowering the costs for companies wanting to provide IDN access in less popular scripts is one obvious, tangible way to make this happen. A little flexibility could go a long way to providing a real internet future for the millions that speak and write Armenian or Burmese or a host of other languages.

    Written by Andrew Mack, Principal at AMGlobal Consulting

  • SPECIAL: Updates from the ICANN Meetings in Nairobi

    CircleID in collaboration with the team from Dyn Inc., will be bringing you video blogs and updates from the 37th ICANN meetings in Nairobi, Kenya (7-12 March 2010). Stay tuned as we keep this page updated through out the meetings. Updates are posted in reverse chronological order, Nairobi (EAT) time.

    Coverage of past ICANN meetings:
    ICANN 36 in Seoul, South Korea
    ICANN 35 in Sydney, Australia
    ICANN 34 in Mexico City

    Comments and questions?
    Please post them below in the comment section of the page or send us an email.

    * * *

    Update / Local Time: Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:35 PM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. sits down with Bart Boswinkle, Senior Policy Advisor for the Country Code Name Supporting Organization, at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya.



    Update / Local Time: Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:30 PM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. speaks with Zahid Jamil, a representative for business interests and other major topics, and a big player for ICANN, at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya.



    Update / Local Time: Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:50 PM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. talks about DNS Security (DNSSEC) with longtime Internet industry leader Steve Crocker, CEO of Shinkuro Inc., at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya. Updates on the root being signed or scheduled to be signed: .ORG to be signed in July, .COM next year, .NET end of 2010. ccTLDs's showing much activity across the board.



    Update / Local Time: Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:46 PM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. spends a few minutes with Ndeye Maimouna, Director of ITC in Senegal, about security around the location of this ICANN 37 meeting being in Nairobi, Kenya.



    Update / Local Time: Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:32 AM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. discusses a 2nd topic with Margie Milam about vertical integration and registry/registrar separation around distribution at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya.



    Update / Local Time: Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:31 AM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. speaks with ICANN Policy Director, Marika Konings, about registration abuse at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya.



    Update / Local Time: Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:30 PM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. meets with Stephane Van Gelder, General Manager of Indom.com at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya.



    Update / Local Time: Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:07 PM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. meets with Margie Milam, ICANN Senior Policy Counselor, at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya. The main topic for this video is Specific Trademark Issues (STI).



    Update / Local Time: Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:38 PM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. speaks with ICANN CEO, Rod Beckstrom, at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya. Big stories coming out of Kenya include further networking out of Africa, EOI board vote and progress areas for new gTLDs.



    Update / Local Time: Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:10 PM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. has a discussion with Liz Gasster, ICANN Senior Policy Counselor, at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya. WHOIS is the main topic.



    Update / Local Time: Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 7:50 PM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. chats with Avri Doria, Chair, Executive Committee of the ICANN Non-Commercial Stakeholders Group, at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya. Expressions of interest in new gTLD is the main topic.



    Update / Local Time: Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:24 AM — Gray Chynoweth, GC, VP Business Operations for Dyn Inc. discusses the .XXX TLD with Stuart Lawley, Chairman & President of the ICM Registry at ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya.



    Update / Local Time: Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 11:23 PM — Gray Chynoweth, General Counsel & VP, HR at Dyn Inc. discusses the upcoming ICANN 37 meeting in Nairobi, Kenya. Gray introduces the video blog series, done in conjunction with CircleID for the 4th time. Gray also outlines the topics for this event including security and remote access, new TLD's, the .xxx gTLD, DNSSEC rollout, root scaling, WHOIS study and more.

    If you're not making the trip out to Africa, stay tuned and watch all of the footage from ICANN 37 in Nairobi, Kenya following Gray's hike of Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania with other Internet professionals (http://kili2010.com).



    Brought to you in partnership with Dyn Inc. Please add your feedback and suggestions using the comment form provided on this page or contact us directly.

  • ICANN Nairobi Kicks Off This Weekend - So What Is Cooking? .XXX , New TLDs and More

    The ICANN meeting in Nairobi starts officially next Monday. However, as is normally the case, by the time Monday rolls around people will already have been working since Saturday morning (if not earlier).

    All ICANN meetings seem to be surrounded by some bit of controversy and excitement, but the Nairobi meeting is possibly more dramatic than many others. The last attempt to hold a meeting in Nairobi failed, with ICANN opting to hold the meeting near LA's airport, LAX, instead. This time round there was quite a bit of controversy and tension surrounding the meeting's location.

    The end result of the tension, security worries and everything else is that quite a large number of people who would normally attend the meeting will be staying at home.

    Others will be traveling to Reston, VA, where Neustar has organised a US offsite location. Though with the time difference between VA and Nairobi anyone in attendance will end up working through the night!

    So what's on the agenda?

    New TLDs—this time round the focus will be on "EOI"—the concept of "expressions of interest" that was mooted at the last meeting in Seoul.

    DNS SEC will be on the agenda again, but getting excited about it is far from easy - sorry!

    IPv4 depletion will probably get a look in, but it's still a "hard sell". Until ISPs "buy in" and start deploying v6 on their public networks it's going to be nigh on impossible to make any tangible or meaningful movement in this area.

    IDN ccTLDs. You can expect updates from the various countries that have applied using the "fast track". There might be more applications from other countries, as the meeting will have attracted its usual media circus.

    But the real "hot potato" for ICANN is going to be .xxx

    Following on from the recent decision which found that ICANN had "dropped the ball", the ICANN board will be voting on the Friday of the public meeting.

    In reality you can expect to see board members being canvassed / briefed / harassed by interested parties pretty much all week. How will they vote?

    Will the US government try to intervene?

    If ICANN do move ahead with .xxx, will that have any impact on new TLDs?

    If ICANN's board doesn't move ahead with .xxx this time round there is little or no chance that Stuart Lawley and ICM Registry are going to throw in the towel.

    To start with they've no reason to. They have just won a legal battle that shows that ICANN was in the wrong. Sure, it may not be "binding", but any decision that so much as casts a doubt on ICANN's processes and procedures is a "win" for ICM—and rightly so.

    So how would ICANN fare if ICM were to pursue this through to the next level?

    ICANN stakeholders probably don't want to see their money being poured down a legal drain ... I know I don't.

    Written by Michele Neylon, MD of Blacknight Solutions

  • Creditor Can Execute Against Domain Name Where Registry is Located: Office Depot v. Zuccarini

    The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling in Office Depot v. Zuccarini [Scribd link], agreeing that a creditor may levy against a domain name in the jurisdiction where the domain name registry is located. The decision is significant for two reasons. First, it affirms (or reaffirms) that domain names are property subject to the claims of creditors. Second, it allows creditors to proceed against domain names where the registry is located, thus allowing creditors to proceed against domain names in one proceeding and more importantly levy against domain names located abroad (where the registry is located in the United States). Overall, this makes getting at a domain name much easier for creditors.

    Background: Office Depot originally obtained a judgment against frequent cybersquatting defendant John Zuccarini. Office Depot then assigned the judgment to DS Holdings. Office Depot obtained the judgment in 2000 and it's surprising that 10 years later the judgment is finally being enforced against something. Although Zuccarini is proceeding pro se, it seems like he was or became well versed in putting up roadblocks and delaying resolution of the litigation.

    DS went after 190 .com domain names that were registered in Zuccarini's name. DS originally tried unsuccessfully to have the domain names transferred directly to it. (This was the technique successfully used by the plaintiff in Bosh v. Zavala.) Later, DS sought to have a receiver appointed over the domain names. The district court granted DS's request to have the receiver appointed, and Zuccarini appealed. Zuccarini's appeal focused on whether it was proper to appoint the receiver in the Northern District of California, since the domain names were not necessarily "located" there.

    The court's ruling: The court runs through basic principles of in rem jurisdiction and what rules apply. The court then looks to federal rules to determine where the receiver should be appointed in this case. Finding no applicable federal rule, the court looks to California law. California law provides that a writ of execution may be issued "in the county where the levy is to be made." With this in the background, the two questions presented by the court are: (1) "are domain names property that is subject to execution?" and (2) "if so, where are the domain names located for purposes of execution?"

    With respect to the first question, the court cites to Kremen v. Cohen, and easily concludes that (under California law) "domain names are intangible property subject to a writ of execution." Kremen undermined Network Solutions, Inc. v. Umbro Int'l, Inc., 259 Va. 759, 770 (Va. 2000), a Virginia case widely cited for the proposition that creditors cannot get at domain names because domain names are contract rights rather then property. To the extent Kremen did not refute Umbro, this decision definitely provides the necessary ammunition to creditors. (Again, collection is state-specific, and apart from the analysis of the nature of domain names, the outcome in these cases turns on the statute in question, which vary from state to state. That said, I think given the robust marketplace in domain names, Umbro's conception of the domain name as a personal services agreement seems outdated, and most courts will easily recognize this.)

    With respect to the second question, the court acknowledges that "attaching a situs to intangible property is ... a legal fiction," and the determination must be made in a "context-specific" manner. Fairness was relevant to the court's determination of the appropriate situs, and the court was understandably not receptive to Zuccarini's policy arguments that allowing a court to issue an order directed to the registry would mean that every .com and .net domain name could be levied through courts in the Northern District of California. The court also looked to the ACPA, which provides for in rem jurisdiction over certain cases where the "registrar, registry, or other domain name authority" is located. Although this was not an ACPA case, the court found the structure set up by the statute persuasive and that the writ was appropriately issued from Northern District of California since VeriSign (the registry for .com domains) is located there.

    My reaction: The decision clears up two things. Although post Kremen v. Cohen there shouldn't have been much dispute that domain names are property which are subject to the claims of creditors, the case clears up any lingering doubt that may have existed. (Kremen and this case applied California law, but the result shouldn't vary much across other states.) Second, the decision makes clear that a court which has jurisdiction over the registry can issue an order allowing the creditor to get at the domain names. The case also implicitly affirms that getting a receiver appointed to sell the domain names is the appropriate route for the creditor. Getting the name transferred to the creditor is not a remedy allowed under California law (Palacio Del Mar Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. McMahon). Additionally, a transfer of domain names from a cybersquatter to a judgment creditor raises some issues around potential infringement of third party rights through sales or other exploitation of the domain names. (See this post on Bosh v. Zavala for some discussion of those issues.) The method ultimately used by DS in this case (a receiver) avoids all of these issues, or at least shifts them over to the receiver rather than the creditor.

    Finally, as mentioned above, this ruling makes clear that regardless of whether a domain name is registered through a foreign registrar, a court having jurisdiction over the registry can issue an order directing transfer of the domain names to a receiver. With respect to .com and .net domain names, this means that creditors can try to get at these domain names through proceeding in the Northern District of California (as the court notes, VeriSign is the registry for .com and .net domain names and is headquartered in Mountain View). While the ACPA allows plaintiffs to file in rem suits where the registry is located, it's nice (for creditors) to have a similar ruling in the post-judgment context, and one from the Ninth Circuit as well.

    Will this cause a rush of similar claims to be filed in the Northern District of California? It's tough to say, but even post Kremen, it does not seem like there's been a ton of post-judgment collections activity with respect to domain names. From a practitioner's standpoint, it's certainly nice to have this rule on the books.

    An odd footnote: Zuccarini is a colorful character whose internet exploits have gotten him in trouble with the law. He was arrested in 2003. (Here's a post at CircleID rounding up reactions to his arrest.) According to his Wikipedia entry which contains a link to a Bureau of Prisons search, he was released in 2005.

    Written by Venkat Balasubramani, Tech-Internet Lawyer at Focal PLLC

  • Study Suggests New gTLD Cybersquatting, Defensive Registrations Overestimated

    According to recent study conducted by Minds + Machines, historical data analysis suggests brand owners do not necessarily register their brands when it comes to new generic Top-Level Domains. From the report: "A survey of the domain registration behavior of Fortune 100 companies reveals that they have not registered many of their trademarks in recently created generic top-level domains (gTLDs). A sample of 1043 brands were registered in less than 30% of the eight new open gTLDs created after 2001. If historical registration data is a guide, brands are unlikely to undertake many defensive domain name registrations in the proposed new gTLDs, and furthermore are unlikely to be the victims of cybersquatting."

  • Nominet Passes Governance Test With Flying Colours

    The dot-uk registry Nominet has passed a crucial governance test with flying colours, voting yes [pdf] on eight Board resolutions with more than 93 percent member support.

    The resolutions will make a variety of changes to the organisation, ranging from an increase in the number of Board members to an explicit statement that Nominet will work in the public interest. The vote was a crucial test for both Nominet's Board and members: trust and confidence in the Board had been damaged by an acrimonious internal battle, which had subsequently led to the UK government threatening to end self-regulation of the UK's registry operations.

    Overwhelmingly support for the changes will help put Nominet back on the right path and, members hope, enable work to begin on a range of pragmatic issues surrounding the registration of dot-uk domains, such as the ability to register domains for terms other than two years.

    Nominet itself called the votes "a defining moment for the UK domain market and the UK Internet landscape" with CEO Lesley Cowley saying that she believed Nominet's members had "proven their commitment to considering the needs of all stakeholders" and that the changes would demonstrate to the UK government that the reserve powers currently contained in a Bill going through Parliament "will not be necessary".

    Here's a quick rundown of the changes with what they mean for Nominet and dot-uk:

    Public purpose

    Nominet's articles have been changed to include that fact that the organisation works in the public interest i.e. the dot-uk registry has a duty beyond its members to make decisions that work in the overall best interests of the UK.

    Upside: This change was highlighted in particular by the UK government as being crucial for continued self-regulation. Nominet's unusual member model means that those who register dot-uk domains are the only people entitled to vote on changes. This worries people because dot-uk has a far bigger impact than just a market for selling Internet addresses. With this change (with was made up of three separate resolutions that got 95, 96 and 97 percent support), the threat of government regulation should be quashed. It also demonstrates a willingness by Nominet's members to be pragmatic. All of this is excellent news for a healthy, independent dot-uk registry.

    Downside: You can expect the public purpose clause to be quoted by the Board in future for decisions unpopular with members. The public benefit aspect of Nominet's work was also used as justification for the suspension of several thousand dot-uk domains which the UK police said were being used to sell counterfeit goods. The decision raised concerns that the UK police may be provided with an effective bypass of the law courts when dealing with dot-uk domains.

    Board and vote changes

    The Board will be expanded from the current six (four non-exec directors plus CEO and chairman) to 11 (three independent directors and up to two more Nominet executives). And the voting threshold for ordinary Board resolutions will be reduced from two-thirds to a simple majority, which is in line with standard company law (measures passed with 94 and 96 percent approval).

    Upside: You get a bigger Board, which allows for more expertise and helps spread the load. You also get more day-to-day managers on the Board—which is crucial with helping to introducing pragmatic information and advice (although I think the plan is to add only one more Nominet exec at this time). This should help Nominet deal with its expansion and make the whole outfit more robust and professional.

    The voting change should also make the organisation more flexible, which is crucial in an increasingly competitive registry market—particularly with ICANN about to introduce potentiually hundreds of new top-level domains. Nominet's low turnout problems are also lifted slightly by lowering the voting percentage. And it reduces the possibility for large members to effectively hold a veto over the organisation—which is not in the wider interests of anyone.

    Downside: The three new directors are not directly elected but are chosen by the Board and then put to the membership for approval. This approach was specifically designed to prevent possible capture by a determined group. In this case, it was domainers frustrated with what they viewed as unfair decisions, who started using Nominet's own systems to put representatives on Nominet's Board and Public Advisory Body. And it was this action that led to the Board crisis, worried the UK government and eventually led to this whole voting situation.

    So while having three directors chosen by the Board should effectively prevent the situation from happening again, so making Nominet itself more stable and robust, there is a risk that this approach could cause resentment and, over time, pressure may start building up again. Hopefully what will happen is that Nominet members and Board will settle down, introduce more balancing mechanisms and start addressing domainer concerns—at which point the three directors can be made directly electable.

    There is a potential downside in reducing the voting threshold. Nominet largely survived the dotcom boom and crash intact because it had been set up with tight rules that shielded it from speculation. As Nominet opens itself up more to making changes, it is conceivable that there could be a repeat of the crazy dotcom days and the organization be on shakier ground. However, considering where the registry world is now, considering where Nominet is now and considering the other changes made, this is a pretty unlikely scenario.

    Also, one important aspect that I believe I'm right in saying still hasn't been tackled is that there is *still* a 90 percent voting approval requirement. That is something that needs to be dealt with some where down the line. A 90 percent voting restriction just doesn't make sense.

    Pricing

    This was the riskiest one. The Board was asking for the right to change prices without requiring a formal vote from members. The logic was good: the current system provides no flexibility and the Board was effectively unable to steer the organisation. The approach where members' consent was required to make changes to prices was potentially destabilising, and it meant that several large companies had an effective veto over Board action.

    Nonetheless, asking people to give up a power that has a direct impact on their businesses and hand it to a Board in whom some do not currently have confidence was a tall order. Incredibly, it passed with a hefty 93 and 95 percent.

    I think here was a clear example of the Board listening and explaining and gaining the confidence of its members. The Board dropped initial plans to also give itself the right to change member pricing after a few members said they were uncomfortable with it. Calm reason has prevailed in this case.

    Upside: Nominet can start playing more effectively in its market. The Board is also put in a situation where it can act like a Board. And the effective veto over finances by some members, which is not a healthy dynamic, is largely pulled out. The vote also demonstrates that members are willing to hand over some power in the expectation of a Nominet Board making good decisions. It will also please the UK government which in its darker moods looked at Nominet as a price-fixing cartel.

    Downside: The Board needs to use its new power carefully and only with respectful engagement with members. This is a big trust issue. The current Board has already said it has no plans to change prices, but a Board in a few years may do so and if the new Board doesn't have sufficient institutional memory it may make changes bluntly and cause tremendous ill-feeling in its members—who will probably be the same people and so remember the trust that provided in this vote.

    Membership

    A slightly vague resolution was passed that Nominet would look at its membership model. A 95 percent vote agreed "in principle" that Nominet's constitution should be "further revised to provide for wider stakeholder involvement". And that the Board should develop "one or more proposals to achieve this" which it will then put out to public consultation.

    This is a big issue. In fact, it is the biggest issue in terms of Nominet's future. Whichever way it goes, members will at some point have to vote to give themselves less power. This will be a good thing because dot-uk is much, much more than just those companies that sell domains, but a large number of members will need to be persuaded of the greater good and why handing over some power is in their own interests.

    I think Nominet risks underestimating the trickiness of this task, especially since it will need to combine gentle persuasion with hard rulemaking, carrots and sticks, to make it work. The best example of this is the voter turnout for these resolutions.

    Of 2,727 members, only 1,055 or 39 percent of them actually voted. Nominet went to great lengths to engage its membership on these votes and was very successful in that double the number of people that normally vote turned out this time. And 72 percent of all possible votes were received (there is a vote weighting system in place).

    Now, a 72 percent vote turnout is good (although considering its importance you would really want 80+ percent), but a 39 percent voter turnout is terrible.

    It's not hard to figure out why: if you randomly pick Nominet members from its list, chances are that a third of them don't even have functioning websites, or have websites that haven't been touched in 10 years.

    A HUGE number of Nominet members aren't really doing anything. And the reason for that is Nominet's member pricing model. You pay a big upfront fee for joining of £400, and then after that a £100 annual subscription. The problem with this is that people will think the £100 is worth it each year even if they do nothing because they paid such a large amount upfront. So you end up with large numbers of completely disinterested members.

    Nominet also does a pretty poor job of engaging its members (although it has hugely improved in recent years) explaining to them why they should get involved and how to get involved. The company also doesn't actively canvass for members so it is a little out-of-tune with why people would want to become members, and what it is that the silent majority actually want from Nominet.

    There are a number of things the organisation could do, but the risk is that it could end up upsetting members but penalising some unnecessarily. I think there are two initial solutions:

    1. Change the membership pricing model—decrease the initial fee and pay for it by increasing the annual fee. The problem here of course is that the Board specifically pulled out the right to change membership fees from this round of votes after members got nervous.
    2. Start enforcing some compliance. If members haven't updated their websites or contact details, they can be given a warning. Likewise if their website doesn't exist. Give people a reasonable period of time to update details and if they don't, cancel their membership when it comes up for renewal.

    It would take 12 months for these two changes to work themselves through the system but at the end of it you would have cut out the huge amount of member dead wood that Nominet carries, and it will have put members in the position of deciding whether they really want to engage with Nominet.

    But that is just one side of the membership coin—dealing with existing members. The other side is pulling in people that are not Nominet members, and may not even wish to register domains, into Nominet so that the organisation can become more representative and make decisions on behalf of a broader cross-section of people (its public purpose aspect).

    Fortunately there are plenty of case studies here—ICANN and the IGF being the most obvious. And, fortunately Nominet's management and some of its members, know both ICANN and the IGF and the whole idea of "multi-stakeholder" decision-making pretty well. There are also some organisations that would help, such as the Internet Society, who president Lynn St Amour specifically mentioned her interest in this aspect in a supporting quote to the votes.

    But that doesn't mean it will be easy—Nominet will need to develop a hybrid system that accounts for Nominet's unique membership model and the fact that it has a direct relationship with registrants.

    It is possible that recently announced changes to the Policy Advisory Body—where people self-create in order to help develop new policy rather than leave to a selected group—may be helpful in developing a way to get Nominet members working with those that share a common interest.

    But at some point you will need to give people who are not Nominet registrars the right to vote on decisions—and most likely without paying for the priviledge. This is not going to be an easy model to create, and it will be the next stage in the evolution of Nominet as the dot-uk registry operator.

    In conclusion

    Stepping back from the details to the fact that eight Board resolutions were passed with 93 percent and up member approval, this is great news for Nominet and its members. The issues garnered huge support. Vital changes can now be made. The UK government should get off Nominet's back. And it will be possible to start rebuilding trust and heal wounds. And, most vitally, it means that Nominet can now focus its attention on doing what it is there to do—making the dot-uk registry work better.

    Written by Kieren McCarthy, Internet consultant, journalist and author

  • Switching on the Light: Expression of Interest for New TLDs

    They say late converts are the most passionate believers. Until now I haven't supported the Expression of Interest (EOI) for new TLDs, the proposed mechanism to measure the number and type of likely applications. Not because it won't work (I think it'll work fine) but because I didn't think it was necessary. I've changed my mind. Here's why.

    The EOI was conceived to counter claims from the anti-TLD crowd that tens of thousands of TLDs will 'flood the root infrastructure' and 'dozens' of TLDs will create morality, trademark and geographic problems at the top level. Having spent the better part of three years talking with potential TLD applicants, I know these claims are untrue. There are two main reasons we won't see huge volumes of TLDs or a lot of 'problem' strings: (1) obtaining and operating a TLD is very expensive; and (2) there are carefully constructed procedures to eliminate problematic applications.

    Factoring in all the costs, it takes an applicant at least $500,000 to get a TLD ready for root entry. Given this cost, only a fruitcake would apply for a string that faces legitimate trademark, morality, community, confusing similarity or geographic concerns. And there aren't that many fruitcakes with $500,000. Even someone wanting to make a political statement has much faster and cheaper ways to do it than applying for a TLD. Will some applications generate problems? Perhaps a few. Most strings will be very carefully chosen by their applicants to move through the process without objections. Talk to anyone who's dealt with a lot of applicants and you'll hear the same thing.

    Will thousands of new strings 'flood the root infrastructure'? Not from what I see. It's expensive, and there simply aren't that many viable applicants out there. Also, many applications will be duplicates for the same string (e.g. something popular like .BLOG might see a half dozen EOIs) so the number of EOI applications will be greater than the number of actual strings entering the root. If more than 300 unique strings emerge from the EOI process I'll buy everyone a drink at the ICANN Latin America meeting in December.

    Why did I become an EOI supporter? First, some people don't seem to believe what I explained in the previous paragraphs. I continue to see exaggerated claims of TLD volumes/ problems, and I continue to hear this alarmism repeated back to me when I visit political offices in Washington DC. It's as if someone's actively spreading disinformation there. Second, there's no reason not to have an EOI. As long as it's mandatory it will produce precise planning data, and there are no harmful effects from it.

    I don't think anyone can object to the EOI's principles. It's about broader communication and more accurate information, and those can only be good things. If you believe there'll be rampant trademark infringement at the top level, why oppose an EOI that measures this? If you think there'll be widespread morality concerns, why oppose an EOI that provides data on this? If you worry there'll be thousands of TLDs flooding the root infrastructure, why oppose the precise measurement of actual TLD load?

    As the EOI can't be opposed on principle, the arguments against it tend to be peripheral, and weak. Here are the ones I've seen:

    'It Will Favor ICANN Insiders'

    First, as others have pointed out, the majority of ICANN insiders don't want new TLDs. Insiders have been around a long time and have typically found comfortable niches with the status quo. New TLDs upset their world. The majority of TLD applicants are very new to ICANN—I wouldn't call them insiders.

    Also, there'll be an extensive communications campaign before the EOI window opens and this campaign will educate a far wider audience than current ICANN followers. It will be essentially the same campaign that would have preceded the opening of the full application window (had there not been an EOI). The campaign will alert new people that TLDs are happening and tell them how the application process works. Given that it's the same campaign (the same size and duration) why would having it in conjunction with an EOI favor 'insiders' any more than having it in conjunction with the full application window? This criticism isn't logical. To maximize community awareness and involvement, and to get timely EOI data, we should start the communications campaign as soon as possible and run it for as long as necessary. The planning for it is already completed. It's ready to go.

    'EOI Will Create a Market in TLD Slots'

    This doesn't make much sense. Here's why:

    a. The Rules Are Still the Rules. Even if an EOI position is sold the applying entity cannot change. The new owner of the entity must continue meet all DAG obligations (including the 'Applicant Background' requirements at evaluation question 11). So we're not talking bait and switch. Evaluation of the application (and any objections to it based on its ownership) don't start with the EOI, they start when the full application is submitted. Given this, why do we care if there's a new owner for the EOI entity? If George forms Acme Registry Company, submits an EOI, and then sells Acme Registry Company to Susan, why do we care if Susan is the new owner, as long as Susan meets all the evaluation criteria? If the concern is that Susan didn't know about the EOI process and bought Bob's company for an inflated price let's solve that problem by launching a strong communications campaign as soon as possible. That will educate Susan and others to form their own companies and submit their own EOIs.

    b. It Won't Happen Any More Than it Would Without EOIs. The EOI doesn't increase the likelihood of TLD applicants being bought or sold. The cost of a 'place at the table' has always been $55K. Under the pre-EOI model you submitted $185K but you could quickly get $130K back on refund—so it's always cost $55K. Having an EOI won't increase any potential speculation.

    c. Speculation is Very Risky. Submitting an EOI purely for speculative sale is extremely risky. If it's a popular string, there will be multiple applicants and you may find yourself with no string and no $55K. If it's a less popular string, and you're the only applicant, you may not find a buyer for it. If you're trying to sell the string to someone with community, geographic or trademark rights, they don't have to buy it from you, they can just Object to you (which costs them much less than buying it). The net result—speculation is very risky, and the payoff is low, so it's unlikely to happen with any frequency.

    'EOI is Too Expensive for Some Applicants'

    As a self-employed person I sympathize with cost concerns, but this isn't a criticism of the EOI. It's a criticism of the cost of the TLD program. The EOI hasn't added to applicant cost. Previously, the fees for getting a TLD were $185K. With EOI, the fees are $55K plus another $130K if a full application is submitted. The total in both cases is $185K. Applicants will actually be better off with the EOI because it involves fee payment in two phases, rather than all up-front.

    So this criticism isn't about the EOI. It's a call for ICANN to start subsidizing some applicants (or somehow guess which applications will be cheaper to process). Subsidization is a very separate issue from the EOI, but let me make one important observation about it.

    Running a new gTLD registry will be very expensive and the $55K EOI fee is the tip of the cost iceberg for applicants. The DAG has been loaded up with extensive new requirements that add to operating cost (e.g. DNSSEC, financial continuity instrument, numerous trademark and other rights protection mechanisms, malicious activity mechanisms, audits, data escrow, compliance reports, etc.). If a decision is to made to subsidize someone because they can't afford the $55K EOI fee then whoever is subsidizing that applicant should also plan to subsidize their ongoing registry operations. For example, this same applicant will almost certainly need to be subsidized for the Continuity Instrument at DAG Evaluation Question 50 (this instrument requires up-front funding for three years of registry operation). EOI cost is insignificant compared to overall registry cost.

    In summary, I think the benefits of the EOI significantly outweigh the criticisms of it. I encourage the Board to vote 'Yes' in Nairobi and start the communication campaign immediately.

    The Communications Campaign Should Begin Immediately

    Approving an EOI without committing to the communications campaign is meaningless. Here's why:

    The Sooner We Get EOI Results The More Useful They'll Be

    Operational readiness and root scaling planning is going on right now, but it's based on assumptions (e.g. how many contention sets will there be? how many morality objections should we plan for? what size hamsters should be on the wheel powering the XYZ root server?). The sooner we get EOI data the more useful this data will be as an input to planning—and we can't get full EOI data till we've performed the communications campaign.

    Greater Public Awareness is a Good Thing

    The communications campaign will educate new people that TLDs are happening and how they're happening. Let's involve those people now so we get maximum participation in the process and maximum involvement in the outstanding issues. Why not involve new people now?

    Starting the Communications Campaign Isn't a Policy Issue

    Whether or not we should have a Communications Campaign is policy—but that policy has been decided in the affirmative. 'When' the campaign starts is an implementation decision. Let's stop emasculating the staff by making every implementation step a policy matter.

    Starting the Communication Campaign Doesn't Set an EOI Closing Date

    Opening the communications campaign doesn't mean we're tied to dates for the EOI window. We can always extend the communications period or we can delay closing the EOI window. Also, we could have the EOI window open during (and close after) the communications campaign. This would give us EOI data sooner, and would add a useful sense of urgency to the communications message.

    As the staff report indicates, not every issue has to be resolved before accepting EOIs. Let's take the thorniest remaining issue - vertical integration. Let's base the EOI and DAG on compromise language developed in 2009 (the 100K name limit) or on language from existing contracts such as MOBI and TEL. Either of these approaches are reasonable compromises. If the PDP ends up changing things we'll adjust.

    I'm hoping the Board approves the EOI in Nairobi and starts the Communications Campaign immediately. We've been hearing about the TLD boogieman for years now. Let's switch on the EOI lights and see if he's real.

    Written by Richard J Tindal

  • Domain Name Registration Now 192 Million Worldwide

    New domain name registrations in the fourth quarter of 2009 reached 3.7 million domain name registrations per month totaling close to 11 million new domain name registrations across all of the Top-Level Domains (TLDs) in the last quarter of 2009, according the latest Domain Name Industry Brief by VeriSign. "The base of country code Top-Level Domain Names (ccTLDs) rose to 78.6 million domain names, a three percent increase quarter over quarter and a 10 percent increase year over year. In terms of total registrations, .com continues to have the highest base followed by .cn (China), .de (Germany), .net and .uk (United Kingdom)."

  • XXX Saga Continues

    Sex and the internet. Put the two together and you are bound to find an interesting story. While the saga surrounding sex.com took a new twist in the last couple of days, with the current owners going dotbomb, the .xxx story also took an interesting turn.

    ICM Registry LLC applied to ICANN to run the .xxx TLD. You don't need to be a genius to work out which sector .xxx was aimed at - adult entertainment / mature content.

    For several years ICM and ICANN tangoed.

    In the end the ICANN board voted during the Lisbon meeting (March 30th 2007) against .xxx and focus shifted to other events. The Lisbon meeting was the first ICANN meeting that I attended and I remember the tension in the hotel bar on the night before the board meeting. You could have cut the air with a knife. ICM and their supporters were literally in one camp, while those in opposition were in another. Westerdal's article (linked above) covers most of the salient points in the history of the .xxx bid to that date.

    However the story of .xxx did not end in Lisbon.

    But ICM weren't going to simply "roll over". They'd already had one application for the .xxx TLD rejected and so they then asked for an independent review. That was back in September of last year, with parts of the process taking place earlier in the year.

    The independent review involved testimony from not only ICM executives, but also former ICANN CEO Dr Paul Twomey, Dr Vint Cerf and many many others.

    For those involved with the new TLD process the outcome of any review of ICM's .xxx application will be examined very closely. The new TLD application guidebook, which is still being drafted, will obviously be influenced by any previous TLD applications. Any review process that takes place outside the "normal" ICANN process could be a source of concern not only for ICANN, as an organisation, but also for organisations wishing to launch a new domain extension. If the ICANN procedures and processes can be shown to be flawed then there may be a whole range of issues for both ICANN and the applicants to deal with prior to any forward movement in the new TLDs.

    So earlier this evening ICANN CEO, Rod Beckstrom, tweeted that the independent review had found in ICM's favour—with a vote of 2 - 1.

    Shortly afterwards the actual decision was published on the ICANN website.

    If you have the time you can plough through the entire document (about 80 pages), but the key "takeaway" from this is that ICANN has lost.

    The ICANN board's decision has been shown to be flawed.

    The panel states:

    ...the Panel finds ground for questioning the neutral and objective performance of the Board, and the consistency of its so doing with its obligation not to single out ICM Registry for disparate treatment

    Not good. That strongly suggests that ICANN's board may have been influenced by external forces - in all likelihood the US government.

    The rest of their findings are worth quoting, as they are very important and shine a spotlight on the inconsistencies:

    The Panel concludes, for the reasons stated above, that:
    First, the holdings of the Independent Review Panel are advisory in
    nature; they do not constitute a binding arbitral award.
    Second, the actions and decisions of the ICANN Board are not entitled
    to deference whether by application of the "business judgment" rule or
    otherwise; they are to be appraised not deferentially but objectively.
    Third, the provision of Article 4 of ICANN's Articles of Incorporation
    prescribing that ICANN "shall operate for the benefit of the Internet
    community as a whole, carrying out its activities in conformity with relevant
    principles of international law and applicable international conventions and
    local law," requires ICANN to operate in conformity with relevant general
    principles of law (such as good faith) as well as relevant principles of
    international law, applicable international conventions, and the law of the
    State of California.
    Fourth, the Board of ICANN in adopting its resolutions of June 1, 2005,
    found that the application of ICM Registry for the .XXX sTLD met the required
    sponsorship criteria.
    Fifth, the Board's reconsideration of that finding was not consistent
    with the application of neutral, objective and fair documented policy.
    Sixth, in respect of the first foregoing holding, ICANN prevails; in
    respect of the second foregoing holding, ICM Registry prevails; in respect of
    the third foregoing holding, ICM Registry prevails; in respect of the fourth
    foregoing holding, ICM Registry prevails; and in respect of the fifth foregoing
    holding, ICM Registry prevails. Accordingly, the prevailing party is ICM
    Registry. It follows that, in pursuance of Article IV, Section 3(12) of the
    Bylaws, ICANN shall be responsible for bearing all costs of the IRP Provider.
    Each party shall bear its own attorneys' fees. Therefore, the administrative
    fees and expenses of the International Centre for Dispute Resolution, totaling
    $4,500.00, shall be borne entirely by ICANN, and the compensation and
    expenses of the Independent Review Panel, totaling $473,744.91, shall be
    borne entirely by ICANN. ICANN shall accordingly reimburse ICM Registry
    with the sum of $241,372.46, representing that portion of said fees and
    expenses in excess of the apportioned costs previously incurred by ICM
    Registry.

    Note the financial portion of the judgement. ICANN, which has already had a budget overrun, gets hit again, this time for nearly half a million dollars.

    You can download the full text of the review panel's decision from the ICANN website, although some sections have been redacted by ICM for reasons of confidentiality.

    Since this was released on a Friday night it's unlikely that there will be much public reaction from either ICANN, ICM or any others until next week, but I suspect that there will be some very interesting discussions surrounding this decision.

    Amazing how a single document can rock the boat, isn't it?

    Update 02/26/2010: ICMs sends response to ICANN (PDF)

    Written by Michele Neylon, MD of Blacknight Solutions

Articles From SEO Book
SEO Book.com - Learn. Rank. Dominate.
  • Crafting SEO Landing Pages

    The landing page, in terms of SEO, went out of fashion.

    Landing pages, which tended to be mass-generated, near identical pages pointing to one money page, became a target for the search engine spam filters.

    However, the type of landing page we should take a closer look at is the type of landing page used in PPC - a page carefully crafted to lead a visitor to desired action. SEOs can benefit from applying the same techniques used for creating effective PPC landing pages to their organic pages. After all, we all want visitors to arrive at our pages, and take a desired action.

    All Search Is About Connecting With People

    Our pages may rank well, but if the visitor doesn't do something that ultimately leads to more money in our pockets, our sites won't last long.

    In the past, ranking well has led to a pre-occupation with factors like keyword density i.e. repeating keyword phrases often.

    However, the search engine algorithm's are no longer quite so stupid. The need to slavishly repeat keyword phrases in order to rank pales in comparison to other factors. It's no longer necessary to forsake good copy writing in order to please machine algorithms.

    To make our rankings work for us, we must connect with people. This means our pages must talk their language and focus on solving their problems.

    A fail in SEO is not missing out on the #1 ranking. A fail in SEO is a visitor clicking back. Do everything to avoid the back click.

    Talking People's Language

    People couldn't care less about you or your company.

    People care about themselves.

    Take a look at your pages. Do they talk about you, or do they talk about your audience? For a page to work well, it must connect with your audience, and the easiest way to do this is to talk about their wants and desires. If a page doesn't grab a visitors attention, they won't persevere, they will click back. What's a #1 ranking worth if visitors click back?

    Here are a few guidelines on how to grab a visitors attention:

    Title Tag Text Should Match Your First Headline Or if not matching the phrase exactly, it should be close to it in terms of topic. This reassures to the searcher they are in the right place.

    A Search Is Invariably A Question Keyword terms often aren't phrased as questions, but they are all questions. When people type "buy DVD online", they're really saying "where can I buy a DVD online". Try to determine searcher intent. Decide what the visitors question is, repeat it, then answer it.

    Create A Clear Call To Action - what is it you want the searcher to do next? Sign-up? Buy something? Click on Adsense? Make that action clear and obvious.

    People Scan - Use big headings. Often. If you're vague about visitor intent, you can use a number of different headlines, or images, that grab people's attention in case your lead hook fails.

    Use The Word "You" A Lot - it's all about them. Their problems, their sense of self, their language, their wants and needs. Relegate all the stuff about you, unless they specifically ask for it, or you're using testimonials.

    Every Page On Your Site Is A Landing Page

    Every page on your site has potential to pull in visitors.

    Even if a page only receives one visit a month, it's still a landing page. Given that SEO strategy involves building a lot of content, it's easy to think of "junk" pages low down in your domain structure as unimportant.

    However, if people land on those pages, then that's half the battle won. Those pages will be winners if they lead people to the pages you want them to see. Therefore, every page on your site should contain a clear call to action - leading visitors to the one thing you want people to do.

    The Difference Between SEO Landing Pages & PPC Landing Pages

    In PPC, the page must be tightly controlled, stay on message and lead a visitor to desired action. Failure to do so means blowing through money.

    With SEO, we have more leeway. We can include a variety of text content on pages, as it increases the likelihood of catching long tail phrases. This casts a wider net, and at negligible cost. However, we still need to structure the page well enough so people a) won't click back and b) will take the desired action.

    It's a good idea to structure a page so - rather obviously - the most important stuff comes first. Make the call to action, wherever it is placed, clear. Relegate superfluous text, which targets long tail variations, below the fold and/or into side links.

    Most likely, a few pages on your domain will be doing the gruntwork. Most of your visitors will come in on your home page, or a small collection of well linked pages on your site. Pay careful attention to these pages. They should be as crafted as tightly as a PPC landing page in terms of language and call to action.

    Test these pages. Are they converting? What is the abandonment rate? Whilst it can take a while to test and alter SEO pages, it's worth doing, as incremental gains on a few pages can lead to huge changes when rolled out over an entire site.

    What happens if you make a heading bigger? Paragraphs shorter? Reposition page elements? Change the language and pitch? You can also test these variables using a short PPC campaign, of course, and then roll your findings into your SEO strategy. Once you've got a winning formula, you can roll it out to every page (landing) page you create.

  • Learning SEO: It Can Get Noisy

    There is obviously no shortage of information on SEO.

    But thanks for turning up here :)

    The sheer avalanche of SEO information can be overwhelming, for beginners and experts alike. Who do you know who to listen to? What information do you need to know, and what information is filler?

    Why should you even listen to SEOBook?

    1. Most Information Published On SEO Is Filler

    You can learn 80% of what you need to know about SEO pretty quickly. You don't need the additional 20% in order to achieve, unless you're a masochist - otherwise known as an SEO professional :)

    Most of the information you'll come across on the topic of SEO is written by, and for, a professional/enthusiast crowd. There is a massive echo chamber of opinion, constantly replenished, produced using publishing tools based on the notion of communicating something, often.

    It can result in a lot of noise, and not much in the way of signal, especially when you're learning. If you're starting out, and want to focus on learning SEO, it's a good idea to tune the industry chatter out. It's more likely to confuse than help in the early stages.

    2. Understand The Business Of Search

    Search engines aren't your friend. At best, they tolerate SEO, but only when it aligns with company goals.

    The search engines have a business to run, and their goals aren't the same as yours. Whilst search engine reps often come across as helpful and friendly, because they typically are helpful and friendly people, keep in mind that what they are saying serves their company first and foremost. Any advice they give you is, quite rightly, designed to further company goals.

    That's their job.

    Chances are, your goals and the search engines goals will be aligned in many areas, but take their advice with a grain of salt. They don't care if your site succeeds or not, as there are plenty of other sites to index.

    Google KidSense

    3. Define Goals

    Before you undertake SEO, define your website goals. Do you want to make more money? Get more attention? Get more leads?

    The purpose of SEO is to get your site seen in the search engines. Your aim is to attract the visitors that help you achieve your goals. A high ranking for a certain keyword won't necessarily help you achieve your goals unless your site matches visitor intent.

    Think about the web from a visitors point of view. What do they want to find? What content will they engage with? What will they spend their money on?

    There's little point ranking well if the content you provide doesn't make you money and/or gain audience. It's getting increasingly difficult to rank pages that aren't closely aligned with the searchers intent. So, the more you understand your audience, and the more content that matches their intent, the more you'll get out of SEO.

    4. Get A Credible, Well Organized Course

    Like SEOBook's course for example ;)

    This isn't a sales pitch. There are a number of great courses out there. Choose one or two that suit your budget and objectives, and dive in. Chances are, you will need to shell out some money, but the cost of a decent, well structured course is nothing compared to the wasted effort spent heading in the wrong direction.

    In a nutshell, SEO is about about publishing content people want to engage with, and linking. You need to create content that matches visitor intent, you need to be crawlable, and you need to have inbound links. Good SEO courses will have this message at their core.

    Did I mention links enough?

    5. Connect With People

    It's natural to want the secret sauce - those secret dark techniques that result in number one rankings.

    Whilst this was characteristic of SEO years ago, it's less true now. These days, SEO is more a holistic, strategic process aimed at connecting with people, as opposed to a dark, technical art aimed at tricking machines.

    Focus on making connections with people. That means understanding what people want. You can do this by undertaking basic market research, using the search engines themselves!

    6. Test

    Don't listen to me. Well, maybe just a bit. Don't listen to the repeaters in forums.

    Test and measure for yourself. It's one of the best SEO courses you can do. It's ongoing, and it's free.

    Start with a simple, focused well constructed site. What is a well constructed site in terms of SEO?

    With every change you make, every new SEO strategy you adopt, test the results. Did the change help you achieve your website goals? Did you get more traffic? Better quality traffic? If your rankings improved, did this result in more/better traffic? It can be difficult to isolate variables at the best of times, but there is no chance of doing so if you try too many techniques all at once.

    Make changes one step at a time. Test and measure repeat. Become at expert at measuring SEO against your goals.

    Build up your own private knowledge base of SEO in your niche. Your niche may require different strategies to other niches, which is why well-meaning advice in forums and on blogs can hinder you. You'll also become a better judge of who is offering you good advice, and who is just repeating something they heard.

  • SEO Consulting: How To Construct Great Proposals

    Like in any consulting field, SEO is rife with competition. There is only one way to win in such an environment, and that is to set yourself apart from the crowd.

    Not in a bad way, of course :)

    Here are some ideas on how to construct winning proposals.

    Size Isn't Everything, But It Does Count

    Large proposals take a long time to do. On the upside, large proposals can look impressive, simply by virtue of their size. Clients often like to see large proposals, but they don't tend to read them.

    Proposals can be a tricky balance to get right. No matter how brilliant your solution, most clients will think twice about you if you present it on a single sheet, especially if they have no prior connection with you, or aren't meeting you face-to-face. A proposal of a certain size can appear more authoritative.

    What is the ideal size?

    One good way of presenting a proposal is to break it into three parts. The first part is a summary, including your client-specific solution and costs. Length can vary of course, but keep it succinct. No fat.

    The second part is a case study or two. Again, keep them succinct. It's highly likely that the client won't actually read beyond this point.

    Finally, add background information about you, your company, your history and the SEO business, all of which should be aimed at supporting the summary page and case studies. This final part can be generic and doesn't need to be re-written for each client. Clients may only flip through this section, but tend to find it reassuring that it exists.

    Contrast this approach with a proposal that is threadbare. It may be irrational, but thin proposals can feel incomplete.

    Give Something Of Value Away

    In your summary pages, share real information.

    Share the type of information that is valuable and the sort of you'd usually charge for providing. Clients are likely to assume that if the SEO is giving a few morsels of valuable information away in the proposal, then even more valuable information will be forthcoming if they sign you. Demonstrate your mastery. If all you do is provide generic information at this point, then your proposal is less likely to stand out.

    Some potential clients, of course, may pick your brain and then implement your solutions themselves. Whilst this can happen, it's unlikely. The client already knows they want SEO by the time they're at the proposal stage, and if they could have done this work themselves, they probably would have done so already.

    Secondly, you can outline solutions that involve time cost to achieve. Imply that this work must be undertaken by someone who knows what they are doing. Outline the risks of not doing this work properly. The more real work, and risk, there is invlolved in implementation, the less likely a client will be willing to go the do-it-yourself route.

    As we all know, there is a lot of real work involved in SEO. Make sure the client is left in no doubt on that aspect.

    It's Not About You

    Focus on the clients needs.

    Nothing loses a potential client faster than an SEO who talks entirely about themselves and their industry. Clients don't care. Clients care about their problems and their industry. In the summary pages, restate the clients problem and propose your specific solutions. Outline time frame and costs.

    This exercise is useful for a number of reasons, the main one being that you, or the client, may not know what the actual problem is!

    What a client says may not be what they mean. For example, the client may say they want SEO because they're heard that's a great way to get traffic quickly. They may not say it in these words, of course. They may say they want SEO, and they want it asap.

    However, if the SEO has asked enough questions, aimed at identifying the problem, the SEO may unearth unstated problems. In this case, a client wants to increase traffic quickly. A solution to such a problem might be a combination of SEO and PCC. The PPC delivers immediate traffic while the SEO strategy might take some time.

    Formulate questions aimed at identifying the clients actual, as opposed to stated, problem. They may be quite different. The result is that your solution will be a good fit, which will lead to less frustration, on both sides, further down the line.

    You also might discover at this point that the clients expectations are ridiculous, and you'd be better off looking for a more reasonable client. For example, I was once pitching to a large advertising company. Their clients had been asking for SEO, so all they knew is they "needed some SEO".

    Great.

    Problem was, as I discovered in the meeting, was that they knew nothing about the need to alter sites or web publishing approach. They had told clients they could deliver SEO as a bolt-on-service, a wave of the magic wand that miraculously delivered rankings and free traffic for life to brochure sites.

    I didn't go any further with them.

    Offer Guarantees (Assurance)

    Guarantees are a contentious issue in SEO circles.

    Many SEOs - quite rightly - point out that no one can guarantee a ranking position, which is true, but such technical nuances may unsettle a client.

    Clients tend to like assurance, and a guarantee can help provide this. So rather than dismissing guarantees, look at aspects you can guarantee.

    A fiend of mine, in a different industry, offers a guarantee that goes along the lines of "if you don't feel satisfied after our strategy meetings with you, even after you sign the contract, you can walk away, no questions asked, and no charge.".

    That sounds like something substantial, but actually he is just restating consumer law in the country where he lives. The law is that a service must be fit for the purpose the client intended, and if it isn't, the client has a case against the provider for non-suitability of service.

    My friend realized he could never afford to contest such cases, and would likely lose, as the consumer law favored the buyer. All an aggrieved client really had to do to win such a case was say the service wasn't fit for their purposes.

    He was dealing with firms with deep pockets, and legal action defending against such firms would come at high cost, even if he was in the right, so he decided to restate a consumer right the client actually already had, combined with an economic reality - his inability to engage in costly legal battles - into a form of a reassuring guarantee for sales purposes.

    Case Studies Are Powerful

    There is no sales tool quite so powerful as a good case study. A case study is a story. People love stories. A case study is also proof of your ability.

    Outline the problem. Tell your audience what the problem looked like before you started - very useful if this problem is similar to the problem the prospective client also faces - what you did to solve the problem, and the positive results of your solution.

    Stories are very powerful sales tools, and a case study is a great opportunity to tell a few.

    Package It Up

    Consider printing and binding your proposal, and delivering it.

    We receive so many emails these days that they don't make us feel very special. It doesn't feel like there is much effort gone into them. A binded proposal, on the other hand, feels substantial.

    In the interests of speed, you can still send an email copy, but try doing both and seeing if you land more deals.

    Charging

    Don't undercharge. You'll regret it :)

  • Beating the Logic & Creativity Out of You

    I remember in 2nd grade when our teacher was teaching us how to do math I raced ahead and was doing lessons for today, tomorrow, and next week. The teacher rewarded my efforts by yelling at me and ripping up the pages from the book and giving me a 0 on that homework.

    In fourth grade we would play around the world with math flash cards where you raced to say the answers, and I would literally go all the way around the classroom without losing. I won so much that the other kids would boo when I won and cheer if I lost. In 5th grade I scored well on some state examination test that they had me take a college level entry exam. I beat most college-bound high school students in math before I entered junior high school.

    Between 7th and 8th grade we moved.

    Somehow in 8th grade they put me in slow learners math. Maybe they were trying to balance the number of students in each class? While in slow learners math the teacher handed out these obscure word problem tests a few times a month. Every time we did them I would either tie with the winner or beat all the kids who were taking algebra.

    There were other topics where I sucked. Anything to do with spelling fail. Writing? Not so good. Foreign language? No conozco! Typing - absolutely brutal.

    All these years later I use the math and logic to make money writing words, and matching words up in patterns that algorithms like. But what more would I have done if I didn't waste 6 years of my life in the military? Maybe I wouldn't have fell into marketing, but it is almost impossible to do anything online and willfully remain ignorant to marketing. If you have any level of curiosity you will stumble into it (especially if you have any ambition and lack capital).

    But education is to set up to beat the creativity out of you, punish outliers, and turn you into a debt slave consuming drone. You should respect authority, even if ill gained.

    If students were any good at applying math & critical thinking to the real world there would be riots in the street.

    Online critical thinking isn't typically appreciated either.

    Social media makes one-liners great, so plan on including a few of them, and plan on some of your words being taken out of context and used against you.

    Any form of criticism is defined as being linkbait or an attempt at capturing attention. As the web continues to saturate and it becomes more like the real world it will only get more absurd.

    We are no longer in an “Information Age.” We are in the Age of Noise. Falsehoods, half-truths, talking points, out-of-context video edits, plagiarism, rewriting of history (U.S. was founded as a Christian nation, for example), flip-flops, ignoring facts (Cheney and torture for example), neatly packaged code words and phrases, media ratings focus, dysfunctional government (fillibusters have more than doubled, but most don’t realize Republicans are blocking everything), mainstreaming fringe causes….I could go on and on.

    Is it any wonder why so many who are struggling with kids, jobs, rising medical costs, etcetera have such a tough time wading through all the crap?

    There is only so much attention to go around. Anything you don't know = grab the ugliest segment of the market + embellish it & state that is what the entire market is. Easy. Anyone who is an SEO is a spammer who illegally hacks websites trying to sell overseas pharmacy drugs and rank for misspellings of birtney spaers. All domainers are cybersquatters & brand hijackers. Affiliates only push scams that use reverse billing fraud.

    But when you go back to the math and think about it, the bottom 80% or 90% of ANY market usually isn't very exciting (or profitable, especially if you are a cog). It has been commoditized and doesn't reward creativity. It is doing the things at the fringe - the 1% where you have an artistic flair of brilliance which is seen by some as wizardry that produces profound results. It often backfires, at least off the start:

    All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. -
    Arthur Schopenhauer

    You get beat up for a while and the market tests you (sometimes for years), but eventually it takes notice:

    Through this experience, I learned an important lesson: When in doubt, make your product more compelling. All of Fog Creek's affiliate marketing ideas, coupons, discounts, direct-mail pieces, catalog ads, and everything else we spent time on -- none of this was as good a use of our time as simply doing what we loved best anyway: creating useful software.

  • Spam Free Search?

    Just for fun. But if things get much worse it might be good for utility as well ;)

  • 3 Steps for Optimizing Content for Long Tail Keywords

    The following is a guest post from Tom Demers.

    One of the most pivotal aspects of driving large volumes of search traffic in most verticals is effectively targeting long tail keywords. While ranking for competitive phrases and developing link authority are certainly crucial aspects of SEO, much of ranking on long tail keywords is properly targeting and optimizing for them. A while ago Aaron made the following image as a conceptual example of how the relevancy algorithms may differ for different types of keywords:
    Long tail keyword ranking factors

    This article will outline a three step process for targeting long tail keywords.

    Step 1: Build a Basket

    The first (and possibly most important) consideration is determining which keywords to target. For this I think a three-step process is best:

    Traditional Keyword Research

    It’s always a good idea to do some idea generation and to get a feel for the possible variations of your specific targeted keyword by utilizing a keyword research tool. For the sake of the article, we’ll assume that we’ve selected our “head” or core keyword target, and that we’re attempting to rank an article for the key phrase and related key phrases. Three tools that I find particularly useful for this purpose are Google’s Search-Based Keyword Tool, the SEO Book Keyword Tool, and my company’s Free Keyword Tool.

  • Using Your Own Analytics

    Really the best source of keyword data for determining the long tail keywords you can target is your own data. This is powerful because it shows you a variety of keyword combinations, the data is proprietary (your competitors didn’t pull the list from the same keyword tool you used, so they won’t be targeting the same keywords), and you have actual data both that you can rank for a given keyword, and you have an indication of how that keyword performs on your site. In Google Analytics, there a couple of reports you can pull to get this information (most analytics packages will provide you with similar capabilities). Drill down to traffic sources > keywords > non-paid:
    Long tail keyword content stratgies
    Then you can create a filter for the head term. For the sake of this example we’ll say we’re targeting the phrase “long tail” and variations:
    Long tail keyword filter in Google Analytics.
    By creating the filter, we can see a variety of modifiers that the page and/or other content on our site are already driving. And, if we are in fact attempting to optimize an existing page for multiple keywords, we can utilize a content report to see what that page is already driving traffic for:

    View Entrance Keywords for a page in Google Analytics..

    You can then see all of the queries driving traffic to that page. By analyzing the traffic and conversion statistics for that page, you can then start to feature more effective variations more prominently. The beauty of analyzing your own data lies in the fact that you can de-emphasize variations that don’t convert for your site.

    Continually Iterate on Both Keyword Research and Keyword Analysis

    Periodically, it’s a good idea to return to traditional keyword research, and to dig back into your analytics. This is particularly true if a concept or product is seasonal, but regardless the queries driving traffic to your site are bound to shift, and analyzing both the segment of keywords you’re targeting and the actual traffic to a given page can help to drive a tremendous amount of additional traffic to an individual page.

    Step Two: Put It On The Page

    Unless you coordinate an army of writers or build a venture-backed model around creating a piece of content for every phrase imaginable, you can’t create a piece of content for every phrase you want to rank for. As such you’ll have to effectively target long tail keywords by including the multiple phrases in your keyword bucket throughout the page:

    • Varying the Title Tag and Header - In varying title tags and headers for SEO you are ensuring that your pages aren’t over-optimized and they include relevant long tail keywords you’ll want to target (rather than redundantly featuring the same keyword twice).
    • Place Variations and Modifiers in Your Content - By researching the variations of a keyword you might want to include in your content, you can be aware of them as you craft content, and you can strategically place modifiers throughout your page’s content. For instance, it might not be natural for you write out the phrase “affiliate long tail keywords for promoting products” but if you know this is a phrase that drives some traffic, you can be sure to include phrases like “whether you are a retailer or an affiliate promoting products”. You’ll be using phrases like long tail keywords frequently enough that if the longer phrase is lower competition, you might not even need to include the exact phrase to rank for it. Note below that none of the ranking pages use the exact phrase “affiliate long tail keywords for promoting products”:
    • This is the SERP for affiliate long tail keywords for promoting products.

    • Pay Attention to All of Your On-Page Elements - Be sure to work into your page’s headlines, bolded copy, alt attributes, title attributes, etc. the variations you’re targeting. By mixing up the words and phrases you use in these elements, you’re also ensuring your page isn’t over-optimized

    Step Three: Building Links For Your Keyword Basket

    Finally, even though many of your long tail keyword variations will rank on their own, you’ll want to develop some links with specific anchor text to these pages. You can do this in a few different ways:

    • Vary Your Internal Links to a Page– Again, this allows you to avoid being “over-optimized,” and if you stick primarily to variations that contain the head keyword within the variation and append modifiers, rather than synonyms, you’re consistently transferring relevance for your core term.
    • Use an Important Modifier in Your Headline – While your title tag is what’s seen by searchers, many people linking to your article will use your headline as anchor text. Using a variation here helps attract links for important modifiers
    • External Links You Control- Things like company listings, directory listings, and nepotistic links often offer you the opportunity to control your own anchor text: while many times just leveraging internal links on an authoritative site is enough to rank, sometimes utilizing article submission Websites or other low-quality external linking sources with keyword-rich anchor text can help you to rank for mid to low-competition keywords.

    Ultimately the best way to rank for long tail keywords is to build an authoritative Website and seed it with a lot of content, but on a page-by-page basis you can often leverage strategic keyword targeting and your own analytic data to help drive exponentially more traffic than you would focusing solely on the “head” keyword.

    Tom Demers is the Director of Marketing with WordStream, a software company specializing in pay-per click software and keyword research and organization solutions for SEO. Tom is a frequent contributor at the WordStream Internet Marketing Blog.

  • Which Multivariate Testing Software is Best?

    My buddies from Conversion Rate Experts have put together a review site for multivariate software called Which Multivariate. Surprisingly old school in the modern affiliate link filled web, they have made the site vendor neutral and are not planning on ever taking affiliate commissions in an attempt to gather honest reviews. Check it out. Its worth a look!

  • Spam vs Mahalo: Matt Cutts Explains the Difference

    When the internal Google remote quality rater guidelines leaked online there was a core quote inside it that defined the essence of spam:

    Final Notes on Spam When trying to decide if a page is Spam, it is helpful to ask yourself this question: if I remove the scraped (copied) content, the ads, and the links to other pages, is there anything of value left? if the answer is no, the page is probably Spam.

    With the above quote in mind please review the typical Mahalo page

    Adding a bit more context, the following 25 minute video from 2008 starts off with Matt Cutts talking about how he penalized a website for using deceptive marketing. Later into the video (~ 21 minutes in) the topic of search results within search results and then Mahalo come up.

    Here is a transcription of relevant bits...

    Matt Cutts: Would a user be annoyed if they land on this page, right. Because if users get annoyed, if users complain, then that is when we start to take action.

    And so it is definitely the case where we have seen search results where a search engine didn't robots.txt something out, or somebody takes a cookie cutter affiliate feed, they just warm it up and slap it out, there is no value add, there is no original content there and they say search results or some comparison shopping sites don't put a lot of work into making it a useful site. They don't add value.

    Though we mainly wanted to get on record and say that hey we are willing to take these out, because we try to document everything as much as we can, because if we came and said oh removed some stuff but it wasn't in our guidelines to do that then that would be sub-optimal.

    So there are 2 parts to Google's guidelines. There are technical guidelines and quality guidelines. The quality guidelines are things where if you put hidden text we'll consider that spam and we can remove your page. The technical guidelines are more like just suggestions.

    ...

    So we said don't have search results in search results. And if we find those then we may end up pruning those out.

    We just want to make sure that searchers get good search results and that they don't just say oh well I clicked on this and I am supposed to find the answer, and now I have to click somewhere else and I am lost, and I didn't find what I wanted. Now I am angry and I am going to complain to Google.

    Danny Sulivan: "Mahalo is nothing but search results. I mean that is explicitly what he says he is doing. I will let you qualify it, but if you ask him what it is still to this day he will say its a search engine. And then all the SEOs go 'well if it is a search engine, shouldn't you be blocking all your search results from Google' and his response is 'yeah well IF we ever see them do anything then we might do it'."

    Matt Cutts: It's kinda interesting because I think Jason...he is a smart guy. He's a savvy guy, and he threaded the needle where whenever he talked to some people he called it a search service or search engine, and whenever he talked to other people he would say oh it is more of a content play.

    And in my opinion, I talked to him, and so I said what software do you use to power your search engine? And he said we use Twika or MediaWiki. You know, wiki software, not C++ not Perl not Python. And at that point it really does move more into a content play. And so it is closer to an About.com than to a Powerset or a Microsoft or Yahoo! Search.

    And if you think about it he has even moved more recently to say 'you know, you need to have this much content on the page.' So I think various people have stated how skilled he is at baiting people, but I don't think anybody is going to make a strong claim that it is pure search or that even he seems to be moving away from ok we are nothing but a search engine and moving more toward we have got a lot of people who are paid editors to add a lot of value.

    One quick thing to note about the above video was how the site mentioned off the start got penalized for lying for links, and yet Jason Calacanis apologized for getting a reporter fired after lying about having early access to the iPad. Further notice how Matt considered that the first person was lying and deserved to be penalized for it, whereas when he spoke of Jason he used the words savvy, smart, and the line threaded the needle. To the layperson, what is the difference between being a savvy person threading the needle and a habitual liar?

    Further lets look at some other surrounding facts in 2010, shall we?

    • How does Jason stating "Mahalo sold $250k+ in Amazon product in 2009 without trying" square with Matt Cutts saying "somebody takes a cookie cutter affiliate feed, they just warm it up and slap it out, there is no value add, there is no original content there" ... Does the phrase without trying sound like value add to you? Doesn't to me.
    • Matt stated that they do not want searchers to think "oh well I clicked on this and I am supposed to find the answer, and now I have to click somewhere else and I am lost" ... well how does Mahalo intentionally indexing hundreds of thousands of 100% auto-generated pages which simply recycle search results and heavily wrap them in ads square with that? sounds like deceptive & confusing arbitrage to me.
    • Matt stated "and if you think about it he has even moved more recently to say 'you know, you need to have this much content on the page,'" but in reality, that was a response to when I highlighted how Mahalo was scraping content. Jason dismissed the incident as an "experimental" page that they would nofollow. Years later, of course, it turned out he was (once again) lying and still doing the same thing, only with far greater scale. Jason once again made Matt Cutts look bad for trusting him.
    • Matt stated "I don't think anybody is going to make a strong claim that it is pure search" ... and no, its not pure search. If anything it is IMPURE search, where they use 3rd party content *without permission* and put most of it below the fold, while the Google AdSense ads are displayed front and center.
      • If you want to opt out of Mahalo scraping your content you can't because he scrapes it from 3rd party sites and provides NO WAY for you to opt out of him displaying scraped content from your site as content on his page).
      • Jason offers an "embed this" option for their content, so you can embed their "content" on your site. But if you use that code the content is in an iframe so it doesn't harm them on the duplicate content front AND the code gives Jason multiple direct clean backlinks. Whereas when Jason automatically embeds millions of scraped listings of your content he puts it right in the page as content on his page AND slaps nofollow on the link. If you use his content he gets credit...when he uses your content you get a lump of coal. NICE!
      • And, if you were giving Jason the benefit of the doubt, and thought the above was accidental, check out how when he scrapes the content in that all external links have a nofollow added, but any internal link *does not*
    • Matt stated "[Jason is] moving more toward we have got a lot of people who are paid editors to add a lot of value" ... and, in reality, Jason used the recession as an excuse to can the in house editorial team and outsource that to freelancers (which are paid FAR LESS than the amounts he hypes publicly). Given that many of the pages that have original content on them only have 2 sentences surrounded by large swaths of scraped content, I am not sure there is an attempt to "add a lot of value." Do you find this page on Shake and Bake meth to be a high quality editorial page?
    • What is EVEN MORE OUTRAGEOUS when they claim to have some editorial control over the content is that not only do they wrap outbound links which they are scraping content from in nofollow, but they publish articles on topics like 13 YEAR OLD RAPE. Either they have no editorial, or some of the editorial is done by pedophiles.
    • Worse yet, such pages are not a rare isolated incident. Michael VanDeMar found out that Mahalo is submitting daily lists of thousands of those auto-generated articles to Google via an XML sitemap...so when Jason claims the indexing was an accident, you know he lied once again!

    Here Jason is creating a new auto-generated page about me! And if I want to opt out of being scraped I CAN'T. What other source automatically scrapes content, republishes it wrapped in ads and calls it fair use, and then does not allow you to opt out? What is worse in the below example, is that on that page Jason stole the meta description from my site and used it as his page's meta description (without my permission, and without a way for me to opt out of it).

    So basically Matt...until you do something, Jason is going to keep spamming the crap out of Google. Each day you ignore him another entreprenuer will follow suit trying to build another company that scrapes off the backs of original content creators. Should Google be paying people to *borrow* 3rd party content without permission (and with no option of opting out)?

    I think Jason has pressed his luck and made Matt look naive and stupid. Matt Cutts has got to be pissed. But unfortunately for Matt, Mahalo is too powerful for him to do anything about it. In that spirit, David Naylor recently linked to this page on Twitter.

    What is the moral of the story for Jason Calacanas & other SEOs?

    • If you are going to create a thin spam site you need to claim to be anti-spam to legitimize it. Never claim to be an SEO publicly, even if you are trying to sell corporate SEO services.
    • If you have venture capital and have media access and lie to the media for years it is fine. If you are branded as an SEO and you are caught lying once then no soup for you.
    • If you are going to steal third party content and use it as content on your site and try to claim it is fair use make sure you provide a way of opting out (doing otherwise is at best classless, but likely illegal as well).
    • If you have venture capital and are good at public relations then Google's quality guidelines simply do not apply to you. Follow Jason's lead as long as Google permits mass autogenerated spam wrapped in AdSense to rank well in their search results.
    • The Google Webmaster Guidelines are an arbitrary device used to oppress the small and weak, but do not apply to large Google ad partners.
    • Don't waste any of your time reporting search spam or link buying. The above FLAGRANT massive violation of Google's guidelines was reported on SearchEngineLand, and yet the issue continues without remedy - showing what a waste of time it is to highlight such issues to Google.
  • Funny Dilbert SEO Comic Strip Cartoon by Scott Adams

    And all this, only to find out there was a missing ingredient the whole time ;)

    Dilbert.com

    Of course, if Dilbert had a text version of the cartoon and perhaps a more relevant alt tag in his embed code that would help too. Just saying ;)

  • Killer Google AdWords Guide for Affiliates

    My wife used to tell me that I would give too much away...and then she pens something like this AdWords affiliate guide. It doesn't seem fair ;)

  • Comparing SEO Business Models

    One of the great things about SEO is that it allows you to see many lenses on business that you can't normally see with most other professions (outside of perhaps something in high finance or management consulting anyhow). One day you are building a bootstrapped business from scratch wondering when it will make its first Dollar, and the next day your on the phone with McKinsey consultants or an executive from a fortune 500 company talking strategy.

    Zeta Interactive's Hugo Guzman is one of the the folks in the SEO industry who has a broad experience set which perhaps eclipses my own, as he has done virtually everything. And so I recently interviewed him...

    You run some of your own sites, have done some private SEO consulting, I believe you may have done some in house SEO for a while, and are now deep into the bowels of the SEO agency world. What are the best and worst parts of each role?

    Great question! Here’s my take based on personal experience in each role.

    Running your own site(s)

    Best Thing: That feeling of unbridled entrepreneurism. I’ve always felt that website building is sort of like the new real estate development, only anybody can do it and it costs less than $100 to get started (if you know what you’re doing). The other great thing about running your own site(s) is the ability to cut out on time wasting and bureaucracy. There’s no need for filling out corporate approval paperwork or sitting through useless meetings or conference calls, so you can focus in on building content, building links, building databases, and building relationships.

    Worst Thing: The cold hard reality of monetization. There used to be a day when paid links could easily bankroll early development until you got other revenue streams to a point of sustainability, but that well has dried up to a certain extent. Affiliate revenue and Adsense are both viable but take time to develop, especially if SEO is the main source of traffic, so like you, I believe that the best option is to cut out the middle man and develop a product/service of your own that fills a specific niche need at a fair price. I think that the emergence of FourSquare and Twitter localization suggests a strong opportunity for hyper-niche, location-based website development. You don’t have to be the best in the world at a specific thing in order to be successful. Just be the best in your locale or region.

    SEO consulting

    Best Thing: Being able to do SEO “The Right Way” (or at least “your own way”). It feels good to execute an SEO program that way you see fit, especially when it works! It makes for a very rewarding experience. It’s fun to build out the list of deliverables, the timeline for implementation, and the success metrics and KPIs that will be the foundation of your client programs.

    Worst Thing: Dealing with the sales grind, chasing after clients that don’t pay on time (or at all) not getting the hourly bill rate you know you deserve, etc…basically all the business stuff that has little or nothing to do with pure SEO. Unfortunately, many of the SEOs that go this route get caught up in the grind by failing or refusing to fire bad clients, so that they can focus on building revenue by offering more granular or expanded services for their good clients.

    In-house SEO

    Best Thing: Being embedded in so many different aspects of a business and learning about marketing and biz dev elements outside the pure SEO realm. I spent several years working with CBS Interactive and I learned a ton about so many things and worked with some really intelligent people.

    For example, I learned how C-level executives frame marketing channels like SEO. The main success metric that I was measured on was percentage of overall referring traffic (well under 10% when I first started). Even though I was able to exponentially grow natural search referrals, especially for key niches like fantasy football and March Madness – both of which are huge moneymakers for CBS – the cumulative effect on overall traffic was minimal (never reached 20%). The reason was simple; CBS owns their major television network as well as a myriad of local television affiliates, radio stations, billboards, email addresses, etc, which literally drove millions and millions of unique referrals.

    This introduction to mass media metrics helped me gain perspective on the role SEO plays within the larger scheme of things (brand building and management, push/interruption marketing, email marketing, etc). And it was this perspective that would help me connect with marketing executives when I made the move to agency SEO, because I finally understood that while SEO is arguably the most cost-effective marketing channel, it was only one piece of a much larger puzzle.

    Worst Thing: It’s hard to move up the corporate ladder and earn big dollars. Because SEO is typically straddled between marketing and IT, it’s tough to move up into upper-management positions. Some companies (like the Tribune Company) are starting to wake up, but for the most part, it’s still tough to move on up.

    SEO Agency

    Best Thing: It’s sort of like the Peace Corps in that it’s the hardest job you’ll ever love. Granted, you’re not really helping the world be a better place (just helping companies become more profitable) but getting to work with so many different verticals, marketing philosophies, business executives, and web environments is incredibly rewarding. Agency SEO (if you work at a good agency) will undoubtedly make you a better SEO, and a better business person in general.

    Interestingly enough, it’s the seemingly unconquerable workload that proves to be the catalyst for professional growth. Dealing with multiple clients, each of which has impossible deadlines and unrealistic ROI expectations, forces you to prioritize your efforts and focus on the strategies and tactics that will deliver the most bang for their marketing buck. SEO’s that fail to grasp this are quickly burned out and leave the agency life (and usually return after a year or two after realizing that they can’t make much money in-house). SEO’s that “get it” quickly make an impact for clients – and the agency’s bottom line – catapulting them into management and executive roles.

    Worst Thing: It’s sort of like the Post Office. The work just keeps coming and coming. It’s extremely stressful, demanding, and demoralizing at times. But hey, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger right?

    From which of the 4 roles do you see the greatest profit potential?

    That’s a tough one. In-house probably has the least profit potential, followed by agency work. Although it’s worth pointing out that some of the better agencies out there take extraordinary steps to keep talented individuals happy and give them a true stake in the company’s success. My agency definitely falls in that category.

    Consulting has very solid profit potential but building your own site(s) is definitely king in my book because if you pick the right niche and truly devote yourself on all levels the potential is limitless.

    You (Aaron Wall) write about this topic quite a bit, but it’s important to re-emphasize. If an enterprising SEO is looking to start their own site(s) the first thing to take into consideration is the level of passion they have for the topic/theme that the site(s) will encompass, because if the passion isn’t there, it’s unlikely that said SEO will have the motivation to work through the inevitable plateaus that await his/her new business. Also, as most of us know, building the right kind of content is what often leads to the inbound links that will serve as the foundation of a solid search presence, and that’s much easier to do when you truly love the topic/theme you’re dealing with.

    When you guys take on new clients are you knee deep in the SEO projects? Or do you focus more on training your team?

    Truthfully, I’m no longer involved in day-to-day management of SEO projects. I do touch almost every single account, but usually it’s as an advisor to the SEO specialist that’s assigned to the account or because the client needs to tap into my historical knowledge of the account (I’ve been working with some of our clients for several years now and know more about their history than some of their employees). Basically, I keep tabs on each account and come in to deal with really tough and/or complex scenarios that junior team members have never encountered. That said, I do spend a considerable amount of time testing specific hypotheses, either on client sites or on test sites that are owned and managed by my agency.

    One of the most memorable tests we performed was for a major insurance and financial services brand (one of the biggest in the world) that was having a ton of trouble getting their agent profile pages indexed (they had thousands of them). They were convinced that simply adding these pages to their XML sitemap would do the trick, despite the fact that Google explicitly states that submitting an XML sitemap does not replace override their normal indexing and ranking methodology. In order to convince them to take an alternate route (focusing on internal linkage that helped eliminate orphaned agent pages) we simply tested their hypothesis by taking a baseline measurement on the number of indexed agent pages, then adding all of the agent pages to their XML sitemap en masse and then measuring the impact on indexing for those pages (the impact was nil). We then convinced them to implement our recommendations and subsequently measured their impact on indexing of agent pages (over 80% of those pages were subsequently indexed). The result? An interesting conclusion that helps guide our recommendations for other clients as well as an incredibly happy Insurance brand that has now been with us for going on three years!

    As for the rest of my time, it is spent training our team of specialists (and the sales folks and the account management folks) supporting sales across the US, leading sales efforts in the Southeastern United States, and working with our product development team to build tools that help facilitate SEO. Oh and I try to help promote the agency when I find some spare time ; )

    It wasn’t always like that by the way. I started my agency life as a specialist and have gradually moved up the ladder.

    Many of the bigger agency-styled companies sell watered down services of limited value. For example keyword ranking / websourced / marketsmart interactive went from the largest SEO company to closed almost overnight. How do you scale SEO within an agency while preventing the watering down effect that is common at most?

    This is an extremely tough problem to overcome, but one of the things that we’ve focused on is product development that helps automate certain facets of the SEO process, so that our specialists can spend their time being truly strategic.

    For example, back in 2008, I figured out that our specialists (including myself) were spending an inordinate amount of time formatting and filling out the Excel templates that are used to deliver page-level code recommendations to clients (more or less a staple of agency life). This included copying and pasting the existing code side-by-side with our recommended code, so that the client’s IT/dev folks could use it as a point of reference when implementing. This was essentially data entry work that was extremely tedious and took up a tremendous amount of time.

    Working with our tremendous product development and digital services team based in Hyderabad, India, we were able to develop a web application that automatically scraped the designated code for a particular client web page and populated in the correct fields within our Excel template. Now, all our specialists have to do is fill in the recommendations in the appropriate fields, cutting delivery time in half. It’s tremendous productivity booster and also a tremendous morale booster for our specialists.

    If you’re on the client side and are interviewing perspective SEO providers, make sure that they have some sort of technology platform in place that will help automate or at least facilitate some of the non-strategic facets. Otherwise, you’re going to spend a ton of money on what essentially amounts to data entry.

    From a consumer perspective, a lot of the agencies are long on sales but short on results. What are some of the key signals consumers should pick up on when determining if an agency is the real deal or one that is selling watered down water?

    That’s easy.

    Ask them if they can help with direct implementation via CMS and/or hard coding. Ask them to go into excruciating detail in terms of how they handle link building (most agencies claim they do link-building, but it usually just boils down to directory submissions and paid links). Ask them to explain how content influences link-building and social media efforts. Ask them to go into excruciating detail in terms of how social media and SEO dovetail. Ask them to go into excruciating detail in terms of how they leverage analytics as it pertains to SEO. Ask them if they’re accustomed to working with senior (even C-level) executives to facilitate approval and implementation of recommendations.

    If they’re worth their weight, they’ll jump at the chance to give deep answers to each and every one of these questions.

    As an ad agency you guys are also involved in other marketing elements from companies. Does search ever become a key consideration when it comes to product naming, product positioning, and other advertising formats? If yes, could you share some examples?

    My agency was arguably the first to truly embrace the cross-channel interactive agency model, so we definitely work with clients across a variety of marketing channels, and as a matter of fact, we offer a variety of services beyond search (we just made the Forrester Wave for email service providers).

    I can’t get into specific clients and URLs due to confidentiality agreements, but I would say that well over 50% of the clients we work with take search into consideration when naming products, positioning products, and even picking vanity domains. I would say that about 25% of our clients make search their top priority when considering these types of things. Those are our favorites, because they really “get it” and work SEO into everything they do.

    One example that I can give you (without revealing specific client names) is the purchasing of vanity domains to drive SEO for specific product/service offerings. I’ve seen companies drop anywhere from a few thousand to hundreds of thousands in order to secure domains that have large, authoritative link profiles and already rank for high volume keywords. In fact, I recently did some consulting on behalf of one of the largest VC firms in the world, helping one of their clients (we’ll call them “Company A”) essentially put a price tag on a the value of a domain that was owned by a smaller firm that “Company A” was looking to acquire. I actually think that this type of work could become a nice hyper niche for me in the future (until Google and others finally accomplish their goal of eliminating domains from the search equation…but that’s a story for another day).

    What strategies do you use to help clients provide adequate resources for a large or complex SEO assignment when the results might take many months to materialize?

    We’ve gone as far as to help clients screen potential hires or contractors in order to help them staff up for large initiatives. In addition, we’ve embedded our employees at a client’s office for large stretches of time in what you could call a “dedicated resource” type of arrangement. Lastly, we’ve helped coordinate cross-division committees and/or multi-agency collaboration in order to help get large initiatives off the ground.

    Basically, I’ve always preached to the team that they have to do anything and everything to make things happen. Often times, it’s this extra effort that ends up become the primary measure of success in the client’s eyes, especially if there are some solid metrics to go along with it.

    What success metrics are used along the way to help clients appreciate the returns on the SEO efforts?

    I find that year-over-year trending is extremely valuable because it takes seasonality into account, and we’ll deliver that type of trending both at the aggregate level and focused on specific “big money” keywords. Incidentally, our agency doesn’t shy away from extremely competitive keywords. We go after everything that fits the client’s vertical but just make sure to set expectations early on. Clients deserve to rank for the biggest money terms, but they also need to understand that in certain cases it could take years to achieve above-the-fold placement.

    Also, I believe that it’s critical to drill down and measure non-branded keywords as opposed to just looking at raw aggregate referral data, especially when you’re working with big brands that drive mammoth amounts of brand queries. If you don’t strip out the branded search referrals, then you’re not really measuring SEO (99% of the time, branded keywords have and always will rank No. 1 so the traffic they drive are a function of brand awareness, not search engine optimization).

    Google is known for letting bigger brands get away with being a bit spammy. Do you ever suggest to clients that they have the opportunity to push the window?

    The short answer is “Yes”.

    We conform to “White Hat” SEO (whatever that means) but we also believe that it’s our job to educate clients on techniques that may or may be deemed as “spammy” by search engines like Google. They deserve to understand the entire SEO landscape, not just the vision created by Google’s Webmaster Guidelines.

    Also, for clients that are already relatively SEO savvy and were already dabbling in techniques deemed unsavory by Google, we will gladly provide a third-party opinion and consulting on those activities. We believe that they deserve that level of service for the premium they’re paying.

    Within a company internal politics often end up kicking SEO into the back seat. When doing agency work, who are the key individuals from within the companies you service that you consider it a must to loop in on the project?

    Start with the CEO (seriously). And by the way, this also applies to social media initiatives.

    The goal is to find a way to move the needle for a client, even if we are faced with a tough situation in terms of marketing approval, legal approval, or IT implementation (this is more or less par for the course in verticals like Pharma and Financial Services). If we can move that needle, then we’ll immediately push to get in front of upper-level executives, so that we can help them understand what we’re trying to accomplish in the long term (and that we won’t accomplish it at the expense of their brand affinity or legal standing).

    If you’re not getting face time with a senior director, VP, or C-level executive, then you’re probably not doing a very good job.

    Hugo Guzman is the Vice President of SEO & Social Media at Zeta Interactive. He can be reached via email at hguzman@zetainteractive.com or via Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/hugoguzman.

  • Grading Google's Marketing Practices Based On Google's Standards?

    The following is a guest post by Slaven Radic.

    The Google Buzz team has had quite a week. Their new product quickly lived up to its name, though mostly for the wrong reasons, generating buzz about its own privacy issues. Calling the original Google Buzz privacy settings lax would be a gross understatement. It created a storm of complaints, best put in perspective by Harriet Jacobs in her F*ck You, Google piece.

    In short, when you logged into your Gmail account Google simply took all of your frequent contacts and mashed them up into an active social network without much input from people they were connecting. If you exchanged a lot of emails with your editor and your under-cover sources from the same Gmail account, now they were connected through your public profile if you didn't happen to catch the Buzz opt-out checkbox. Or what about using the same Gmail account for emailing your husband and your boyfriend? Well now they're introduced - you're welcome.

    Yes, sounds like a pretty naïve and reckless way to implement a major feature but Google protested that they just wanted to help and meant no evil. After all, their CEO Eric Schmidt had an interesting take on expectations for privacy online: "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place". That was said nary two months before Google Buzz launched - I guess people like Harriet Jacobs and her abusive ex-husband just didn't listen.

    Oops, Our Bad: Thanks For All the Users...

    Since the launch, Google has done an amazingly quick about-face and pledged to do better. The latest set of changes make signing up for Buzz a tangibly more transparent experience, probably what it should have been at launch time. The press has mostly applauded their quick response and patted Google on the back for their responsiveness and keen focus on Gmail user experience.

    But let's see what Google's naiveté about privacy issues meant for Google Buzz:

    • 9 million posts and comments
    • 300,000 mobile check-ins per day
    • Buzz already rivals Twitter for sheer network size

    Those are some pretty impressive numbers for any online launch, but to achieve this in under three days is just unheard of. Actually, there are businesses that do generate this level of interests from their prospects in that short of a time-frame and Gmail deals with them on a daily basis: spammers.

    The '9 Million-Post' Question

    The question is did Google simply make a "mistake" and not consider these fairly serious privacy issues, or did the massive amount of spam Gmail churns through each day actually demonstrate effectiveness of a new business model?

    The former is hard to believe when you consider the army of privacy lawyers Google has and their job to review privacy considerations in revenue-generating AdSense programs. This is especially critical in Gmail, where you are shown ads based on emails you exchange. Gmail achieves this by reading through all your email and matching you up with advertisers interested in addressing your daily struggles. After the initial outrage over this concept a few years ago most users have resigned to trust Google that they have their best interests in mind.

    Your Trust, Google's Toilet Paper

    Google Buzz violates this trust in a serious way. In light of Google's experience in this field, it is hard not to take Google's mea culpa with a huge dose of skepticism. After all, if Google had made Buzz an opt-in service - something that users had to enable rather than be tricked into joining - they would be just another social network trying to compete with Facebook and Twitter.

    Leveraging millions of Gmail users was a shortcut simply too tempting to avoid. The fact that Google decided to revise Google Buzz activation process over the weekend is simply a red herring: they only needed a few days to convert some of the hundred million plus Gmail users into millions of Buzz users, and become the de-facto Twitter competitor over a single long weekend.

    Google "fixing" this privacy snafu a few days later is equivalent to spammers adding an "Unsubscribe" link to an email that's already done its damage.

    The strong impression from the last few days is that Gmail users were a pawn in a very cynical game: Google trying desperately to become a player in the social networking space, after the Orkut launch and their acquisition of a handful of other companies in this space failed to produce results.

    We're Not Evil

    This is a tough act to pull off when your motto is Don't Be Evil. It's been said that eventually Google's shareholders will push it to make product moves and decisions that end up hurting its brand in a quest for monetization. It will be interesting to see if Google comes out of this with their motto intact.

  • How To Start A Web Business And Survive

    An SEOBook reader, Josephbm91, outlined a problem many of us have faced: when you're starting out, it's easy for clients to walk all over you.

    So let's take a look at strategies for those starting out, be it in SEO, web design, or other small, web-based businesses. Those of you who have established web businesses, it would be great if you could share your experiences and strategies in the comments :)

    Making The Start

    How do you make the start? You've got a computer, an internet connection, and a few ideas. How do you get from that point to a thriving business, when you have no customer base, no money and no experience?

    Yeah, it's hard.

    But you'll literally work through it :)

    Society Is Testing You To See If You're Serious

    Ask anyone in business, sports, music or any other competitive human endeavor how they got recognized in their given field. They'll most likely tell you it didn't happen overnight. Whilst talent, luck and having the right connections play a part, the one trait common to those who succeed is persistent hard work.

    In Outliers, a book about how people achieve extraordinary things, Malcolm Gladwell found that to achieve mastery in anything - be it golf, webdesign, programming, music, fashion - takes roughly the same amount of time: 10,000 hours.

    Thankfully, we don't need to be masters at running a small business before we start one, else no one would ever do so. But the underlying idea is sound - persistent hard work is the key to success.

    Being persistent sends a message to those around you, including potential customers, that you're serious about what your doing. If they see you often enough, doing the thing you say you do, then you'll eventually be recognized for it.

    So if you feel you need to prove yourself, you're right. Society actually demands you do.

    What Is Worth Getting Serious About?

    Many people start businesses because they enjoying doing something. Someone who plays sport may have the desire to be paid a good living wage for playing the game she loves. Someone is good at art, so he wants to be a designer.

    Whilst there is nothing wrong with this approach - having a genuine passion for something will help you get through the rough times - I'm sure you can spot the potential problem. There might be a LOT of people who have a passion for the same thing. The more people who want to do something, the more effort you need to put in in order to stand out.

    In terms of sport, it's relatively straighforward. The sprinter with the fastest times gets recognized and progresses. Those sprinters with slower times either get better, or go find something else to do. In business, its a little more complicated, but the principle remains the same.

    You need to stand out.

    Supply And Demand

    Think carefully about supply and demand. Ask yourself: is there sufficient demand for what I want to do?

    Let's say you want to do web design. Is there demand? Why, yes, the demand for web design services is almost infinite. New companies start every minute, and most of them will need a web presence. Established companies who already have a web presence change their design from time to time, thus creating even more demand.

    All good.

    Now let's look at the supply side.

    How many people want to be web designers. The answer is: quite a few. In fact, it would appear that web design demand is more than met by the supply of web designers. What happens in such situations is there is a downward pressure on prices, because those who create demand have a lot of supply to choose from.

    The world is oversupplied with web designers. At least, it's oversupplied by people who call themselves web designers. There's a difference, of course, between someone who owns the tools of production and those who use those tools well to solve business problems. Owning a camera does not make someone a commercial photographer. Likewise, those with the most artistic design skills may make lousy web designers if they aren't focused on business aspects.

    Recognizing the reality of the situation might may you reconsider your choice of career, and opt for an area where there is heavy demand and short supply instead.

    Another way to face this problem is to differentiate. Can you do something better than other designers? You may be highly skilled in contemporary graphic design, in which case you may choose to place strong emphasis on displaying your portfolio, and target the type of clients who appreciate - and will pay for - this expertise.

    You may have, or can acquire, detailed market knowledge in one particular niche - i.e. travel sites, real estate sites, etc. Clients, generally speaking, are a lot more comfortable with providers who understand their area of business. You have an advantage if you can speak their language, rather than just the self-absorbed language of design forums.

    Can you focus on a geographic area? i.e. the immediate area where you live. Sometimes, people want to deal with someone local.

    What is the thing you can do for which there is a market? If there are too many competitors in that market, then slice that market up until you can find a niche. Aim to be top of that niche. Then put in persistent effort working that niche in order to build reputation.

    Chris Pearson gave away a number of popular free Wordpress themes on his site, created designs for popular sites (including Copyblogger & SEO Book), and then created the Thesis theme for web developers, which has since done 7 figures in sales volume. Yes Wordpress themes have become commoditized, but due to his strong marketing and continual increase in product value he was able to differentiate & build a solid business model. In his own words on starting out, Chris wrote:

    Before I launched Thesis, I created a few free WordPress themes that became extremely popular. Although these themes defined the early stages of my career, they are really nothing more than visible markers of a learning process that continues today with Thesis.

    Establishing Yourself

    Once you've decided on an angle, you then need to establish yourself. Society wants to see how serious you are.

    It is very difficult to market a business without some form of track record. But every business needs to start somewhere, and they don't start with a track record. So, the most important task for someone starting out - in any occupation - is to get one.

    One way to get a track record is to treat your first few jobs as a marketing cost. This is the cost of establishing a reputation, and if you make any money at all from these first few jobs, it's a bonus. The aim is to get referrals and a portfolio of work.

    Approach charities or small local business who need a web presence and offer your services for a deeply discounted rate, or for free. It's a win-win for both parties, because they may not be able to afford web design, and you need their testimonials and experience.

    Be sure to make it clear that the job is being done at a discounted rate, and let them know what your usual rate it. This way, they'll perceive value, and won't be in for a shock when you ramp your prices up for any future work. Focus on building a positive relationship with these clients. If they are happy with your work, they may well refer you to others.

    Once you have a track record, the risk to a future customer of hiring you is diminished. You become a known quantity, which puts you above the wanna-bes.

    Is this working for free? Some might consider it that way, but it could also be seen as just another marketing expense, like advertising. Many businesses, including big, established businesses, give away products and services - in the form of loss leaders - in order to help get their foot in the door. People who train for careers pay to learn, whilst as a freelancer, you can potentially learn on the job for free. Clients can teach you a lot about your own business , especially where your strengths and weaknesses lie.

    Pricing

    It's important not to stay cheap or free, however.

    Some think the easiest way to get business is to undercut competitors on price. This can be a self defeating strategy, especially for the sole operator, for a number of reasons:

    You get cheap clients - people who seek the lowest price probably aren't placing much value on what you do. These type of clients, ironically, can also be the most demanding. They want the most for the least, and will often push you on the amount of work you deliver.

    Someone else can always undercut you. There will always be a competitor who has a cost base lower than you do. From there, you're locked in a no-win race to the bottom.

    If it looks cheap, it is cheap. It's human nature not to value something that is cheap, and place a lot of value on something that is expensive. In the book How We Decide, by Jonah Lehrer, the author describes an experiment conducted with wine. Participants were told one bottle was cheap and one was expensive. The expensive bottle got rave reviews from tasters, and the cheap one - not so good. However, the labels were switched. The expensive wine was actually the cheap wine.

    Perception counts for a lot.

    So if your angle is cheap, make sure your margins are still high enough to sustain you. Only you know how much you need to survive at any given time.

    Alternatively, target ruthlessly, either by offering a superior, needed product, more niche know-how, or find some other angle where there is untapped demand. Be prepared to prove your worth by providing case studies describing how you've solved people's business problems in the past.

    Got any other tips for those starting out? It would be great if you can share what you know :)

  • Why Be Fair

    We've discussed in the past about how our brand is "everything we do".

    As an SEO provider, business owner, or service provider, your brand is more than your logo, website and advertising. It's also what you say, what you do, how you act, and how you treat people.

    Today, let's look at the benefits of using fairness as a way to add value to your brand.

    The Importance Of Reciprocation

    We all know about "win-win" deals.

    The best deals leave enough on both sides of the deal so both parties can prosper. A deal where one party takes all and the other party gets very little isn't desirable for many reasons, one being it just isn't fair.

    Rational business theory often overlooks this point. If a client "wins" by screwing you down to the very last cent, and concludes the deal, then supposedly everything should now proceed through to delivery and conclusion. But humans are emotional. The aggrieved SEO is hardly going to act like a true partner. More likely, they'll look to reciprocate the treatment they've received.

    What is the cost of negative reciprocation?

    We are social animals. If someone treats us well, and is fair, we feel we should treat them likewise. If someone screws us over - well - they can't expect us to give 110%. What they can likely expect is negative reciprocation, which can manifest itself in many different ways. It's not quite "revenge", but such ill-feeling can end up costing a lot more than any savings the customer made on the deal.

    The same is true of your customers.

    The Process Of Fairness

    It is important that your dealings with customers be:

    • Fair
    • Transparent
    • Honest

    If you commit to being fair, and be seen to be fair, you can still get more out of the deal than the other party - win-win deals don't need to be, and most often aren't, 50/50 - but the other party is unlikely to resent you for it if they feel the process by which the deal was arrived at was a fair one. Psychological studies have shown people often care more about how a decision was arrived at, rather than what the final decision actually was.

    Fairness of the process colors people's perception of the outcome.

    What Does It Mean To "Be Fair"?

    Be seen to be fair in the eyes of the person you're dealing with. This can be difficult to make concrete, but if you don't have a genuine intention to be be fair, you almost certainly won't achieve it.

    In practice, it means not making arbitrary decisions, listening to all parties and considering their view. It also means making making the rules transparent. A game where only one party knows the rules breeds resentment.

    An outcome should be reached where each party can see each step taken, and why it was taken. People may not even like the outcome, but they are much less likely to reciprocate in a negative manner if they feel they have been treated fairly, in a fair process. A sense of fairness runs very deep in our psyche- it's tied up with ego, self-respect, status and recognition.

    This attitude of fairness can run across all aspects of business, not just in deal making and sales. It also applies to customer service. If a customer highlights a problem, how do you react? Do you see it as an opportunity to build brand? Do you seek an outcome that will advantage only you, or do you aim to arrive at a fair outcome for all? I'd wager aiming for the fair outcome is the better long-term bet.

    But what happens if a customer is being unfair to you?

    Of course, this can and does happen. Some people will take advantage. Again, seek to make the process fair and transparent, even though they might not like the outcome you seek.

    Hard But Fair

    Yes, yes - this all sounds very nice, but it's a shark-fest out there! That may be so, but you can still play hard whilst also using fair process. You've heard the phrase "hard but fair". The fairness makes the "hardness" acceptable. "Hard and unfair" tends to result in lawyers. In this respect, a fair process itself can add value, rather than destroying it by incurring extra costs.

    Brand And Fairness

    Proctor & Gamble have an internal set of "Ten Commandments" and the very first commandment is "Do The Right Thing". Their employees must demonstrate" rectitude, integrity and fairness". Sure, all companies say that, but the companies that actually do it build stronger on-going relationships, and strong brands. Do you return to companies who you felt treat you unfairly?

    Your brand incorporates relationships with all those who you deal with, and may of those people you'll deal with over and over again. Great brands aren't just about the outcomes they achieve. They are also about how the process by which they achieve those outcomes, and if that process adds emotional value, as opposed to destroying it - by being seen to be fair - then your brand becomes stronger.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options