Anyhow, i think the most important thing is to rank best on the keywords you are trying to hit at. Though the fact remains that people who are commissioning SEo firms would really look at their ranking FIRST(empahsized), before the track record of that company.

“internet marketing consultant” eh Andy? Sounds like a invite for some fun.

As far as ranking well as a requirement for selecting a vendor, the agency should at least do well on their niche terms but I agree with Jordan that client results are more effective.

Glad you had a chance to respond and fill me in on your thoughts. I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one which is why comments are enabled on this blog.

I think it is important for SEO’s to be able to rank their sites, you disagree. I’m sure there are bigger debates in the SEO-universe than this one. I can’t apologize for my statement as I think it’s perfectly fair to judge a dentist by their teeth. Might not apply in all cases but for lack of additional information, it’s a good starting point.

You did say, however, about ranking for those phrases: “This is clearly a big strike three (in this case I wouldn’t even give the SEO firm a strike one or two).”

So the other criteria on the list, which I did say was pretty solid, wouldn’t really matter if you’ve already ruled them out.

Also, these people probably can’t tell what’s a good keyword phrase and one that no one is actually using. “We’re ranked #1 on Google for ‘optimization for search engine visibility.’” What they don’t know is that there’s very little competition and no searches on the term.

Thinking about your points further, perhaps slightly better advice would be to look at their clients’ rankings for targeted keywords. That is, if you can get a list of clients. I know some companies (like many of SEOmoz’s clients) don’t want their SEOs telling the world they’ve hired them. Still has the same problem as above, however. Hm…

PS–I’m a ‘she.’

Here is what I wrote (as noted above):

“… Too often when I take a look at the SEO’s website and research their targeted phrases (usually pretty obvious when you look at the title and heading tags) I find that they don’t even rank for their own phrases.”

I am NOT saying that you need to rank for “seo” or “search engine optimization” to be a good SEO which was even mentioned by Jordan above when he wrote, “On the plus side, Dave does indicate that the title and header tags are a good place to find keywords that the site is targeting.”

I’m saying that an SEO should be able to rank for the phrases they’re targeting. I’m not saying what they should target (that’s between you, your offerings, and your conversion data). And I should also note that I’m not saying this is the only thing to look at, just the first thing. The article goes on to list other points to consider.

But…I’ve never tried to rank for SEO terms. I remember talking to John Scott years ago who indicated internet marketing terms converted much better.

Now I don’t try to rank for anything because I have a strong base of happy clients and have no need to aggressively chase more.

I also think it’s worth noting that not every company trying to rank for SEO terms necessarily has client interests at heart. After all, if they are dedicating so many resources to ranking for themselves, is this at the expense of clients? In some instances, I think it clearly has been.

2c.

I do appreciate the kind words in the piece. That said, I’m not actually targeting that term. I’m going for the bigger prize “internet marketing consultant”, which is more lucrative and targeted for me (and we’re #5 and #6).