"SEO is B*LLS**T"

I’m just confused… how are they defining if a site is “overly search engine optimized”???

“mom and pop” may not be to savvy but they usually have ‘heart’ and a solid product. That sounds like the google I want them to be (instead of the view as money grubbing business people).

Anyway, I hope that also means the domain age does not have to be a main criteria for good ranking – otherwise I’d beat out facebook (a newish site comparatively speaking).

According to semrush facebook is getting almost 300,000,000 search visits per month..
Seems to be ranking for millions of keywords..

You are totally right on… And now what’s happening with all of the algorithm updates in that Social Media is playing an even bigger part in boosting SEO.

And… IMO… that’s why Google is putting a stronger precedence in Google +. Sites that are getting more +1’s are getting a boost in PR.

Facebook doesn’t really rank for anything competitive other than “facebook” does it?

Doesn’t matter if it does or not.
Traffic is traffic – money is money – they got both.

And so does google.

They both have a product that works and people use.

What a ‘different’ world it would be without a huge facebook type site!
(in comparison, myspace stinks).

Facebook doesn’t really rank for anything competitive other than “facebook” does it?

According to semrush facebook is getting almost 300,000,000 search visits per month..
Seems to be ranking for millions of keywords..

I

Anyway, I hope that also means the domain age does not have to be a main criteria for good ranking – otherwise I’d beat out facebook (a newish site comparatively speaking).

funny you mention facebook, im reading an seo book by danny dover(was lead seo at seomoz) and he explains that facebook was(and still is) is so poorly setup seo wise and allowing google to crawl it that google had to make changes to it bot just for facebook