For the most part, we find the tools from Grader.com indispensable. BUT…
If you’ve read the New York Times piece on Decor My Eyes – here’s a link to this frightening SEO tale – you know that there’s an eyewear provider who was able to leverage bad publicity into good search juice.
And, if you’ve been following the developments, you’ll know that Google has made some changes to account for how negative reviews help or hinder SEO results. You can read about those in this article, entitled “What Google’s Search Change Means for Your Website.”
So, why are we picking on Grader.com?
This is why. A 98. Out of 100.
This means that the site still ranks in the top 3 percent of all the sites that Grader has graded based on “Marketing Effectiveness.”
This, despite an MOZ “Page Rank” score of 2, out of 10.
This, despite a “Blog Not Found” listing on the Grader report.
This, despite a “No Twitter Grade” for the site.
One of two things is true: (1) “Marketing Effectiveness” does truly equal “number of indexed pages” (which, in this case, is in excess of 423,000) or “number of inbound links” (more than 14,000; a good chunk probably from the bad reviews), or (2) Grader has yet to update its scoring – since Google just made the change this week.
Thoughts?
Leave a Reply