[OldWelshGuy]

The title of this thread is something I get time after time probably 5 or more times a week on the phone. "I really need to get my site ranking on the search engines, but money is tight", is normally how it goes.

Recently I had two cases where they had spent £10,000 & £25,000 respectively for their websites, didn't consider for one minute that it would need marketing and promoting, and the companies who designed their sites didn't even mention it. WORSE STILL is that the sites are poor, totally non search engine friendly etc

Both the cases above were deseprate, had financed to the hilt to get their business on the road, and their sites were bot LOUSY. In both cases the web designers were happy to do exactly what the clients asked them to do regardless of whether it was going to harm their businesses. The result was two egocentric websites that were unbeleivably bad had no proper structure no decent content and no hope of ranking. How do you tell someone who has paid £25,000 for a completely flash site that they are not going to be able to rank for their terms?

I try to be as helpful as possible, but one thing I find is that people are angry at being let down by 'the internet' and their designers, and that anger gets in the way, and is transferred to me with regards payment. All too often I hear the magic words, I have spent xxx on this site so far and got nothing so I am not willing to part with a penny until I see some results blah blah blah.

This isn't a rant, and there IS a point here, and that is that MANY designers are possibly braking the law and leaving themselves open to legal action for recovery of money paid.

The sale of goods act states that goods must be fit for the purpose for which they were intended. If a design company supplies a website that is unspiderable, then I would argue that it is not fit for purpose. Whether it ranks or not is irrelevant, the 'fitness' i would say is sarch engine friendliiness. A clear example of this is a site where the page title and description are sitewide. This WILL harm a site.

So what can we do about this? I work with designers all the time educating them how to make an SEO) friendly site, they then go straight out and offer SEO services on their site .

Finally I will say this. I dealt with a case last year where the site owner was an architect, he was a little eccentric and had paid £100,000 for his website. The site was a 10 page bought in template. I was sceptical but he HAD paid £100k for the site and some 'seo' . The site was worthless.

When businesses start up they get information etc, but they don't get advice on websites. Our business link units in Wales try to do their best, but they believe the best thing to do is to 'save them some cash' and build a site for them. HOW WRONG IS THAT!

EU money is once again puring into the UK for possibly the last time. Hundreds of millions have been wasted by regeneration initiatives, while companies get rich charging the earth for websites that don't CAN'T (in many cases) perform.

On forums like this are decent people working to earn a crust, designers charging sensible rates and providing decent work, designers taking the time to learn about SEO for their clients.

I try to help these clients that have suffered, my wife goes nuts because she says (rightly) that the designers have walked away with thousands, and we are picking up the pieces gratia!

Right or wrong I believe in Karma, but I can't help getting angry at rip off design companies

[batface]

Originally Posted by OldWelshGuy

This isn't a rant, and there IS a point here, and that is that MANY designers are possibly braking the law and leaving themselves open to legal action for recovery of money paid.

The sale of goods act states that goods must be fit for the purpose for which they were intended. If a design company supplies a website that is unspiderable, then I would argue that it is not fit for purpose. Whether it ranks or not is irrelevant, the 'fitness' i would say is sarch engine friendliiness. A clear example of this is a site where the page title and description are sitewide. This WILL harm a site.

It's educating people that the contract has to stipulate EXACTLY how SEO is approached in the design, otherwise what have the designers done wrong. I'm in discussion with a guy who says that his designer is sorting out SEO, but when pushed he has no idea what that really means, and like you suggest feels that because he is spending x amount it must be good and doesn't want another big spend.

I have just started on a site with uniform page title and description and stuffed keywords meta. At least it's a blank canvas.

A gripe of mine is the unwillingness of many businesses to work at new fresh content on a regular basis.

Mick

[Alvin]

Like you James I come across many people who have paid considerable amounts to have a web site that is worth ziltch ,in terms of earning a revenue.

Not so sure one can lay all the blame at the feet of web designers,as I believe it is more a case of the blind leading the blind in many cases.And quite often a client will insist on a particular type of site which is very often not good SEO wise.

I gave up doing SEO for the general public some years ago,as I realised that very few web based business's were going to make it.

I now look for an idea or a product that I consider a viable proposition and will then build the site,do the SEO and provide any capital needed.

For this service I charge 50% of the profits.I believe this to be the fairest method of working possible as if I do not perform I do not earn a penny,and I am the one who has taken all the risks as the business owner has had to do nothing cost wise or work wise.

So far all concerned have been very happy with the arrangements.

I am at present not taking on anymore projects owing to the need to get out more.

Alvin

[consultant]

Without knowing more on the clients, it is hard to criticise - are they hardened business people going into the world of web or just newbies, deciding that web is a good thing. I would guess the first, if they are spending that money. I dont want to sound harsh, but if they are newbies spending thousands on a site, without planning, they probably deserve to lose this amount now rather than a lot later!

Anyway, back to the main these. If they have no money and you think that the concept is good, do the work for shares and a further incentive i.e. if you complete the work, you get x% of shares of the business. If the goals are acheived, you get a further x%. this way, you could built up a portfolio of shares across several companies that could mature into something greater, down the line

If you do not believe, walk away!

As for the web designers, yes, they do have some culpability, as they should be guiding their clients as well as being guided by them/working to a brief.

[KingPin]

You know, back in 1999/2000 there wasn't really a great deal of web designers (not compared to todays standards), then from 2002 I seen a massive influx in web designers offering full sites for stupid amounts like 100 quid.

I can understand the thinking of a not so savvy SBO and thinking it's a bargain but the reality is, most of the sites these types of people made were absolute s**t. Then of course by the time the client had paid and stuff it was already too late to do anything which resulted the SBO shelling out more money to get the site done right.

I'll never forget I had a client come to me once and asked me how much I charged for SEO/SEM work and he stood there as if he seen a ghost. I told him he will get what he pays for and more.

He proceeded to tell me about a company that offers SEO, with web design and hosting at 4,000 quid per month so I told him if that's what he wants to do then go and do it.

He showed me their site and what keywords they got their clients ranked for. When I looked at the keywords I was totally stunned because they were phrases like "My money eats yellow Bananas".

This company even told their clients that the higher your PageRank, the higher up in the search engines you will be placed. I tried to educate him but he wouldn't listen so in the end I told him good luck.

He came back to me a month later and begged me to sort out the abortion of a job this company done so I agreed to look at his site and see what I could do.

I was amazed at some of the back links. This guy was a lawyer in the west end of London and he was getting link from adult video sites, random Indian sites etc etc.

They even charged him 5,000 quid for 5000 back links, all of which were of no relevance to his site at all.

Best part about it is, they build his site using a free template and charged him for it.

Now, as for web designers and SEO, I have always seen it as one of them touchy subjects because a web designers idea of SEO is not always the idea of a professional SEO.

I know you can't know everything but a willing to listen and learn will carry you far.

I probably went way of topic but hey, to many people get screwed over by design houses and so called SEO companies these days.

/rant over

KP

[An Oasis]

Sounds to me like a case of PPPPPP.

Whilst I have a degree of sympathy I doubt whether many of us with successful websites got it right first time.

[Calibre Designs]

Great quality posts and thank you for your past experiences.

Forums like this would really help people realise their mistakes.

[Alvin]

Originally Posted by An Oasis

Sounds to me like a case of PPPPPP.

Whilst I have a degree of sympathy I doubt whether many of us with successful websites got it right first time.

More like XXXXXX

what the F**k is PPPPPP.?

Alvin

[Inzvestor]

The design fraternity has a pretty nifty approach to those wanting work for free, perhaps SEO could adopt a similar campaign.

http://www.no-spec.com/

[KingPin]

Originally Posted by An Oasis

Whilst I have a degree of sympathy I doubt whether many of us with successful websites got it right first time.

The difference is when it comes to clients you should be able to deliver before you even attempt to sell a service.

It's the clients money, their business and their future in your hands. Especially if it's online based.

Don't run before you can walk as they say.

KP