Would you rather be remarkable, or have kickass search rankings?
I recently finished the book Zag, which regurgitates the now-traditional marketing-speak of differentiation and being remarkable as the keys to success. Frankly, I can’t debate the benefits of those two virtues, but while reading, I kept asking myself:
Does remarkable really matter when you have Google on your side?
Don’t get me wrong. Being remarkable usually leads to great search rankings by way of backlinks – in addition to so many other things – so it’s a noble goal. However, remarkable isn’t exactly a commodity. I mean, how much remarkable is there in the job board landscape, really? Not that much has changed in 10 years.
The vast majority of job sites don’t have resources for Super Bowl ads or naming a sports arena, let alone billboards, radio spots and newsworthy partnerships. Search is the key to success for most job sites. Superior rankings means traffic means results, which ultimately means happy customers. Without the constant, affordable traffic search engines bring to the equation, most sites couldn’t withstand the weight of operation.
As a result, there’s an arms race of sorts to out-optimize your opponent(s). If my SEO can beat-up your SEO, you haven’t a chance. And those without a fighter in the ring shouldn’t expect, well, a fighting chance.
So, search or remarkable? My own experience says search. Give me a niche, and I’ll beat you. Give me a bigger, more established niche, and it’ll just take a little longer. In contrast, can I be more remarkable than you? Much tougher to do, mostly because it’s out of my control and in the hands of those who do the remarking.
Case in point: Without a doubt, Cheezhead is the most remarkable thing I’ve ever done in business. Yet, 40 percent of my traffic still comes from search engines. If every regular reader left tomorrow, I’d still have a healthy dose of unique traffic thanks to search.
Want to write a three-letter-word book title about success in business? Don’t call it Zag. Call it SEO.
Popularity: 3% [?]
March 19th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
I disagree.
“Remarkable” creates loyalty, retention, and repeat customers to any revenue channel. These things are critical to sustained growth of a business enterprise.
“Search” puts eyeballs on a page (or increases the odds that eyeballs will land on a page). If the product or service being offered is found to be less than “remarkable”, SEO isn’t gonna help all that much.
Maybe I view “remarkable” as a goal and “search” as a tool (or a tactic?) towards reaching the goal.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
How about both?
Just the fact that people come doesn’t mean that you’ll end up monetizing those people. I get some great Google Love, too (at least, for a site of my size), but if people don’t like what they see, I’ll be talking to different people every day. That defeats the purpose.
Admittedly, it takes a little bit more time, but by being remarkable (which hopefully means that you’re providing something that people want), people will find you eventually.
I’m willing to bet, in fact, that you wouldn’t pick search if you had to make the selection. It is highly unlikely you would be in the position that you are, complete with your impressive “sell out”, if you didn’t retain the people that found you.
That being the case, I still won’t turn down Google’s #1 spot for “Houston Recruiter” or “Texas Recruiter”.
Dan
March 20th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Being an SEO I’m always going to champion the opportunities that a good search marketing campaign offers. However while search might be enough now as the cost of the technical back ends gets cheaper there are going to be even more niche competitors.
Now a number of blogs are offering their own job sites I can see similar developments in this direction.
March 21st, 2007 at 9:22 am
I agree with the cheez- people buy what is in front of them. Shelf space is more important than good taste, and search will beat ‘remarkable’ if its one or the other.
Likewise, I think the same is true for ‘passion’ and ‘excellence’ v. just plain execution, in many cases.
I blogged on that topic the other day:
http://www.ere.net/blogs/Martin_Snyders_Passing_Scene/0DBA9237681942D3B6806E60735A477E.asp
As usual Joel comes up with the non-CW insight…