seo specialist

If you want to boost your online business then you must have a good website. You must have a website that looks superb and attracts visitors and customers. Candidly speaking, most of the visitors prefer the websites having good presentations. That is why; website design makes one of the significant elements for internet marketing and business.

Again the question arises, what makes a good and profitable web design? The best answer for this can be that an effective website design is user-friendly and SEO friendly. These both points must be adequately imbedded into the making and processing of a website.

Features of SEO friendly web design:

Content Management: Content should be unique, attractive and very much relevant. Content makes a great impact on the minds of visitors hence it should be written in the interest of customers and upon the focuses of your website.

User-Friendly: Website must have user-friendly features that makes browsing and navigation easy along with less time consuming.

Presentation: In the times of Web 2.0, presentations and looks have been the key for internet marketing. Presentation involves everything that is graphics, textures, colors, tones and so on.

Technical Aspects: HTML coding, graphic designs, flash, multimedia, alignments and other things combine together to create a unique web design.

Importance of SEO Friendly Web designs:

Better Visibility at the Search Engines like Google, Yahoo, MSN etc.

Popularity and help in building a unique brand image

Direct interaction with visitors and potential customers

Good and Entertaining presentation attracts visitors’ attention

According to the modern Internet trends, SEO friendly web design is must to enhance one’s online business. Get it as soon as possible.

From: by Subhash Kandpalpromotionworld.com

UPLINK WEB DESIGNS & MARKETING

A top exec from an online marketing services company recently asked me if I had any great examples of companies that truly excel at integrated marketing. Sadly, my response was, "No."

Perhaps that's not entirely fair. There are lots of good examples of integrated marketing campaigns. We read about them in the press all the time, and we watch companies and agencies win accolades for them. But the keyword is "campaign." These typically isolated campaigns leverage multiple tactical elements across channels. I'm not aware of any company that's truly integrated in its approach to marketing. Why? Well, truly integrated marketing is hard, darn it...

Fundamental 1: Integrated Marketing Starts With the Customer

When I ask marketers to define "integrated marketing," the word "multichannel" typically comes up very quickly. Many marketers believe that integrated marketing is about message and content consistency across channels. Other marketers take the multichannel idea a bit further, emphasizing that different channels have different strengths and should therefore play different roles in an integrated marketing campaign.

My beef with these definitions? They're inside out; they're from the marketing organization's point of view, not the customer's. A marketing organization that excels at integrated marketing puts the customer at the center of its strategy and executes extremely well across channels and lines of business.

Fundamental 2: Integrated Marketing Emphasizes Customer Processes

Think about it this way. Your customers don't care that you're only responsible for e-mail, not the Web site, direct mail, or call center. When a customer or prospect clicks through an e-mail and lands on your home page, or receives an offer in the mail and calls customer service to inquire further, she expects a seamless handoff. Most integrated marketing examples I learn about (over)emphasize coordinating creative elements instead of understanding and coordinating how each channel and customer touch point helps the customer achieve her goal. The result? For the customer, dead ends and unnecessary frustration. For the company, lost opportunities and damage to the brand.

Fundamental 3: Integrated Marketing Transcends Campaigns

I find that most marketing organizations still think in terms of campaigns and launches or pushes, rather than programs. When it comes to measuring success, these organizations tend to agonize over issues like attribution (i.e., which communication should get credit for generating a response or sale). While I don't mean to minimize the importance of understanding campaign performance, overemphasis on individual campaign performance is a common barrier to integrated marketing. Believe it or not, it's possible to optimize response to individual campaigns to the detriment of the overall program and customer value. Integrated marketing requires that marketers evaluate metrics that transcend an individual campaign, namely customer metrics like engagement, value, and profitability.

Fundamental 4: Integrated Marketing Requires Interaction and Dialogue

Although some marketing organizations are experimenting with trigger-based communications and onsite dynamic content delivery, these tactics pale in comparison to traditional push-marketing tactics. Yet when considered from the outside -- from the customer's perspective -- integrated marketing is inherently two way and responsive to customer behaviors.

Fundamental 5: Integrated Marketing Is a Fusion of Sales, Marketing, and Service

Integrated marketing doesn't stop at the organizational boundaries of the marketing department. Integrated marketing requires an integrated approach to marketing, sales, and service. Does this expand the definition of "integrated marketing"? I think not.

Step back and consider this issue from the customer's perspective. How do customers develop their perspective on the companies and brands with which they do business? And without conducting a major quantitative study, ask yourself: do marketing campaigns or individual interactions with a company have a bigger impact on how customers and prospects perceive your company? I think that's a pretty easy question to answer. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but marketing is responsible for how the company is perceived.

CMOs Must Lead the Way to Integrated Marketing

I realize the implications of what I've outlined here. Integrated marketing is customer-focused marketing. Customer-focused marketing requires relevant communications, interactions, and content, regardless of channel and customer interaction point. That's a tall order and requires an incredibly strong leader. There's a lot of inconsistency in how CMOs perceive themselves and how their job is perceived by others. And senior marketing execs often express frustration with how the marketing function is viewed. CMOs must define and lead a customer-focused marketing strategy that crosses product, channel, geographic, even functional boundaries. Otherwise, they risk losing the customer.

From: clickZ.com by Elana Anderson

UPLINK WEB DESIGNS & MARKETING

On the Google scale of projects, the search giant’s newly launched online encyclopedia Knol ranks as relatively minor. But for some, it’s a stretch – not technologically, but ethically.

Google has over the years expanded its Web presence beyond the familiar search box. With each foray into content, it raises concerns about conflict of interest with its original function as unbiased search engine – concerns that Google search would be disposed to point to Google content first.

“This is a step too far,” says Danny Sullivan, editor in chief of Search Engine Land. “Google’s job started out being a service that points people to other information, and that remains their primary job – not to be providing the information themselves.”

The company now controls the leading online video site YouTube, owns a major blogging platform, and has advertising inventory on millions of external pages thanks to AdSense and DoubleClick.

Like most search engines, Google keeps secret the algorithms that rank search results, meaning that users are left to trust the company not to favor its own burgeoning content over others.

“I would prefer that a search engine keep church and state separate,” says Jay Bhatti, co-founder of Spock.com, a people search engine. “You can’t choose to be a content creator as well as a content aggregator that impartially sends people to data sources. It’s very tough.”

Google has moved into some areas of content because few other companies can undertake projects of such scale, such as digitizing the world’s books. Other times, it dabbles in publishing mainly to improve its search functionality.

In the case of Knol, says Mr. Sullivan, the project overlaps needlessly with existing online encyclopedias, including Wikipedia, Citizendium, and Squidoo.
“They really didn’t need to do Knol,” says Sullivan. “What you really want sometimes is for Google to say no to itself.”

A Wikipedia alternative
Launched in beta form two weeks ago, Knol allows anyone to write encyclopedia pages. Unlike Wikipedia, each page, or knol, will have a signed author and may include his or her point of view. Outsiders can make edits if approved by the author. The setup fixes some perceived weaknesses of Wikipedia, namely the blandness of group writing and the ability of vandals to wreck an entry.

Another difference: The author may put advertising on the knol, with revenues shared by the author and Google.

Within days of Knol’s launch, some knols showed up in Google’s top 10 search results for certain keyword queries – something observers like Sullivan consider an unusually rapid rise to prominence.

Other red flags went up. Search expert Aaron Wall demonstrated that content could be “scraped” off another page – say from Wikipedia – dumped onto a knol, and show up higher on Google’s search results than the original. What’s more, a Google algorithm clearly noted the original page, but still ranked the knol higher.

“Let’s say I’m the nefarious type. How long does it take me to see that Knol outranked the original source before I … grab hundreds of thousands of pieces of content on the Web, upload them to Knol, and add AdSense to it?” says Mr. Wall, author of SEO Book, a search engine optimization guide at seobook.com.

A Google spokesperson countered that the company has “strong and robust” ways of establishing authorship and discouraging plagiarism. The Knol community of users will have tools to flag abuses, and plagiarized authors can file a take down notice that Google “will then investigate and act upon.”

As for the high ranking of some knols, a Google software engineer named Matt Cutts publicly responded in a blog that these floated to the top because of their placement on the Knol front page, thereby becoming highly visibile. Some knols ranked highly in Yahoo, he added, but “that doesn’t mean that Yahoo is boosting Knol.”

Despite the concerns, there is no conclusive evidence that Google has ever favored its own content.

A company spokesperson said Google is committed to keeping its search operations and content projects separate, and any content it owns will be treated by the search team the same as any other.

Google also points out it would not make sense for it to jeopardize public trust in its searches, which makes up the foundation of their business.

Ensuring search transparency
Discussions in the tech community, however, have been percolating over better search engine transparency. Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales is experimenting with a transparent search engine. In January, he launched Wikia Search, an engine built on open source algorithms – a radical concept Google won’t be adopting.

“We are, to be honest, quite secretive about what we do. There are two reasons for it: competition and abuse,” writes Udi Manber, a Google vice president of engineering, on a company blog devoted to greater openness. If Google’s search algorithms were known, he argues, people would game the system.

The search engine Spock, meanwhile, found it easiest to simply limit itself to search, says Mr. Bhatti, after partners balked at the possible competition. If Google’s going to do both, he says, it needs to assure users the two are separate.

Sullivan proposes that Google hire an ombudsman – somebody who would have full access to investigate complaints and report back to the public. A variation on that theme, put forward by Jeff Chester at the Center for Digital Democracy, would be a third-party task force that could both vouch for integrity without divulging specifics.

“When you dominate search in such a way, then you need to go the extra mile … to assure the public,” says Mr. Chester. “At the end of the day, Google’s job is to serve the advertisers with the largest budgets.”

Mr. Wales says he trusts Google at this point. “If someone in Google said link to Knol first, we’d hear about it because it would really cut against the ideology of everyone who works at Google.”

That said, as Google grows stronger, the concerns naturally increase. While Wales wouldn’t want a mandated ombudsman, “I think it would be good business sense for Google to offer.”

From: csmonitor.com

UPLINK WEB DESIGNS & MARKETING

In "Link Building Starts at Home," we examined how linking building begins with your home page and all the other pages that make up your Web site. Keep in mind: it's important to serve up seemingly static hierarchical URL structures, providing consistently crawlable keyword-rich navigational constructs and leveraging CSS (define) to build an optimal platform for link building.

Before analyzing how other Web site functions can fracture link-building efforts, you must understand why your Web site's structure is crucial for efficient link building. It's a pretty straightforward proposition: linkers are lazy, so link builders need to work harder.

Random linkers are particularly lazy, which is probably one big reason bookmark services have outpaced using browsers for following favorites. Random linkers don't care if they lock into an appended URL for an affiliate when they comment about your content on their blogs, forums, or beyond.

Random linkers don't care if they use FeedBurner URLs to follow your RSS feeds. Random links just latch on to any odd link, which is why link builders have to work harder to channel their choices into an optimal destination URL.

Lethargic Spiders

When your Web site presents linkers with JavaScript-embedded links in Flash files for .swf (define) objects, linkers have to click on something to reach their desired destination. Search engine spiders, not so much. As a matter of fact, the only thing lazier than random linkers are search engine spiders, because they won't even bother to click on a link.

Once again, you must work harder to get search engine spiders to follow a JavaScript navigational path or help the spiders read content in a Flash file. There are a lot of ways you can do that. CSS is a great workaround for JavaScript-based navigation. For other elements, like JavaScript used in Flash files, you'll need to do some work on the .swf objects to make your content visible.

Workarounds include using a program like sIFR (define). SIFR functions well to make invisible Flash-embedded navigation visible for search engines spiders to follow. Flash SDK can help too, but plan to weed out superfluous programmatic phrases.

More elegant Flash workarounds include progressive enhancement (define) adds yet another layer of complexity to the situation. Few if any URLs are created during the phenomenal user experience, so linkers are stuck with tapping a limited link series that may or may not be what they are actually talking about when they establish the link. There are options for workarounds for AJAX, too. Some Webmasters end up creating static HTML pages, which are snapshot versions of AJAX pages programmatically generated by site visitors. These pages are then linked together with a supplemental architecture of sorts beyond just providing site search results.

The use of supplemental architecture and alternative navigation schemes such as bread crumbs, pagination constructs and archives, site search results, tag clouds, and even a stoic old sitemap don't just help bind AJAX-based sites together. These types of tactics also provide alternative paths for spiders to crawl and index. What's optimal for link building is often optimal for spiders, too.

Remember, supplemental linking tactics that help bind a site together are no replacement for hierarchical navigational constructs. These linking tactics are just another set of SEO (define) tools in your toolbox. Like most tools, they should be used wisely.

In Summary

Successful link building is all about increasing the number of high-quality, topically pertinent inbound links to a Web page to raise its visibility in search engine results for specific keywords and keyword phrases. As a result, there are several link-building tactics that require particular attention for your native site.

Good things happen when you get your site right. Every tactic I've talked about today and in my last column will help you create a stronger link-building strategy, because these tactics provide a link-friendly environment to house your content. Sure, you still need to optimize your content. But at least search engine spiders can see it now.

When you start link building from your home, you build a solid foundation for all your online marketing schemes, especially for natural search optimization initiatives. The tactics don't change when optimizing a Web 1.0 site or a Web 2.0 blog. Good link building starts with your home page. Happy linking makes for a happy home.

From: ClickZ.com

by P.J. Fusco

UPLINK WEB DESIGNS & MARKETING

Yahoo wants to be in bed with Google. Google wants to own the bed, the house, and the landing strip in the back yard. Probably the most talked about yet least understood marketing collaboration in the history of the Internet, the Yahoo/Google remarriage has everybody in the business buzzing.

We're just ahead of three years since Yahoo severed its relationship with Google and, like so many other ill-fated toxic relationships, it seems the two information access portals can't stand to be together or apart.

Maybe it's a great way to push Microsoft away. On the other hand, inviting Google in for a short-term romp might just shut Carl Icahn up. Who cares if Yahoo outsources its search advertising to Google? You should, and here's why.

Morons and Their Money

What's that old saying about fools and their money? Overstock.com's VP of Tactical Marketing Geoff Atkinson told Bloomberg that the partnership between Google and Yahoo should help the relevancy of advertising on Yahoo.

Elsewhere in lunacy, Maurice Levy, the chairman and chief executive of agency giant holding company Publicis Groupe, added that the deal would be "very positive." This is the same guy who announced a "partnership" with Google early this year.

Partnership is a lovely term as it covers all manner of good and evil while saying exactly nothing in the process. Agency managers I've spoken to recently are still struggling with Google's arguably one-sided advertising terms and conditions.

Maybe the negotiations will go better once Google is the only place to buy search ads. Maybe Hillary Clinton will get back into the presidential race as well. I hear the American dollar is about to mount a giant comeback against the Euro, too.

Government Action?

Anti-trust regulators haven't yet commented on the proposed initiative. Just a wild guess here, but the details of the relationship would first have to be laid out in detail before any regulatory commission could take action.

At this point, the deal is sufficiently (and by design) so vague, even the Yahoo managers I spoke to last week were wondering what to tell their biggest clients. Way to go, Yahoo. Nothing like leaving your managers in the dark while attempting to drench the industry in happy gas. Thank goodness your best people aren't running out the door. Keep up the good work.

Levy and Atkinson can both be counted in the group that doesn't think search ad prices will increase as a result of the proposed alliance. Newsflash: prices are increasing with or without the collusion ... er ... co-opertition, I mean collaboration.

On what planet is having only one place to buy anything a good thing for competitive pricing?

Six of One, Half Dozen of the Other

Microsoft doesn't like the idea of Yahoo and Google coming together, big surprise there. Yahoo President Sue Decker defended the deal in a Reuters interview last Friday by saying tests had concluded that Google serving ads into Yahoo wouldn't prevent the expansion of Panama. She's right: weak technology is preventing Panama expansion, not Google.

By the way, I'd love to take a look at the raw data from those tests.

Yahoo is quick to point out that it will control the flow and frequency of Google ads in search results. Much in the same way, I control the flow of oxygen into my bloodstream. I can stop breathing any time I want.

I have just one question for Ms. Decker: if you can turn it on and off and you want us to believe you have all the control, why are you doing it at all?

Of course, the option still exists for Yahoo to partner with other third parties to "backfill" search revenue. History has taught us that mixing search ads into results go together like peanut butter and pickled herring, so why not go for it?

Winners, Losers, and Loners

The bigger picture here is the ongoing battle for display advertising dollars. With revenue sourcing issues out of the way, Yahoo can focus on dominating the display world, or simply wait for Google's program to gain critical mass and start serving Google ads.

At the end of the day, big agencies might win, because buying search advertising from one source is much simpler than trying to manage multiple search buys. Online media integration will be easier, and thinking (as it relates to search advertising) will no longer be necessary. Google can simply tell us what to think and where we should go to find ourselves.

I can understand why Yahoo is bleeding talent. As a long time supporter and fan of Yahoo, even I feel a bit betrayed; I can't imagine the rage some Yahooligans must feel. Are we still saying Yahooligan? Maybe Gooligan?

Yahoo wants us to believe this is simply a partnership to help build revenue while they continue to build a portal. Some advertisers don't think prices will increase. Wake up people, the emperor of Jonestown is buck naked and the only thing we've yet to discover is the flavor of the Kool-Aid.

From: SearchEngineWatch

UPLINK WEB DESIGNS & MARKETING