From a link building perspective
you can do it yourself or pay someone else to, much as you can buy your own PPC or buy your own media, but why not use a hard cost agency to do it beter and cheaper?
Also I need to learn to spell 'better' it would seem.
( ,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 19:10,
archived)
Also I need to learn to spell 'better' it would seem.
.
"but why not use a hard cost agency to do it better and cheaper?"
Is it that much cheaper?
How would you define better?
( ,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 19:13,
archived)
Is it that much cheaper?
How would you define better?
It is a shorter term benefit
and I cannot really improve on milt's response below, much as I do like a good bicker.
( ,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 20:39,
archived)
You might not believe it,
but I hate an argument.
I'm amused that no one has defended working in social media, though. I was even ruder about them.
( ,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 21:05,
archived)
I'm amused that no one has defended working in social media, though. I was even ruder about them.
Some of my best friends work in social media
and that's all I am willing to say.
Except, of course, that it is not. I think that there are areas where social media can be leveraged just as bill hoardings have their place, or advertising in the local rag. I think tat it is an important and valuable resource which can be used as a superb and targeted channel.
I also think that every man and his dog want to jump on the band wagon and that the sort of marketing director who wants 'social media' because it sounds good is a lot more likely to be charletonized (yes I do make words up, what of it?) than the same man in traditional media channels (including organic search).
I also really like battered chips.
( ,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 22:28,
archived)
Except, of course, that it is not. I think that there are areas where social media can be leveraged just as bill hoardings have their place, or advertising in the local rag. I think tat it is an important and valuable resource which can be used as a superb and targeted channel.
I also think that every man and his dog want to jump on the band wagon and that the sort of marketing director who wants 'social media' because it sounds good is a lot more likely to be charletonized (yes I do make words up, what of it?) than the same man in traditional media channels (including organic search).
I also really like battered chips.
I think our main difference in perspective seems to be that you
work with large businesses, and I work with small. As such, I get pissed off when I see people who, say, run a dog walking company who have been sold a blog and twitter by a social media 'expert'.
Social Media is fine for large companies (even though it backfires all the time), but lots of blog posts with "comments(0)" is a waste of everyone's time if they don't have or need a big client base.
( ,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 22:34,
archived)
Social Media is fine for large companies (even though it backfires all the time), but lots of blog posts with "comments(0)" is a waste of everyone's time if they don't have or need a big client base.
Actually, I think a dog walking service is a prime example of
a business which could benefit from social media engagement within a local vertical, but yes, in general your point is a valid one.
( ,
Wed 23 Jun 2010, 9:15,
archived)
Things like Twitter feeds...
...need a reason to exist. It needs to be part of the service and it needs to add value to the customer in some way, shape or form.
For a kennel, I can see there being an argument for a feed to allow the dog owners to keep tabs on their animal, when it was walked, fed, etc. As well as a way for owners to keep in touch with the kennel in a fairly simple way.
A dog walking service? Maybe there is an argument for it, but it would have to serve a purpose.
( ,
Wed 23 Jun 2010, 10:19,
archived)
For a kennel, I can see there being an argument for a feed to allow the dog owners to keep tabs on their animal, when it was walked, fed, etc. As well as a way for owners to keep in touch with the kennel in a fairly simple way.
A dog walking service? Maybe there is an argument for it, but it would have to serve a purpose.
I wouldn't say better and cheaper.
I would say that an agency can do it well from contract start (as long as you have picked a good agency) without having to go through the pain of recruiting staff that you are not geared up to assess the skill-set of.
This is ultimately why agencies exist. They have specialists on tap and (presumably) can pick a decent candidate at interview. They can also hit the ground running.
It takes time to build a competent in-house team. They can be just as good as an agency. They are likely to be cheaper in the long-run though.
( ,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 20:04,
archived)
This is ultimately why agencies exist. They have specialists on tap and (presumably) can pick a decent candidate at interview. They can also hit the ground running.
It takes time to build a competent in-house team. They can be just as good as an agency. They are likely to be cheaper in the long-run though.
.
"It takes time to build a competent in-house team."
Is there really that much knowledge to the link building side that an SEO consultant couldn't teach a marketing department in a day? I appreciate that there is skill to code optimisation (which I suspect should be a one-off job to someone who knows what they are doing.)
However, as I mentioned before, I'm sure that it's going to be the in-house team who are more able to write interesting content about their area of expertise to post on relevant blogs and article collection sites, which seems to be a far less spammy approach to link building.
( ,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 20:45,
archived)
Is there really that much knowledge to the link building side that an SEO consultant couldn't teach a marketing department in a day? I appreciate that there is skill to code optimisation (which I suspect should be a one-off job to someone who knows what they are doing.)
However, as I mentioned before, I'm sure that it's going to be the in-house team who are more able to write interesting content about their area of expertise to post on relevant blogs and article collection sites, which seems to be a far less spammy approach to link building.
But where do you distribute your content?
You could achieve something in a day, but I doubt you will create anything lasting. We have a three-month probation period for our link builders (although we usually have a pretty good idea if they are worth keeping after two months).
Yes, in-house people are often much better placed than a third party to write authoritatively on a subject, but they often crank out very formulaic material and marketing or PR departments are often geared up for offline writing; the jump to engaging an online audience is quite often beyond them (sweeping generalisations but still).
I deliver training courses to people like this on a semi-regular basis and am astonished at how unimaginative these in-house writers can be. We often come up with a small raft of suggestions about how to create new and interesting content and see a look of dawning realisation cross their faces, accompanied by "oh yeah, I hadn't though of that" - and these are ideas we come up with after spending less then an hour with them and their brand.
There needs to be someone who is responsible for some sort of creative input into the writing process, but they need to be divorced from the writing process - someone responsible for the content strategy - and some sites have this. Those that don't will see the benefit of hiring and SEO, even if it is difficult to justify a new hire.
As for link building, they need monitoring. It is too easy for a team to get stuck in unimaginative ruts. They need an oversight system to poke them out of their comfort zones. A culture of idea sharing needs to be cultivated and innovation needs to rule the team.
Ultimately, there is nothing wrong with in-house teams. They will be just as susceptible as agencies to charlatans; the defense against this is someone knowing their onions doing the hiring (difficult if you are building a function from scratch). But if you want work to start with professionals doing the work, and you want them started by the start of next month, you will be lucky to get job ads live by then; you call a good agency and say I need this resource starting on the 1st July, as long as the money is good, you will have those people working right on time.
( ,
Tue 22 Jun 2010, 21:35,
archived)
Yes, in-house people are often much better placed than a third party to write authoritatively on a subject, but they often crank out very formulaic material and marketing or PR departments are often geared up for offline writing; the jump to engaging an online audience is quite often beyond them (sweeping generalisations but still).
I deliver training courses to people like this on a semi-regular basis and am astonished at how unimaginative these in-house writers can be. We often come up with a small raft of suggestions about how to create new and interesting content and see a look of dawning realisation cross their faces, accompanied by "oh yeah, I hadn't though of that" - and these are ideas we come up with after spending less then an hour with them and their brand.
There needs to be someone who is responsible for some sort of creative input into the writing process, but they need to be divorced from the writing process - someone responsible for the content strategy - and some sites have this. Those that don't will see the benefit of hiring and SEO, even if it is difficult to justify a new hire.
As for link building, they need monitoring. It is too easy for a team to get stuck in unimaginative ruts. They need an oversight system to poke them out of their comfort zones. A culture of idea sharing needs to be cultivated and innovation needs to rule the team.
Ultimately, there is nothing wrong with in-house teams. They will be just as susceptible as agencies to charlatans; the defense against this is someone knowing their onions doing the hiring (difficult if you are building a function from scratch). But if you want work to start with professionals doing the work, and you want them started by the start of next month, you will be lucky to get job ads live by then; you call a good agency and say I need this resource starting on the 1st July, as long as the money is good, you will have those people working right on time.