Have you heard of a service called "Autocomplete Engagement?"
-
One of our clients was approached by a company selling a service they're calling "autocomplete engagement," which they're claiming has the ability to manipulate the auto-suggest feature of Google. They are not selling content, or technical SEO, and claim that the average "SEO guy" cannot garner the results they can.
My questions are: a) has anyone heard of this tactic, and b) can it really be done? c) if it can be done, what can a company do to manipulate that information beyond a strong technical SEO and content strategy?
-
No worries and good idea to toss the question of concern out to the Moz community. In the future, if it's anything having to do with Google or any new "up and coming" solution or search criteria change, then check with Google first, then check the Blogs here at Moz or elsewhere because I'm sure content writers would LOVE to be the first to hit on a new idea for how to rank in Google.
Hopefully you can put your clients at ease
- Patrick
-
Thanks Patrick - I had tested it myself in Google and saw the same results you did. I assumed this was some crazy gimmick, but wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something that's "up-and-coming," you know? Plus, of course, the client was all pumped about being FIRST ON GOOGLE FOR EVERYTHING and I wanted definite answers to talk them off the ledge with
-
Rachel,
The gimmicks I've heard are countless. The clients feared into buying a product/service are countless. Yet, this is a new one I haven't heard about. I'll put it this way, if you are promoting a service which is "KILLER" and "WILL GET RESULTS" then you had better just show up for the service name in Google, at the very least, right? I wouldn't worry about this "company" and/or "service" and be upfront with your clients about how these types of solicitations will be frequent and annoying.
I'm sure you already did this, but I wanted to do it also and share with the community. First, begin typing in "Autocomplete Engagement" into Google. You can clearly see you have to type out the whole phrase and yet you don't get one single "Instant" result in the drop down menu. Unfortunately, I already entered and searched the whole phrase, so that's why you see it in my search history AND also this post in my screenshot. No results for their SUPERIOR SEO TRICK
Second, when you do search the entire phrase, you get nothing about any mention of an SEO service. Hell, this question is already ranked on 1st page for that term. Scratching my head. Show this to your clients and then let them know it's just another scare tactic to get them to spend some money... I mean waste money.
Hope this was a helpful response! - Patrick
-
"Autocomplete engagement" sounds like a terrible name for a reality TV show.
Haven't heard of it. Considering that it's Google's best guess as to what you're typing, and it's based on what other users have searched, I wouldn't say it's impossible. But the catch is you need to know exactly what your users are typing in. Let's say you sell dialysis equipment. You would need to know if your users are searching "dialysis machine", vs "how do dialysis machines work" (and those represent two very different searches). You then need to rank well for that term.
The only thing I can assume is they're going to somehow flood Google with clicks on a term. Done hundreds, or even thousands of times, I could see it working to some extent. But any successes would be transient (this is the reason why mechanisms like Panda, Penguin and Hummingbird exist in the first place). As such, I place little stock in it.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
"Fake" market research reports killing SEO
Our robotics company is in a fast growing, competitive market. There are an assortment of "market research" companies who are distributing press releases about their research reports (which are of less than dubious quality). These announcements end up being distributed through channels with high domain authority. The announcements mention many companies in the space that the purported report covers - including ours. As a result, our company name and product brand is suffering since the volume of press announcements is swamping our ratings. What would you do? Start writing blog postings on topics and post through inexpensive news feeds? Somehow contact the firms posting the contact and let them know they are in violation of our trademarks by mentioning our name? Other ideas?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | amelanson1 -
Does Duplicate Content Actually "Penalize" a Domain?
Hi all, Some co-workers and myself were in a conversation this afternoon regarding if duplicate content actually causes a penalty on your domain. Reference: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66359?hl=en http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-duplicate-content-wont-hurt-you-unless-it-is-spammy-167459 Both sources from Google do not say "duplicate content causes a penalty." However, they do allude to spammy content negatively affecting a website. Why it came up: We originally were talking about syndicated content (same content across multiple domains; ex: "5 explanations of bad breath") for the purpose of social media sharing. Imagine if dentists across the nation had access to this piece of content (5 explanations of bad breath) simply for engagement with their audience. They would use this to post on social media & to talk about in the office. But they would not want to rank for that piece of duplicated content. This type of duplicated content would be valuable to dentists in different cities that need engagement with their audience or simply need the content. This is all hypothetical but serious at the same time. I would love some feedback & sourced information / case studies. Is duplicated content actually penalized or will that piece of content just not rank? (feel free to reference that example article as a real world example). **When I say penalized, I mean "the domain is given a negative penalty for showing up in SERPS" - therefore, the website would not rank for "dentists in san francisco, ca". That is my definition of penalty (feel free to correct if you disagree). Thanks all & look forward to a fun, resourceful conversation on duplicate content for the other purposes outside of SEO. Cole
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ColeLusby0 -
Why did this fabric site disappear for "fabric" and why can't we get it back?
Beverlys.com used to rank on the first page for "fabric." I'm trying to get the date of their demise, but don't have it yet so I can't pinpoint what Google update might have killed them but I can guess. In doing a backlink analysis, there were hundreds of poor quality, toxic sites pointing to them. We have carefully gone through them all and submitted a disavow request. They are now on page 9 from nowhere to be found a week ago. But, of course, that's not good enough. They are on page 2 for "fabric online" and "quilt fabric." So Google doesn't completely hate them. But doesn't love them enough even for those terms. Any suggestions? They are rebuilding the site to use a different ecommerce platform with new content and new structure. They will also be incorporating the blog within the site and I've advised them on many other ways to attract traffic and backlinks. That's coming. But for now, any suggestions and help will be much appreciated. Something has got to be holding them back for that one gem of a keyword. Also, I would like to know what experiences others have had with the disavow request form. Does Google absolutely hold you to making every attempt you can at getting those links removed? ANd how does it know? No one responds so it seems to be such a waste of time. And many now actually charge to remove your links. Thoughts? Thanks everyone!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | katandmouse0 -
Avoiding the "sorry we have no imagery here" G-maps error
Hi there, we recently did a redesign on a big site and added Gmaps locations to almost every page since we are related to Real State, Listings, Details, search results all have a map embedded. While looking at GWT I found that the top keywords on our site (which is in spanish) are the following. have here imagery sorry After a quick search I found out this is a Gmaps bug, when Google Bot accesses the Pages it throws an error out with this text repeated several times. If you do a search for "sorry we have no imagery here" you will see lots of sites with this issue. My question is, Is this affecting the overall SEO since Bots are actually crawling and indexing this hence its being reported by GWT, Should I cloak this to robots? Has anyone noticed this or has been able to fix it? Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | makote0 -
Why are "outdated" or "frowned upon" tactics still dominating?
Hey, my first post here. I recently picked up a new client in real estate for a highly competitive market. One trend I'm noticing with all the top sites they are doing old tactics such as:
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Jay328
-Paid Directories
-Terrible/Spam Directories
-Overuse of exact text keywords for example: City name + real estate
-Blogroll/link exchange
-Tons of meta key words
-B.S. press releases blog commenting with kw as name Out of all the competition there is only one guy who is following the rules of today. One thing I'm noticing is that nobody is doing legit guest blogging, has great social presence, has awesome on page, etc. It's pretty frustrating as I'm trying to follow the rules and seeing these guys kill it by doing "bad seo". Anybody else find themselves in this situation? I know I'm probably beating a dead horse but I needed to vent about this 😉2 -
Need a Service to get back links- info on Youtube PR Ranking
I have about 4000 you tube video urls that I need someone to submit for comment links, and profile links, and other links above pr2 and above. (will consider lower pr too). The ones I see when searching, don't seem to be able to understand how to use their submitters. Yes I know PR most likely will not be passed, but at least the vid will rank better with higher pr. My pr4 vids do. It seems to be that you tube vids are easier to gain pr. When I do a link search for pr5 vid urls, it doesn't seem to return links that justify the PR, so any info on that is appreciated. Any comments about how I should not do this or any form of this will not be appreciated. Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | joemas990 -
Is domain name or page title "safe" as anchor text?
I am aware of the dangers of excessively optimized anchor text I have seen some suggestions that as long as your anchor text is either the URL or the page title that this will be OK, no matter how many links come in with that anchor text. Does anyone have an opinion, or even any hard data on this? Thx Paul
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | diogenes0 -
Any recent discoveries or observations on the "Official Line" of incoming link penalization?
I know this is always a contentious issue and that the official, or shall we say semi-official line is that you can't be penalized for incoming links, as you can't control who links to you (aside of course from link buying, and other stuff that Google feels it can work out). I was wondering if anyone had any recent discoveries or observations on this? Obviously there's the problem that is usually brought up where you could damage a competitor buy link building to them with spammy links, etc... hence the half denial of it being an issue... but has anyone seen or hear anything on it recently, or experienced something relevant?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SteveOllington1