<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 2009 Sucked For Most SEO&#8217;s</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.shoemoney.com/2010/01/06/2009-sucked-for-most-seos/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.shoemoney.com/2010/01/06/2009-sucked-for-most-seos/</link>
	<description>Skills to Pay the Bills</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:45:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maxim</title>
		<link>http://www.shoemoney.com/2010/01/06/2009-sucked-for-most-seos/#comment-228091</link>
		<dc:creator>Maxim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jul 2011 11:59:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.shoemoney.com/?p=6361#comment-228091</guid>
		<description>Seo is not dead, you should consider the dofollow and nofollow links from googlebot check, having only dofollow will make your site Seo so much longer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seo is not dead, you should consider the dofollow and nofollow links from googlebot check, having only dofollow will make your site Seo so much longer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Armando</title>
		<link>http://www.shoemoney.com/2010/01/06/2009-sucked-for-most-seos/#comment-145578</link>
		<dc:creator>Armando</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 04:01:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.shoemoney.com/?p=6361#comment-145578</guid>
		<description>I have to disagree with you, no matter how much search engines change the way their search engines function, someone has to rank #1.  There will always be ways to do it, otherwise it would be &quot;fixed&quot; and not true.  Take a look at this article, http://www.webdesignlab.com/blog/breaking-the-rules-of-search-engine-optimization</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to disagree with you, no matter how much search engines change the way their search engines function, someone has to rank #1.  There will always be ways to do it, otherwise it would be &#8220;fixed&#8221; and not true.  Take a look at this article, <a href="http://www.webdesignlab.com/blog/breaking-the-rules-of-search-engine-optimization" rel="nofollow">http://www.webdesignlab.com/blog/breaking-the-rules-of-search-engine-optimization</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nowgoogle.com</title>
		<link>http://www.shoemoney.com/2010/01/06/2009-sucked-for-most-seos/#comment-144753</link>
		<dc:creator>nowgoogle.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:12:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.shoemoney.com/?p=6361#comment-144753</guid>
		<description>If you have become bored of searching in a single search engine, this may be very useful to you. Today search engines hold an important place in the web because it gives a lot of information which we required. To get any details we normally use the biggest Google or Yahoo. If you will have a chance to access multiple engines in a same time how do you feel? The time has come to you to access the multiple search engines. You can use OR or AND options while searching in the engines. You can have different results from different type of search engines. Click nowgoogle.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you have become bored of searching in a single search engine, this may be very useful to you. Today search engines hold an important place in the web because it gives a lot of information which we required. To get any details we normally use the biggest Google or Yahoo. If you will have a chance to access multiple engines in a same time how do you feel? The time has come to you to access the multiple search engines. You can use OR or AND options while searching in the engines. You can have different results from different type of search engines. Click nowgoogle.com</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven van Vessum</title>
		<link>http://www.shoemoney.com/2010/01/06/2009-sucked-for-most-seos/#comment-144680</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven van Vessum</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 09:03:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.shoemoney.com/?p=6361#comment-144680</guid>
		<description>For me it&#039;s quite te contrary, for me 2009 has been a great year as an SEO. In The Netherlands, one of the most competeted SEM markets, more and more companies are starting to realize they should be up there in the top 10.

Yes, companies are looking to improve their conversion rates, but that goes hand in hand with SEO (and SEA, Bannering etc. for that matter).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For me it&#8217;s quite te contrary, for me 2009 has been a great year as an SEO. In The Netherlands, one of the most competeted SEM markets, more and more companies are starting to realize they should be up there in the top 10.</p>
<p>Yes, companies are looking to improve their conversion rates, but that goes hand in hand with SEO (and SEA, Bannering etc. for that matter).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doyle Lewis</title>
		<link>http://www.shoemoney.com/2010/01/06/2009-sucked-for-most-seos/#comment-144602</link>
		<dc:creator>Doyle Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:59:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.shoemoney.com/?p=6361#comment-144602</guid>
		<description>You do realize that Victoria Beckham was part of one of the largest selling female groups of all time, correct? The music sucked, sure, but that is at least a valid reason to be well known. Then couple that with being married to the highest paid athlete in the world (a few years back, anyway).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You do realize that Victoria Beckham was part of one of the largest selling female groups of all time, correct? The music sucked, sure, but that is at least a valid reason to be well known. Then couple that with being married to the highest paid athlete in the world (a few years back, anyway).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Morris</title>
		<link>http://www.shoemoney.com/2010/01/06/2009-sucked-for-most-seos/#comment-144576</link>
		<dc:creator>James Morris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:04:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.shoemoney.com/?p=6361#comment-144576</guid>
		<description>^^^ What he said! ^^^

And, BTW, Jeremy... Here&#039;s my response to this ridiculous post....

http://jmorris.name/blog/rant/the-stupidest-post-i-ever-read/

Congrats!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>^^^ What he said! ^^^</p>
<p>And, BTW, Jeremy&#8230; Here&#8217;s my response to this ridiculous post&#8230;.</p>
<p><a href="http://jmorris.name/blog/rant/the-stupidest-post-i-ever-read/" rel="nofollow">http://jmorris.name/blog/rant/the-stupidest-post-i-ever-read/</a></p>
<p>Congrats!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WebsterJ</title>
		<link>http://www.shoemoney.com/2010/01/06/2009-sucked-for-most-seos/#comment-144575</link>
		<dc:creator>WebsterJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:02:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.shoemoney.com/?p=6361#comment-144575</guid>
		<description>Here is your post about how SEO is Dead was from 2005:

http://www.shoemoney.com/2005/12/10/seo-is-dead/

Your track record on predicting the demise of SEO isn&#039;t very good.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here is your post about how SEO is Dead was from 2005:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.shoemoney.com/2005/12/10/seo-is-dead/" rel="nofollow">http://www.shoemoney.com/2005/12/10/seo-is-dead/</a></p>
<p>Your track record on predicting the demise of SEO isn&#8217;t very good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

