Web Copywriting, SEO and the Web at Large

SEO: Agency Versus In-House

Posted July 9, 2009 | Posted By Web Copywriters at Webcopyplus
Categories: Website promotions | Tags: | 1 Comment | Share This

 

MarketingSherpa recently did a study that compared SEO improvements of companies that rely on in-house staff versus agencies.

It reported in-house SEO efforts saw a 38% lift during a six-month period. Meanwhile, agencies achieved a 110% lift during the same period.

It highlights the opportunity specialists can deliver. Limited staff or jack-of-all-trades can no longer keep up with the assorted online technologies and tactics. While this is the case for everything from web design to development to copywriting, it’s especially true in the SEO realm.

Consider the fact that today’s websites compete with more than one trillion pages, versus just one billion pages in 2000. With the Web getting more complex, and more competition vying for attention, deep knowledge in a specific area can equate to a major competitive advantage.

Share This Story

Share
Thumb 'SEO: Agency Versus In-House' at Stumble Upon Bookmark 'SEO: Agency Versus In-House' at Del.icio.us Submit 'SEO: Agency Versus In-House' to Reddit

 

Comments

  1. Donald Korl says:

    I agree with going with specialists. If you have a ‘do it all’ writer, for instance, he won’t know about the effective tactics to employ when developing web copy. You should get a good web copywriter. The same goes for design. I wouldn’t get a print designer to touch my website. You should go with an actual web designer.

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter the * required information where indicated. Comments are moderated — and rel="nofollow" is in use. Please no link dropping, no keywords or domains as names; do not spam and do not advertise!



Comments:

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL