“Why I don’t get SEO?” Would Social Network Marketing and Content replace SEO sometime? I have been routinely checking out Boagworld.com and their work has impressed me greatly. There was an article on the topic “Why I don’t get SEO” on the weekly web developers pod posted by Paul Boag. You can checkout the article under the marketing category on BoagWorld.com as I can’t post the link since I am new to it. Paul has indicated that he doesn’t feel that SEO is that vital and he hasn’t kept his opinions about SEO being highly overrated a secret and has also suggested that it is a money making solution for a certain few elite personnel. In the board room, CEO’s have been normally looking at “SEO” as the Holy Grail in attaining success in their websites probably due to the three letter resemblance. Numerous points have been made by Paul in the blog: 1. No guarantees to a continuous investment SEO is more or less a lucky draw business that needs constant investments to be in the same position unlike a newspaper (PPC advertising too) where the volume of readers and its distribution area is known. With comparisons to a newspaper he makes a strong statement about it involving an ad to be bought “but being given no guarantee as to what page it will appear on or how big the ad will be” that implies something that you wouldn’t go for normally. 2. This is manipulation of the system Another thing that figures on Google’s watch list that he is also concerned about is that the system is being controlled by SEO. Your wildest dream of beating Google with its own rules where no algorithm will be able to hold them back is something that SEO companies will offer you. It’s just my thinking, but such a claim by any company would have me reaching for the door. It has been stated by Paul “it seems more sensible to work with Google’s known goal – to provide great content to its users, rather than trying to manipulate a system we do not fully understand". Wouldn’t it be wiser to invest money and time in developing fabulous unique content from smart, newsworthy and wise writers instead of wasting that effort on working on SEO tactics? 3. The user experience could be damaged There is no doubt that, it most certainly would be a foolish thing to make some modifications on your website that would make the users’ experience unpleasant. Though it might hit your mind as to whether tactics of flooding pages with irrelevant keywords and other irritating methods are used by anyone? Unfortunately there are a few who do it. 4. Its marketing of a passive nature Paul has explained that “Search engines are passive because they require the searcher to have a pre-existing need for your product or service. On one hand this makes the search more targeted because it only reaches people who are interested in your product. On the other, it does not allow you as a marketer to create a need or raise the profile of a new brand or product." Though I agree with it, this gap could definitely be filled in by advertising. i.e. links to various keywords from your brand could be supplemented with Adwords or wherever possible customers are expected to come, banners can be placed there. 5. No weight has been carried The final issue that Paul faces with SEO is that it “lacks the weight of personal recommendation”. Compared to the traditional SEO, is it that social network marketing is more personal? Would it make more sense to go for Facebook or a full time Twit option instead of putting in money on SEO? There is finally a clear statement that comes from Paul as mentioned: "I am not questioning whether SEO works. However, it is my belief there are better ways of spending your money." In the end I agree with these fascinating points that have been put forth that simply indicates that good content, personal touch via social platforms and marketing by mouth are obviously preferred. Will there be a replacement in process that has targeted network marketing along with amazing creative content being used and would it lead SEO to a slow excruciating death?