Online Reputation Management, SEO Specialist Required

i can help u add me on skype aneshtok1

charto03 said:

this is all a crock of not one of you should even touch this for only $100 and $400 for completion. Charge at least $5,000 for this job as that is more than likely a realistic quote for this type of issue. Do not ruin the ORM market with crappy work.

Also if competitors are attacking the negative links you may never have this problem solved.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED SERVICE PROVIDERS

Click to expand...

I must say in this case I agree with the above.

For a number of reasons

Multinational
Lot of good press from powerful resources from both locally and internationally famous media houses.
Done remarkable things
The sticky history is from 2007 (the authority it has built up is 6years old and if its getting comments it is an active negative property)
S.E.O specialist : ORM is NOT SEO : SEO is NOT ORM



A multinational with all the above features and from my perspective it seems you are saying your reputation is only worth $500.

Sorry but that doesn't add up in my professional opinion.

Bill Clinton is a Multi national icon with lots of good press and yet when you type in his name its not the isolated incident (we are all thinking of) that comes up, so if you have strong assets i.e good press from both locally and internationally famous media houses then they should naturally offset any bad in which case you don't need ORM.

Now here's another point to consider if its a case that the negative property is soooo strong that they have not been off set by ''good press we have from both locally and internationally famous media houses''where even an ''intern'' gets paid $300 a week then how is a $500 going to cut it for the 1st page much less ''to push it back as far as possible''.

In addition if the positive assets you already haven't off set the one negative property then sadly that means they are not strong enough too.

ORM is not SEO

I'll say it again ORM is not SEO.

SEO is the means to the end a conveyor belt if you will.

ORM prices are per page clearance

There are 10 spots on a page hence to clear a full page should be a minimum of $1500 very basic work.

Half a page is again $750 (so if you have 4-10 bad things on the 1st page this isn't going to cut it)

These are the super basic levels where nothing but emotion gets the better of an ORM specialist to help.

I understand you might think this is just SEO but it really is NOT.

Similarly a basic package of easy to moderate SEO is in itself $500 for say 2 keywords and that's to get 2 urls on the first page
(not 1st position on the first page)

In ORM you are trying to push something from the 1st position down to 10th and then into 11th so its on page 2.

Logically speaking would this be a $500 job?

If you want to know whether ORM is even worth your while ask yourself is your competitor benefiting from this situation.

If me and only 1 other competitor sat before a customer and that customer had to choose one of you what are the things that would make him not choose you?

Now imagine if it was you and 9 competitors.

Also run a GAKT search with broad search:
name of your brand
name of your director

See how many people are running those searches a month add the numbers together monthly and global times it by the lowest unit price of your products and service.

In fact lets even divide that number by 2.

Now is loosing that amount in revenue worth it?

I know times are tough Economy is hard and all but.....

Please remember to value this industry and its experts and value your reputation accordingly it is the ONE asset you cannot put a price on.

@Dr.Reed
@Smileatmywinds

I applaud you for your input here. Too many people on this thread willing to take so little for so much work. It takes lots of knowledge, experience and work to do good online reputation repair. It is obvious that some here are ready and willing to take money for their crappy RM. Buyer beware!

Also, I would never tell anyone I could do the job or take a sum of money without looking at the keywords/phrase involved and how extensive the damage really is.

Also be cautious of people who readily accept cheap offers. They will often outsource the work. In the end they may actually cause more damage. I have been doing RM for years and have even done work for BHW when Dave was the owner. If you are serious about removing negative comment off the first page you need to find someone you can trust.

shayokghosh said:

We are a Bangladesh based multinational organization. One of our directors have bad press from 2007 that shows up on the first page of Google search. We have done some remarkable things, and even though we have oodles of good press from powerful news sources they do not show up on the first page of Google. I will provide the keyword, and links to the bad press that needs to removed or pushed back as far as possible and I will also provide the links of the good press we have from both locally and internationally famous media houses. Budget for this task is $500. But I will need to see proof of competency before I hire the SEO specialist. One bad link needs to be pushed away from first page and be replaced with a good link (when I say bad link I mean bad press, when I say good link I mean links to good press) as proof of your competency.

After you have proved yourself I will make a payment of $100. The rest $400 will be paid after successful cleanup of the first two pages of Google. Our good press links come from very reliable sources, while the bad links we have are from fake linkbuilding from our competitors. This task should be fairly easy for a veteran SEO specialist. Since I am a new member in this forum, I can't reply to PM's. So you may leave email addresses with your proposals so that I can contact you if you fit requirements.

Successful completion of this project will result in employment for larger more massive projects in the future.

Click to expand...

Since I do this type of work for others, I can only say that if you knew of the time and effort it requires to do properly you would not have offered to pay $400. You offer far to little.

For the others that claim that ORM is not SEO, you should not post. It takes much SEO to do the work properly. Think for just a second: ORM requires placing links above other links. SEO is the intent to place links above other links.

JustUs said:

Since I do this type of work for others, I can only say that if you knew of the time and effort it requires to do properly you would not have offered to pay $400. You offer far to little.

For the others that claim that ORM is not SEO, you should not post. It takes much SEO to do the work properly. Think for just a second: ORM requires placing links above other links. SEO is the intent to place links above other links.

Click to expand...

ORM is NOT SEO, SEO is the means to the end a conveyor belt if you will, for instance we understand that a fortune 500 company relying heavily on shareholders and stakeholders perception will fuel its stocks price and thus its success on the Stock Market, so when a negative scandal comes to light and you are thinking of it just as an SEO solution this will NOT work but understanding that SEO will be the final piece to bring it all together is the right train of thought.

Similarly slander and defamatory untruths appearing as negative properties don't need SEO they need an ORMer who understands the legal solutions which even Google must abide by and in such instances the legal options can show a better & quicker ROI.

If you anyone else feels that is an incorrect analogy then I am interested to hear your opinion.

Dr.Reed said:

ORM is NOT SEO, SEO is the means to the end a conveyor belt if you will, for instance we understand that a fortune 500 company relying heavily on shareholders and stakeholders perception will fuel its stocks price and thus its success on the Stock Market, so when a negative scandal comes to light and you are thinking of it just as an SEO solution this will NOT work but understanding that SEO will be the final piece to bring it all together is the right train of thought.

Similarly slander and defamatory untruths appearing as negative properties don't need SEO they need an ORMer who understands the legal solutions which even Google must abide by and in such instances the legal options can show a better & quicker ROI.

If you anyone else feels that is an incorrect analogy then I am interested to hear your opinion.

Click to expand...

I am glad you think that way. More gravy for me. Tell me, oh say, about the legal solutions with, oh say, Rip Off Report. There are none, and ROR is difficult to dislodge. Slander and Libel on a Web 2.0 website by a user. Look at section 230 C of the Communications Decency Act. As long as the owner does not moderate content to change meaning, the owner is covered and without liability. With anonymous posting allowed, the posting IP is useless - even more so if a proxy and a throw away email was used. The legal remedy, in the few cases that you may have a legal remedy, is years and $100,000's of dollars down the road. Under section 230 C the site is only liable for content that it creates and posts. While the G can deindex a link, they generally will not without a court order.

You want to talk content. I often have to create that content and then rank it in order to dislodge negative material. Why own the first link and bury the negative if you can own several positions on the same serp?

But think and believe as you will.

JustUs said:

I am glad you think that way. More gravy for me. Tell me, oh say, about the legal solutions with, oh say, Rip Off Report. There are none, and ROR is difficult to dislodge. Slander and Libel on a Web 2.0 website by a user. Look at section 230 C of the Communications Decency Act. As long as the owner does not moderate content to change meaning, the owner is covered and without liability. With anonymous posting allowed, the posting IP is useless - even more so if a proxy and a throw away email was used. The legal remedy, in the few cases that you may have a legal remedy, is years and $100,000's of dollars down the road. Under section 230 C the site is only liable for content that it creates and posts. While the G can deindex a link, they generally will not without a court order.

You want to talk content. I often have to create that content and then rank it in order to dislodge negative material. Why own the first link and bury the negative if you can own several positions on the same serp?

But think and believe as you will.

Click to expand...

LOL sir the legal remedy will only take years if you go after the wrong individuals.

I don't recall saying there was a legal remedy for rip off report my statement was that ORM is not SEO i.e it is not just SEO.

Communications act protects the owner of the website from third party content which the owner of the website cannot control yes no one said that wasn't the case but those are not the only negative properties there are also:

Websites created by a disgruntled employee.
Blogs and blog posts set up by an over zealous customer.

To name but a few.

Unless you only deal with ROR where the liability doesn't extend to the owner of the site I would say SEO is not the only thing ORM consists off as it is a multifaceted discipline.

I don't recall saying you don't have to create and rank content but while we are on the topic ORM in itself will not work if you do not have the optimized content to SEO in which case even if there is SEO and there is no content there is nothing to dislodge/displace negative properties hence SEO is the means to an end part of the puzzle not the whole puzzle.

I love this stuff @Justus and @Dr.Reed nice to hear a good discussion here on BHW about ORM. You both make good points. The only thing that really separates SEO from good ORM is that often (not always) you need to "dominate" the first page in the SERPS. That takes some intensive SEO methods. It is labor intensive and you had better know what you are doing if you expect any kind of decent results!

Also mentioned when it comes to ORM that reputationdotcome as being a good resource but if my research is correct reputationdefenderdotcom was also their site. That site was shut down as there were too many people complaining about them. They surfaced again calling themselves reputationdotcom! FYI

Dr.Reed said:

LOL sir the legal remedy will only take years if you go after the wrong individuals.

I don't recall saying there was a legal remedy for rip off report my statement was that ORM is not SEO i.e it is not just SEO.

Communications act protects the owner of the website from third party content which the owner of the website cannot control yes no one said that wasn't the case but those are not the only negative properties there are also:

Websites created by a disgruntled employee.
Blogs and blog posts set up by an over zealous customer.

To name but a few.

Unless you only deal with ROR where the liability doesn't extend to the owner of the site I would say SEO is not the only thing ORM consists off as it is a multifaceted discipline.

I don't recall saying you don't have to create and rank content but while we are on the topic ORM in itself will not work if you do not have the optimized content to SEO in which case even if there is SEO and there is no content there is nothing to dislodge/displace negative properties hence SEO is the means to an end part of the puzzle not the whole puzzle.

Click to expand...

I made a reply to you, let us see if it will pass the moderators because I did name a legal case in debunking your claim.

lostgringos said:

I love this stuff Justus and Dr.Reed nice to hear a good discussion here on BHW about ORM. You both make good points. The only thing that really separates SEO from good ORM is that often (not always) you need to "dominate" the first page in the SERPS. That takes some intensive SEO methods. It is labor intensive and you had better know what you are doing if you expect any kind of decent results!

Also mentioned when it comes to ORM that reputationdotcome as being a good resource but if my research is correct reputationdefenderdotcom was also their site. That site was shut down as there were too many people complaining about them. They surfaced again calling themselves reputationdotcom! FYI

Click to expand...

I am not Reputation Defenders. That entire industry, and the ilk they sprang from, hates me. They attempted to demonize me on every consumer complaint site that there is. All that libel did was motivate me. I now work with a nationwide group of people to introduce and pass legislation ending one aspect of the negative content industry. Since the pie is so large, we can only take a bite at a time.

JustUs said:

I made a reply to you, let us see if it will pass the moderators because I did name a legal case in debunking your claim.

Click to expand...

Looking forward to it mon ami, if its a PM ill reply in kind.

#lostgringos thank you for your comments, yes Repdotcom used to have a different name Michael F is the CEO but it seems they have quite a few neg properties about them including negative auto suggest results.

P.s just so its clear the reason I say SEO is not ORM is first of all so we don't have people with terrible Online Reputations (3 page SERPS) asking for it to be cleared for $200, anywhere I can I will go out of my way to prevent the devaluation of what an ORMer does and to educate the public that ORM is not a commodity and its not just a simple case of can you SEO this article above that article and here's 50 bucks for it.

Especially for the young ones coming through into this industry who may not yet no the value of what they do or think oh its just another seo gig ill get on fivver and throw some backlinks at it.

Crisis Communication, SEO, PR, Intellectual Property, other denominations of the Legal world, commercial acumen and even the ability to read write and understands various search engines policies. These are just some of the disciplines an ORMer needs to take into account to hone his/her skills this is why I say its not just SEO.

JustUs said:

I am not Reputation Defenders. That entire industry, and the ilk they sprang from, hates me. They attempted to demonize me on every consumer complaint site that there is. All that libel did was motivate me. I now work with a nationwide group of people to introduce and pass legislation ending one aspect of the negative content industry. Since the pie is so large, we can only take a bite at a time.

Click to expand...

Justus you are from the political arena?

Interesting piece of info there ''if its possible'' to share more as to what led to your victimization that would certainly be a source of knowledge.

Dr.Reed said:

Justus you are from the political arena?

Interesting piece of info there ''if its possible'' to share more as to what led to your victimization that would certainly be a source of knowledge.

Click to expand...

Mugshotsdotcom refused C&D. Posted information on ROR and many other consumer complaints sites. Ticked me off and I do not run from challenges or attempts at extortion. My site focuses on exposing the operators and teaching others how to do the work themselves. Everything I teach is based on experience and tried on myself; it is not based on somebodies hearsay.

Beyond this, I formed a coalition of of individuals in several states to introduce and pass legislation limiting how and when mugshots can be displayed. We have also introduced litigation in a couple of states. I am toxic to that industry and the mugshots industry took down all my information (false information at that) on their own initiative. My job will be done when that industry can no longer survive.

That is as much of an answer as I feel is appropriate. If you want to know who I am, with the above information you can find out; but I will neither confirm nor deny.

JustUs said:

Mugshotsdotcom refused C&D. Posted information on ROR and many other consumer complaints sites. Ticked me off and I do not run from challenges or attempts at extortion. My site focuses on exposing the operators and teaching others how to do the work themselves. Everything I teach is based on experience and tried on myself; it is not based on somebodies hearsay.

Beyond this, I formed a coalition of of individuals in several states to introduce and pass legislation limiting how and when mugshots can be displayed. We have also introduced litigation in a couple of states. I am toxic to that industry and the mugshots industry took down all my information (false information at that) on their own initiative. My job will be done when that industry can no longer survive.

That is as much of an answer as I feel is appropriate. If you want to know who I am, with the above information you can find out; but I will neither confirm nor deny.

Click to expand...

Not at all I respect your privacy and discretion, totally applaud your efforts definitely a good cause but you already knew that.

I have a similar disposition towards victims of heinous cyber bullies the keypad warriors won't even see it coming.

Here's a good read:
[h=1]Twitter troll's remorse after boxer he taunted shows up on doorstep
www[dot]bit[dot]ly/10JWPPY [/h]

I wonder why there is not a subforum for Online Reputation Management since the discussion here was interesting to read. I'd love to learn more and especially learn what happened within that discussion but it seems it's been forgotten.