One main issue that maybe all of us are overlooking, is the fact that seo is by definition a type of savaging act. Its entire premise is built on beating the system. The fact that all these tools are not very dependable is only disconcerting to the people in this field. After all, google’s entire premise is to serve visitors the best possible content. This is simply not an seo’s job.

Anyway I’m done with my passive aggressive rant thanx for the info on the subject!

In the past i have done exact searches for words in google keywords free tool and have found that the initial search would show hundreds of thousands of searches for that word or phrase.

However when i have checked back in a few months later the results for seaches are in the hundreds in some instances so there is a massive difference.

I have not mad a mistake and have used the exact keyword option every time – has anyone elas encountered this with the google tool?

[...] vs. Google’s Search-Based Keyword Tool (SKTool).  To get some history, check out posts on Smackdown and David [...]

[...] This post by Michael VanDeMar is two years old but still relevant. Thanks Michael. [...]

Nobody owes you anything. If you think the data is flawed, move on. Do you own tests. Come to your own conclusions.

Coming here and insulting Michael only shows you have nothing better to do with your time then to tear down others. Why don’t you go and do something constructive, instead of destructive?

I for one appreciated this post because it confirmed my own findings. Thanks Michael!

With you, on the other hand, every single post or comment you write is an attempt in one way or another to get people to believe that you know wtf you’re talking about so they will hire you, while apparently in reality you are a blowhard who won’t back up what he says. If I knew nothing else about you that would be enough for me to steer people away from listening to you, period, let alone purchasing your services. I mean, for fucks sake Alan, you flat out agree with the conclusion and say you don’t need any test data to back it up, so what possible reason could you have then to go around belligerently slamming these tests on other people’s blogs if not for self promotion?

Either way, I am done discussing it with you.

Rather than trying to use that article of proof that you’re right, read my comments on the Dave Naylor site. You’ll see I’ve responded there as well. Because flawed logic is flawed logic.

I don’t have to test. I already know. Anyone who uses keyword tool numerics to then determine real world click through rates is making a mistake in the first place. That’s the biggest single issue I have here. While you say you based all this on a bigger test you did, the fact is that you show data from your example test. As if that example proves your point.

Since your example data and testing model itself is flawed, I can not, as an intelligent person, then comfortably believe that your example is enough to prove your point. And since I can not see your data from the larger commercial test, I have no basis of using your link-bait quality headlined article for anything other than entertainment value.

Now – as to your attempt to distract readers by trying to call the kettle black, I’ll say this. +1 for you. Yet since I’ve never once written a “review” article with embedded links, nor do I ever intend to, -3 for you.