New page for website. What do you think?

Woodland Detectors · Dec 1, 2010

For the the past few months my buddy and fellow Treasureneter (aztreasures) has been helping fix my website that was a mess thanks to the amateur I paid to build. Aztreasures is a professional and is currently working with Minelab on some of their stuff. Here is a page of our site coming soon. I think it's great. :headbang:

What are your opinions?

Here's Aztreasures profile .

http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php?action=profile;u=54791

And his work!

http://www.sitegiant.net/

treasurehound · Dec 1, 2010

Looks good and very professional Mike.

Chug And Red · Dec 1, 2010

Looks great, I was wondering about your new avatar!!! now I know HH chug

extractor · Dec 1, 2010

dpitt8 · Dec 1, 2010

looks good to me :icon_thumleft:

mrwilburino · Dec 1, 2010

Makes me want to buy another detector! :icon_thumright:

LM · Dec 2, 2010

Looks very nice, but "looks" are about 1/2 the game. The other 1/2 is how it performs in the engines.
What sort of SEO work has been done? Until there's a hot URL that goes right to the site in question and I can see the source code, I can't offer any opinion, but I do see some pretty graphical buttons containing critical search terms that a crawler probably won't be able to see, which is a very, very common error made by website designers who are otherwise oblivious to SEO.

It appears to be very graphics intensive and content light, which is popular amongst 'designers' but not always the right way from an eBusiness perspective. Keyword stuffing the tags doesn't compensate for a lack of text based mainpage content.

aztreasure · Dec 2, 2010

Thanks, I appreciate the comments...all valid concerns, but as you said, if you could see the page source, they would likely be alleviated.

LSMorgan said:
I do see some pretty graphical buttons containing critical search terms that a crawler probably won't be able to see, which is a very, very common error made by website designers who are otherwise oblivious to SEO.

This screenshot depicts only the top portion of the home page. The navigational text that appears to be graphics is actually text rendered using the Cufon JavaScript library...thus, this text appears "pretty" to a website visitor, but renders as text to a search engine, or visitor with JavaScript disabled. As is very common these days, more license is taken on the home page to utilize graphical elements. It is a choice I made to draw the attention of the visitor on the home page, which I believe is offset by the quality content contained elsewhere on that particular file.

It appears to be very graphics intensive and content light, which is popular amongst 'designers' but not always the right way from an eBusiness perspective.

From the small sample depicted, I agree, as it does not show the additional content on the page, nor provide indication that some visual effects were enhancements to sourced text using JavaScript. I would likely make the same observations if I were in your shoes. Trust me, I am not a 'designer', and am not 'oblivious to SEO'.

Cheers,

Thomas

Blacksheep · Dec 2, 2010

Nice, EZ on the eyes site. It's not to "busy" like many other sites. Clean, clutter free design, well done. :icon_thumleft:

(Mike, might need to haul you and your rug cleaner up here. :coffee2:

)

Sandman · Dec 2, 2010

I like it as it is to the point and an eye grabber. :thumbsup:

Smudge · Dec 2, 2010

Looks pretty professional there, Mike. :icon_thumleft:

LM · Dec 2, 2010

aztreasure said:
This screenshot depicts only the top portion of the home page. The navigational text that appears to be graphics is actually text rendered using the Cufon JavaScript library...thus, this text appears "pretty" to a website visitor, but renders as text to a search engine, or visitor with JavaScript disabled. As is very common these days, more license is taken on the home page to utilize graphical elements. It is a choice I made to draw the attention of the visitor on the home page, which I believe is offset by the quality content contained elsewhere on that particular file.
...
From the small sample depicted, I agree, as it does not show the additional content on the page, nor provide indication that some visual effects were enhancements to sourced text using JavaScript. I would likely make the same observations if I were in your shoes. Trust me, I am not a 'designer', and am not 'oblivious to SEO'.

Cheers,

Thomas

Yeah, sounds like you know how to handle this. 4-H probably got the right guy.

As you are undoubtedly all too aware of, an INSANE number of 'designers' do not render an adequate product for eCommerce, largely because 99% of their small-business customers have no idea what they're buying (and only in time, will they figure out what they really want). Some terrible SEO practices are par for the course with certain "professionals" (that word used in the loosest possible manner). Here in the year 2010 going into 2011, I still regularly encounter eCommerce sites where most of the critical mainpage keyword content is graphical (Not Cufoned) and completely invisible to G crawlers. It just baffles the mind that so many people are still doing this.

Your aesthetic looks great. I do completely agree that the lander should emphasize a clean user experience, as long as the keyword content for SE purposes is accounted for in other areas, once they start clicking through. Is there a user-friendly CMS so he can manage his inventory, or whatever?