SEO Myths ( Podcast )

So, welcome to today’s podcast, and I’m going to be joined by an online friend of mine, Saroosh Khan. Saroosh is a young chap who’s always online, you’ll probably see him kicking about on Facebook, and groups, and various other bits and bobs. So, welcome Sarosh, thank you for taking the time to join me today.

Thanks, Craig, thanks a lot for having me here.

So for anyone who is not aware of who you are and what you do, so why don’t you just give us a bit of a background as to what you’re doing and how you got there?

Seo Myth

Yeah well, I started off with SEO back in 2016. I actually left college and I had a couple of months in which I wasn’t sure what I should be doing. And then somebody just told me that, “Why don’t you go and try blogging?” And I was like, “What’s that?” He told me, “You can earn a lot of money from it.”

I was like, “Oh really?” He said, “Yeah, you should try it.” And then I went into blogging and then content writing and then, I’m not a native, so my English grammar is not that good. And they aren’t really up to the mark, so there’s like literally, “Excellent content writing.” I didn’t want something ordinary. I wanted to be really big in content writing. But then I found out that I have got no scope in SEO. So I started following people, people I thirsted for knowledge. I remember two years ago I texted Craig and I asked him if he got any person that helps and he was like “Yes, why not?” So I learned through a lot of analysis.

I remember I used to run sites through Screaming Frog just for fun, just for the sake of it. And right now I am working as an SEO Manager for Tevis  Interactive. It is a child company of [ 00:01:59], which is one of the leading digital agencies in my country, Pakistan. We are right now trying to go abroad and explore everything, so we have been working very well locally. And I am just kind of having a good time with them.

Well, in my opinion, I am actually a student studying at university. I am doing a BS Accounting and Finance. The two fields are poles apart. You can’t really tell by looking at me that I would be a finance guy if I met you. And you knew I was not a finance guy. I really don’t know any of finance. But SEO and this field have really helped me broaden my horizons and the basis of my analytical skills and how to deal with people. How to gather data, how to interpret data, how to analyze data to get to a proper goal. So I think this is a really good takeaway I have. That I have taken from this field from marketing and SEO.


Interesting. So what we’ll do is just go on to some of the kind of SEO myths if you like. And we discussed what we’re going to talk about and come up with some topics here. So I am going to start going through them and obviously get your input and feedback from those. So, TF-IDF. What is your thoughts on that?

When I started off with the choice of topic to talk today, I was looking for things that would really initiate discussion. Things that could really, I’m very fan of things that create controversies. You learn by analyzing a controversy. I remember a few days ago, not a few days exactly, a few weeks ago, a couple of weeks ago somebody posted on a Facebook group that that nofollow links work or don’t work. So it was a hell of a discussion. I remember that I tried even to, this moment I remember each and every detail of it. Just because it was so interesting. Both the sides were so enthusiastic in the way that they were putting forth their ideas. And the other side was very very enthusiastic in making them appear false as well.

That’s why I was looking for SEO myths. I really don’t think that these are the myths, but myths is a word that is appropriate. Because while we have a chance to discuss these kinds of things and put forward some questions that would really help us get an analytical approach, on the other hand we aren’t really sure how Google identifies these myths. What actually is Google doing with that. So TF-IDF is something very similar. If you take a look at Google patents, you will see not even the exact term “TF-IDF,” but you will see terms that are closely related to it. Like, “phrase match” or “semantic relations” or “topical class.”

So people mostly confuse these terms. But for TF-IDF, if you want to know what TF-IDF actually is, you need to understand that when it actually started … this is a concept from the 1950s, late 1950s, TF is a separate concept that was put forward by separate gentlemen. And as far as I remember, there was a lady who worked on the IDF concept. This concept is from the late 1950s and the start of 1960s. Almost 38 years before the web actually started.

So people are really confusing the terms. In my opinion, TF-IDF is a concept that was pushed into the SEO community, like a “cutting-edge technology,” just because they wanted masses to adopt it. And the masses were actually the people that were not really knowing what TF-IDF is. They did not dig into the idea. They just adopted it and they thought, “Oh my God, my content is going to be so great when I’m done with this TF-IDF thing.” And this is how it actually started.

But if you actually take a closer look at TF-iDF is and you take a closer look at the other of technologies or the techniques Google is using right now as of now to rank or actually index pages on the basis of context relevance and stuff like that, you will find out that TF-IDF is a very very old concept. Here I would like to call Roger Monty. I was reading a few articles yesterday so I just have so that when I come to this podcast, I have some material to talk about. So Roger Monty has got a very good quote. He says that, “In a world with AI neural networks and machine learning are the norm, TF-IDF is like a kid’s bike on training wheels compared to a Ferrari.”

And he is very right about that. TF-IDF is just talking about how many times a [thumb 00:07:18] occurs in your document versus the document of the whole corpus. But I want to really ask all these people using TF-IDF or that are having tools of TF-IDF, “How big is your corpus? Is your corpus as big as Google itself? No it is not.” You are only looking at the first 15, 20, max 50 results. As far as I remember, Quora looks at first 100 results. But are there only first 100 pages in Google? No the corpus is really really big. So you need to actually look at the complete corpus that you have to use the concept of TF-IDF and if you want to really work on it.

Yeah. You know I think you’re right. A lot of people take things like this, I think people in this industry concentrating things that don’t actually make a huge amount of difference. Because they think it’s new or it’s intelligent, and they blow it all out of all proportion. But it’s always fun to talk about those guys that will swear by these methods as well. And if it’s working for someone, fair enough. If that’s they believe, then fair play to them. But I would and say to anyone, “Always do the testing for yourself. And check out whether these things actually work or not.”


LSI, Does it really work?

LSI Keywords

But, get on to LSI, which is another one of those words that people will debate on. You know you hear lots of people talk about LSI and in a positive and a negative way. What’re your thoughts on LSI? Do you think this is a myth, or do you feel like that’s something that works very well for you?

In my opinion, there are actually two kinds of communities that have found out, sub-communities in the SEO communities. One is the community that uses the right kind of concept but terms it as “LSI,” which is not actually true. And the other community is the community which just goes through tools, plus in the seed keywords, and tries to find out LSI keywords. There’s a very famous for that. I don’t really like to name tools while I’m criticizing them, but they’re a very famous tool for that. You plug in the keyword and it will say that “These are the LSI keywords.” But that tool is not really telling us from where are those getting those LSI keywords.

And for a matter, when I really started with SEO, I was really fond of LSI. I would be talking about LSI so much with my friends. But when time passed on and I did some testing and I learned and I read some Google papers, I also read a patent about the LSI itself. LSI itself is a completely separate part of information retrieval. It actually came, LSI was a patent. It was filed in 1988. Again, a long time before web even started in 1998 so it is really absurd for me to believe that Google is using something that is so outdated. But then again, we need to understand what actually is LSI indexing and how we are mixing it.

People usually confuse phrase-based indexing with data and semantic indexing. People think that added synonyms or related phrases to your website works, other pages work. Yes, they do work, but then it’s not only LSI. LSI was actually coined just because the thought that in a data set of “X” documents if you’re performing a search query, there will be a structural and statistical framework on which all those documents could be related. It’s not always that they are related. They could be related. And that was the basis of LSI. But in what we believe is, that in terms of SEO and ranking for Google, there is absolutely no indication that Google uses LSI keywords you mention, so [inaudible 00:11:25] content relevancy, or if it even uses LSI to pull up document pages on the basis of how much they are sprinkled with LSI keywords.

Because LSI is too, I would say, keyword-driven. With the advent and the progress of RankBrain algorithms and neural networks and machine learning, it is really obvious that it is not only about the keyword and intent. It is also about the relevance and the setting in which the search query is being performed. So using LSI as means of optimizing your content is not really a great idea for that matter. I actually, there’s a wonderful post, by wonderful I mean pretty scientific kind of post, Bill Slawski has it on his blog. It was the first post I read about why LSI does not work and then the journey went on and on and on. And now I believe LSI does not work.

But then again, such concepts are subjected to single-variable testing. And a single-variable test is very tough to manage. Especially when it comes to LSI or something which is relevant to content. How can we create a piece of content and we say that we’re only using LSI, nothing else. There would be everything else, because how Google understands that piece of content is not subjective to me, it depends on Google.

Yeah, and I think one of the things you said there is as well, is that relevance has to come into play as well. You can’t just stick in random keywords, you know a two for example, may suggest as LSI has got to be relevant. And I think you have to use common sense in a lot of these instances as well. And obviously Bill Slawski is a very intelligent guy and well known in this industry. And I think I would always recommend if anyone’s listening to this, check out what Bill says. He does a lot of research on this stuff, reads a lot of patents, and as you see, it can help up in your mind a little bit. And help you better understand what LSI actually is and how could Google possibly work that into the system.

Can SEO’s Optimise for Rankbrain?

And then from there, as you see, it’s all about single-variable testing. And that’s the kind of stuff, I like to read is the results of testing rather than people just throwing what’s out there, and started using and God knows what else and hoping for the best. You mentioned RankBrain a moment ago. So do you believe that SEOs can optimize for RankBrain?

RankBrain, one thing I have actually noticed in the SEO industry. When something Google updates something or rolls out an update. Well, there is a lot of information that’s coming regarding that update. There is a lot of misinformation as well. And I have also noticed that that misinformation is actually kind of hijacking peoples’ minds and ideas into launching something, a tool, a concept of your own, or something like that. I’ve always noticed this.

So RankBrain was something similar. People understand RankBrain that you need to have keywords that are related in terms of intent. Your content needs to be the right content to satisfy the intent. But there is one thing that people don’t look at. People really don’t look at the user experience side of the RankBrain. RankBrain is two-sided. One side, I would say one part of RankBrain is intent and how you satisfy the intent. But the other side is the user experience. So for example, if I am trying to satisfy the intent of a global user. So wouldn’t that be very accurate or easy for me if I actually niche down to some specific location and try to satisfy the intent for that user, because I just know the kind of user experience and the relevant setting is in, I know that he is in a suburban country.

And I would actually know the kind of information he would be looking for. So if you are writing content for RankBrain or you are trying to optimize your websites for RankBrain. At a very large amount of population and your audience is really large, it is not really possible. And there can’t be a definitive guide to that, but of course, there can be ways to optimize better and better. But there is not a level of definite optimization for RankBrain. You can’t really come to a point and you can say that “Oh my website is 100% optimized for RankBrain.” Because if you’re optimizing for, let’s say I’m optimizing for financial services, and financial services if I am sitting in a really big metropolitan country close to, let’s say, Wall Street, financial services would have a way different meaning for me than for a farmer or a small-business owner who is sitting in a very remote place.

So the term financial services are very different for both of these locations. And if I am trying to optimize for anyone of them, the other person when searches, it means that my webpage is not 100% optimized, definitely optimized for RankBrain. So to achieve the level of definitive optimization is not possible. But you need to have a really great insight into your audience if you need to reach levels that are considered profitable for you.

Yeah. Well, I think it makes a lot of sense. You know you hear, again, just people talking a bit of doing optimizing for RankBrain and stuff, but it’s physically impossible to be able to do that given that no one actually knows what is in there.

How to measure link quality?

Link building Quality

So, the next thing I’ve got to ask you is about links. Because it’s all good and well talking about one-page stuff, but link building as a massive factor in rankings. And people measure this in different ways, including DA, DR, and using various other tools, Touch Flow, Citation Flow, and stuff like that. As DA, for example, I could measure of linking-

First we need to understand what exactly is “link equity.” Is link equity something that is correlated to DA or DR or some other third-party metric? No, Google is not using that. Then again, with the advent of these neural networks and how Google algorithms are transforming based on machine learning. It’s not only about the linkage place, but it’s also about the user interactions with that link. So what I have actually tested it and it has worked really well for me. It was kind of a black hat test, but then again we don’t really need to have hats to learn in SEO. I actually made a few links, one of the links, a few of my links were on a very high DS site. It was a website that was really new. There was nothing else other than those links.

And there was another website, that I started in the same niche, but it was only having nofollow links. But there was one thing that made a difference. I actually asked some friends of mine that I knew that had different IP servers than me. So I had a service from Fiverr somebody who could just go and increase the click-through rate for those links. And I actually asked them to go to that website and click through that link and come to my website and stay for some time.

So just I wanted to see how well these links perform. So one of the websites, the one in which people actually clicked on that link and interacted with that link, came to my website, spent some time on there. That website really performed well, just because you need to satisfy the placement of the link. It’s not about getting the link on the, it’s about the intent of the link. If for example, if a webmaster that is from the same nation as yours but has another website. He places your link. How can Google actually determine if that link is paid or not? Google actually looks at the user interactions and the signals it gets from it.

For example, if that link was just placeholder and nobody comes and clicks it, so Google will understand that people are not interested just because the link is not placed in a natural scenario that will encourage people to link it or click to it. So in the case that if your link is placed in such an environment, you won’t be getting a lot of link equity from that. But in a case in which a website, somebody actually puts in a query and he visits the website, and your link is placed on that website and he clicks on that link, follows it to your website, and he’s done with whatever he has to do. He has spent some time on your website, scrolls through your website, and then goes back or just goes to the search results, Google will actually take notice of that.

A link that which is present is not getting any clicks, it’s not getting any click-through rates, and that website is not getting any referral traffic. Such user experience signals are really the most important meter in my opinion of link equity, because what link equity actually is, it’s based on link authority yes, but also upon the user experience signals that those authoritative links pass to your website. So it’s, I would say a two-way approach. You need to make sure that your links are placed on pages that are contextually relevant, are in the same contextual pool, so that people actually visit your website as well. And your website shows some good user experience signals as well.

Yeah, I think if you look at most guys that are like vendors if you like, they always do sell links based on traffic to that website. And stuff like that is well, which is obviously going to be, obviously relevance is highly important as well in my opinion. Yeah, so I totally agree, too many people get stuck up on third-party matrix, which Google clearly don’t use. And what I would say there though is, I still use DR as a gauge to whether a domain is powerful or not. It’s not the only thing I go for obviously, what I want when I’m looking for links is, a link that is not on people [People Paragraph 00:22:09] for example where everyone can buy it, obviously, I want it to be totally relevant. I want that website to rank and have traffic. Well that’s the kind of things that I’m looking for, so it can be good to see links of what you’re seeing there. Whereas I know some guys out there that buy links purely based on the third-party metrix, which is never a good idea in my opinion.

Well the SEO community is very much widespread on these sort of links. There are people that believe that links don’t work. I’m not saying that. Links do work. They are still the most important metric when it comes to ranking on Google. But then there are people who think that only links work. No, only works don’t work either. There’s a lot more to SEO than link-building. So we need to actually find out the common ground between these two sides.

I think anyone who only focuses on links is crazy. There’s a lot more to it, technical, on-page, all that kind of stuff all have to be in place before you’re going to see any impact from your links. But I think it’s healthy to have a strong weight spread market campaign rather than it all being focused to one element. Because I think Google can pull the rug from under your feet very very quickly with one change overnight. So it’s good to spread the risk a little.

No Follow Links, Do they pass any power?

No Follow Links

And on that subject of links, and you mentioned it earlier, nofollow links. Do you believe they help in any way? Or do you feel that nofollow links are basically a waste of time?

Well I actually mentioned a discussion, a thread on the SEO Signals Lab. Both of these gentlemen, they are both really good people in their own respects. But they actually initiated a discussion of, “Do nofollow links work as well as dofollow links? Or why exactly we use links, or is Google subjected to follow our directions for those nofollow derivatives that we use,” and that thread was really awesome. It was really great. But there was one thing I actually found out, actually believed it as well. That website is totally gone, the website I’m talking about now. I actually ranked for the keyword “IT consulting companies,” or “IT consulting firms,” many of the relevant keywords, all across US, on the first page, in the features snippet for about eight months with nothing but eight forum links from nofollow, that were all nofollow links.

And the content was shit. I can tell you this. I actually copied content from Wikipedia. Don’t laugh on it, but it was back in the days when I was just learning things. So I did that, and it really worked. I did not really understand how nofollow links worked. I used to believe that it was a fluke, but over the time when I learned how links actually work, I found out that, “Yes, it is definitely working,” because a nofollow link at at a credible source which actually relates to your context. In the context that you’re talking about is far far better as a dofollow link from a source that is not either credible or is not contextually relevant.

For example, if you have a website of an attorney or a district attorney, which has got absolute authority. I mean these attorneys have websites that have really good metrics in terms of links. They are really authoritative website. But if I publish an article on, I would say, keto foods over there and get a link back to my website, although a link is dofollow and the authority is immense, and most of the really traditional SEOs should believe that link equity would follow. But it won’t, just because the contextual relevance is absolutely nowhere. Nowhere close. But then again if you have a link on, I would say, a food blog or a blog where you guest post as an author and there’s a link in your profile which is a nofollow, but then it links back to your own website, I would say that that link has much better authority than that dofollow link. Just because it’s contextually relevant and it would be, I would say, in the same topical cluster from the source of the link and the destination of the link.

So the relationship between the source and the destination is very important. Nofollow links were actually used in the past to fight off spam. But right now, there are two more properties. I don’t remember. One is [UdC 00:27:07] the other is sponsored links. So Google actually updated that just to let us know that nofollow does not mean that Google is not following that. Google is following that and Google actually looks at the source, if it is credible, credits the link equity, in my opinion. And if it’s not credible, does not count it, just because it would think that nofollow link is actually used for a way to not pass link equity. Google does follow our directives to some extent, but it is not obligated to follow. So that’s what we need to understand when it comes to nofollow links and if they work at all.

Yeah. It’s one of those subjects, though it’s up for wide debate. Everyone’s got an opinion on it. Again, you would need to do some single-variable testing on it to see if there’s any movement of some description. Because most people do have an opinion have already got established backlink profiles and they’re not doing that single test to see whether it actually works. But I think, again, using common sense, just because it’s more full doesn’t mean it’s not passed any value. If it’s relevant on a big website and it’s passing traffic, and everything else they click through the, and other user signals, are going to benefit your website anyway. So indirectly, it would potentially still have a benefit anyway, in my opinion, if they were not to work. But that leads on to the last thing I want to talk to you about is pogo-sticking and bounce rate. Are there any factor in rankings?

Pogo sticking

Pogosticking in SEO

Obviously we’ve spoken about click-through rate and all that kind of stuff, but bounce route and pogo-sticking, what’s your thoughts?

Well, my thoughts have gradually evolved. I have actually shifting sides, especially on the pogo-sticking and bounce rate. We actually need to understand the difference between bounce rate and pogo-sticking. Bounce rate is a user that lands on your website and visits only one page. Now that one page can be for five minutes as well, it’s not necessary for that user to just go back. People understand the word bounce rate by the word “bounce,” that a user comes and goes quickly. No, it is just a bounce rate is defined when a user visits your webpage and only visits that single website and does not visit any other webpage. I would say, by my experience, my bounce rates are really high in these terms.

Just because the kind of content that I am publishing on my websites. I usually work with the services industry. For example, if somebody is someone is searching for “Rhinoplasty in Plano,” is a famous keyword in the SEOsphere. Somebody is searching for rhinoplasty. He would not only stay for that rhinoplasty page. He won’t even care, even if I have the rhinoplasty Dallas or Austin page link on the sidebar. He won’t really care about that, because he’s for the rhinoplasty Plano page. So even if he spends 10, 15, 20 minutes, or even 10, 15, 20 seconds over there and he just goes back, that’s not a problem for me.

But then again, there comes the term pogo-sticking. I would say pogo-sticking is a very controversial term. Pogo-sticking is actually when a user comes to your page, leaves instantly in the first five seconds due to many reasons. So we actually need to figure out what reasons can be behind that pogo-sticking and why pogo-sticking does not work. So if the reason is something like the user does not like your content, he goes back makes another search, well that’s really harmful. That’s not really working your way. Because Google will understand that this page that the user recently visited, it did not satisfy the intent of that user. So if he goes back to other page or makes another complete search, that is actually the same search or a relevant search to what it previously did, it harms you in a way.

I would say it’s something I am actually working on these days. I’m actually experimenting with some of the CTR percentage and how this works. But I believe that it is the case. But on the other hand, if a user just leaves just because your website did not load or you had video that just ran, or you had ads, annoying ads that were pop-ups. While it does not speak for your contextual authority, it does speak for the fact that your website is not good for the experience.

So you need to actually figure out if there are users that are coming to your websites that are leaving in very small amount of time and you have actually got user trackings like Hotjar or other services if you are using like that. It would be very beneficial to actually look at what that user is doing on your website in the four or five seconds that he is over there. Because if he is trying to close that ad, the user experience is an issue. What if he scrolls down and finds that the content that he is looking for is not over there? You need to tweak up your content. So instead of just debating upon whether pogo-sticking is a negative factor or not, we need to actually look into the factor why the user is experiencing pogo-sticking and actually solve the reason behind that to gain the benefit.

Yeah. I’d say, again common sense. You don’t want to be serving people pages that look inadequate or are not relevant to that search term. Again, something I hear a lot of people debating over. And all of the stuff we discussed today are things that people talk about on a day-to-day basis, along with many other subjects as well. You know, of all the stuff we’ve spoken about today, obviously, it’s all subjective. It’s peoples’ interpretations of what these things are. Whether it’s LSI or DA, sometimes peoples’ perceptions is where and what they read into it. And I think from what I gather from yourself, as you obviously do a lot of research and read up on stuff and go and check stuff out like Bill Slawski and see what he’s saying.

And I think that’s obviously going to stand you in good stake going forward. Because you’re not taking everything at face value and I think that’s, for a young man, that’s quite a good skill to have. With my first few years of doing SEO, I used to take everything at face value and believe everything that everyone said. And all I found was myself going around in circles and making mistake after mistake. So it’s quite refreshing to hear that you do that level of researching stuff. It’s great to hear that. And obviously, for anyone who is listening to the podcast, what sort of things are you doing to continually develop and do your research? Is it just all Facebook groups and everything else? Or is there something else you’re doing, where do you get all this information from?

How do you continue to learn about SEO?

Well I’m regularly following some of the people on Twitter. I actually started it a few months ago. And I found out that the audience and the kind of discussion on the SEO on Twitter is very much more well-informed and unbiased I would say than Facebook. There were people on Facebook, there’s too much of a fuss. There’s a lot of noise on the groups on Facebook. I mean everybody’s giving an opinion. Sometimes people are giving opinions on Facebook groups, and sometimes I’m wondering why don’t I ask them, “Who are you? What have you actually done or tested? Have you actually tested what you’re saying?”

But on Twitter, the thing is different. People actually talking about things that are actually tested. They have tested either, or they have some logical proof to it. And I’m really enjoying myself on Twitter. This is what I’m doing right now, but on the other hand, I’m also looking deeper into the technical SEO side and the parsing, the indexing and the JavaScript side of SEO. And I’m really thankful to my friend Pablo. He’s a great man in this. He has been guiding me, helping with this. I’m actually more of a person who actually keeps on going on and on, just as you were saying. A negative way to say that would be, “I’m a very idle person and I don’t have much to do.” But I’m enjoying it. I’m young, I’ve got years in front of me. I can try, test for a pretty long time before I actually start establishing my own authority in that.

But I’ve got time to that. I’ve got time to learn, test, fail, relearn, retest, again fail maybe, because failure does not mean that I’m wrong. It only means that I might be true in some other way. And SEO is a vast field. There are many ways you can look at SEO. And figuring out the right way is actually I would say the quest of my life.

Yeah. I’ve had a lot more failures than I have success stories, so I think never fear to feel when the infinite just meets you at that, your approach, and then go onto other success. So it’s good that you’ve got that. I’ve got one last question for you. You mentioned that you are studying finance and stuff like that as well. So, what happens when you finish your studies? Do you want to continue with SEO, or are you just going to go on and have a finance career? What’re your thoughts on what you’re going to do?

Actually there is something over here. Just a few days ago there was a competition by [Rocket Banister 00:37:45]. It’s a big brand. There’s a competition they have, “The Game Changers Challenge,” in which they pick up interns based on their innovation. So they had a very initial kind of test for screening out the applicants. And the test was two parts, first part was finance, second part was marketing. And I actually called two of my friends to help me in that finance part. And it turned out to me that I did not know even a single proper formula for finance. Not even the basic ones. And I have been studying finance for about two years now. And all the finance, I just go in and I just go to sleep in the finance class.

It’s so boring over there. I don’t mean to respect any, disrespect any finance people, but that’s the fact it is. Finance is very boring. I’m absolutely sure I’m not going to take finance up as my career, because I would be a very, I would say, broke person if I went into finance as a career. I intend to go on with SEO and I will be looking forward to working in a more competitive environment than I am right now. To learn more you know.

Yeah. No, it’s interesting to find out what your choice would have been. But good to see that you fancy sticking around in SEO. I think you do very well with it. You seem to have the right attitude and stuff like that. So fingers crossed, you can go on and make a good career for yourself. But, sadly we are out of time for today. I think you’ve obviously offered a lot of insights and a lot of details into a lot of different subjects, so thank you very much for that. And hopefully we can get you on again in the future, just to catch up, find out some of the new information that you’ve been studying on or whatever. So fingers crossed you can come back in a future is new-

Sure. It was a great experience for me to be with you. And I have also got my fingers crossed about everybody.

seo profile image

Craig Campbell

I am a Glasgow based SEO expert who has been doing SEO for 17 years.

  • social media icon
  • social media icon
  • social media icon

Online Courses