Dixon's January Webinar -

On January 23rd 2020 – SEO veterans took on the Rising Stars of the industry to compare approaches new and old – Is experience from before 2010 beneficial or even relevent to Search Strategy in 2020? Dixon Jones was joined by two generations of the Hunt SEO Dynasty and Special guests from the UK and US:

Jenny Halasz, President & Founder, JLH Marketing, Inc, former VP Search Strategy at Acronym with 20 years in the industry starting as Affiliate Manager at Art.com.
Bill Hunt Senior – Founder of Agency Back Azimuth and previously Director of Global Search Strategy at Ogilvy.
Bill Hunt Junior, SEO Manager – Flights & Rental Cars at TripAdvisor
Hannah Thorpe, Business Director at Found . Hannah is an SEO specialist, with experience working across multiple digital marketing disciplines. Hannah has presented at leading Search conferences, including Ungagged and Brighton SEO.
The panel is rounded off with Tom Pool – Technical SEO Director of UK SEO Agency Blue Array and winner of the Young Search Professional of the Year at the Prestigious 2019 UK Search Awards held in The Brewery, London.

Watch on-demand

Listen to the podcast

Transcript

Dixon Jones

Hi, everybody, and welcome to this Majestic webinar. Thank you very much for coming in. The great thing about the panel that we’ve got here is we’ve got people who have been in the industry for a long period, like Bill and myself. And we’ve got on the other end of it, Tom, who has just won 2019 the Young Star of the UK Search Awards. And Jenny, who has straddled both sides. We’re waiting for Hannah to come in, but she might be late.

So, firstly, I want to start with a shout-out to Majestic for helping to sponsor the event. Many of you have come in through the Majestic newsletter, and if you haven’t had the chance to check out the Majestic Link Context they put out last year, it goes into the granularity of links. Do have a look at that on the Majestic blog. So today’s webinar is on the difference between the attitudes of young professionals in the SEO industry and how they differ from those who have worked in SEO for decades. So, let’s ask you all to introduce yourselves. Tom, perhaps you can start with yourself.

Tom Pool

I’m the Technical SEO director at an SEO company based in the UK called Blue Array, which is purely focused on SEO. The technical team is working on some cool stuff that should soon be hitting the spotlight, like the Blue Array Academy and other cool products.

Dixon Jones

Jen, if you want to chime in.

Jenny Halasz

Sure. I’m Jenny Halasz. My company is JLH Marketing. It’s an SEO and analytics consultancy. I’ve been an SEO for a long time. I started in 2000. But I just celebrated my 14^th 29^th birthday. So I’m just young at heart.

Dixon Jones

Okay, if you started in 2000, I’ll say you can straddle both sides of the fence. And Bill, would you like to introduce yourself?

Bill Hunt

I am Bill Hunt from Back Azimuth Consulting. I’ve been doing this for actually before they had a name. Since I wrote my business school thesis, I have been using the internet to reach overseas markets, which morphed into search. So I’ve seen all sides of this. I’ve been on the corporate side, building and selling several agencies. I am now focusing more on high-level business and global market entry strategy, specifically using search in emerging markets.

Dixon Jones

Okay, it’s great. Thanks to all of you for coming in. I appreciate the time you’re taking out. Before we start, I also want to thank the audience for your questions. I asked everybody. If they would like to ask a question of the panelists on the way to their registration. I’m going to blend those questions a little.

Hannah has just joined the webinar. Hannah, would you like to introduce yourself quickly?

Hannah Thorpe

I’m Hannah. I am head of SEO at an agency called Found. So far, I’ve got six years of experience working in SEO, predominantly technical with some content. But now I’m focused on growth, SEO, and how we drive real business change to our work.

Dixon Jones

Okay, so we got, in that case, Bill and Jenny on the old guard, and Tom and Hannah are on the young blood. So, I want to start with everybody giving me one idea of what you think about the other side. Is it getting wrong or bringing it to the industry in a potentially bad way? I’m going to start with Tom, you know, what is it? What is it that you think those who started in SEO 250 years ago are doing that is perhaps not great for the industry today?

Tom Pool

That’s a pretty good question. I don’t want to offend anyone here. So, I’m going to keep it fairly light. I think sticking to older methods, maybe stuff that worked 5, 10, 15 years ago, as opposed to things that no one’s tried yet, they really want to try anything new, sort of sticking with the tried and tested methods, rather than experimenting a little bit more?

Dixon Jones

So, you suggest that it might be the odds of lack of innovation these days?

Tom Pool

Potentially, they prefer to be comfortable with what they know and want to be good with.

Dixon Jones

Okay, we’ll come back to that maybe later. And then Bill, do you want to go the other way?

Bill Hunt

I’m going to go the other way. I think that one thing we run into a lot is people will see something in a headline on social media. And the next thing it’s being recommended to be implemented. And it’s one thing to do on a non-revenue generating platform. But to suggest that to a company can be risky. Now, if facts back it up, and you know, they’ve proven it. But I often see that I have to unravel these, where that’s what it was. We saw this latest greatest thing is a misunderstanding of the application. But in the quest to be fast and to be innovative. I often see that becoming a problem for people.

Dixon Jones

Okay, we’ll come back to come back to that. And then Jenny, what are you going to go for?

Jenny Halasz

Well, I think the things I see from the younger generation are potentially harmful. First off, they trust Google. They trust that Google’s telling them the truth. And that’s something we just never really used to do. Google says this is what we need to do, so we need to do it as opposed to actually testing and learning for themselves whether it works or not.

Dixon Jones

Okay, and Hannah, for the youngsters, do you want to come back?

Hannah Thorpe

Yeah, of course. I want to carry on from Jenny’s point. I would probably say that what I found about the people who have been in SEO for a bit longer is that they try to fight Google. I am not one of the people who trust Google. But I also know to go back to like and when. And I think a lot of the younger people accept you will be giving up a lot of traffic to answer boxes, and that kind of insert feature, you will get rubbish data back. And you work with what you have rather than being angry at Google for what it once took from us.

Dixon Jones

Okay, that’s interesting. And I think it’s a great juxtaposition that we will return to those different leanings between old and young. And I like that. I like that there’s a, you know, a divide. It will make for a better debate before we go into those and dig down into them a little. I’ve got a lot of people here from majestic signups, and they have a desire to talk about links. So, I want to start with the question of trust. For example, Kim asked which Blackhat techniques are still working. Who’s responsible for giving SEO such a bad reputation? Is the old guard, so the new bloods are awesome? Or is it search engines in the way that they communicate with us? Is the reputation of SEO getting better or worse? As time goes on? We’ll start with that one. And then then the link one. Who wants to go with that one? You know, how is SEO getting more or less reputable?

Hannah Thorpe

I think the reputation of SEO is probably getting worse since I’ve worked in SEO. Now everyone knows what it is. Before, I’d find people who would think that I do something in Google and confuse it with paid ads. Now, it feels like many more people know, particularly the client side. They see the difference. They think SEO is black magic. Frequently, my team referred to what we do as smoke and mirrors. We don’t. But that’s kind of how it gets taken. And I think that’s partly the fault of SEOs for hoarding knowledge. Like the amount of audits I read, done by other companies, or the people you put into doing something, but you’ve not explained the why, and you’re not educating the client at the same time. And if we hide our knowledge, and you can’t measure us, as well, as you can measure the channels, they’re going to think we’re rubbish.

Dixon Jones

Okay, anyone else?

Bill Hunt

Yeah, so I did a call last week with, like, a CTO of a $8 billion company, and he prefaced it by saying you’re like the 27th person I’ve had to talk to you over the last ten years. And almost everybody has the opposite advice of the previous. The other one I get is most people have been there and done that with SEO by less effective people. Both they’re doing and the client’s unwillingness to do it. So I do think the reputation is becoming worse. Because I mean, I think Seth recently from Conductor said there are 1.7 million people that had SEO in their title. So, there are a ton of people of varying degrees. And I think, you know, that’s one thing we’ve never been able to get as any standard. And I think it’s to Hannah’s point nobody can agree on what a standard is, a standard of performance or a standard of a tactic. And so we do have a lot of people, old and new, that hide information to try to look smart, or confused people, or they don’t know. So I think the reputation’s getting worse, and, you know, tactics, again, going a lot of this cool stuff that people read about. It’s interesting how we have to walk some of that back and explain to people why it may not work or be sustainable. Back to the first question she asked about black hat tactics. People want to go there because a lot of the people that are, especially nowadays, that are evangelizing seem to be cool people, and they’re the ones in front of the flashy car, and it looks like that’s doing well. Some of it is doing exceptionally well. So, I think that’s where a lot of confusion comes in. Back to, I think, Hannah’s point about respecting Google and playing by the rules.

Dixon Jones

Okay. But we’re not suggesting that’s a function of whether somebody is new or old to the industry is more a function of whether there are bad actors and good actors. They’re not necessarily an age or experience-related thing.

Bill Hunt

Yeah, it’s not. Did he and I think some of the people I’m seeing have been there a while but have always worked in the shadows? They’ve never wanted any attention. And whether they’ve got attention through social media. Why are you even doing webinars and things like that? You know, that’s the stuff you typically didn’t share with a wider audience, which may not have the skill level and the attention to detail to fulfill effectively. It’s not an old versus new. I am seeing some of the older people that, if somewhat retired, are starting to sort of come back in, advocating some tactics that, you know, one today might put into a Blackhat bucket.

Jenny Halasz

I want to add to that and return to what Hannah said in the previous question about challenging Google. I think the black hat tactics are becoming more popular in this age because all these core updates are not necessarily producing better results. And I believe that there are a lot of companies that are getting frustrated with doing the right things and not feeling like they’re being rewarded for them.

Bill Hunt

So you’re saying they’re not creating better results for the general public? As opposed to the US?

Jenny Halasz

I don’t think so.

Tom Pool

I think it’s probably because the reputation is much the same. SEOs have a reputation as snake oil salespeople just trying to sell this thing that didn’t, might have worked, or whatever. But by having sort of the same sort of reputation, it makes the people who are good at it and are more legit, if you will, stand out a little bit more amongst this sort of crowd of people who are arguably not as good or not as legit if you will.

Dixon Jones

Yeah. I don’t know if the ones that stand out are the ones that are good or those that are good at marketing themselves. So okay. Right, I have to move on. I know you want to come back in. But I want to get a few more questions out into the webinar. So, Daniel asks how to build new links the new way Roxsana said link building the internet used to thrive on that stuff. And now there’s not so much we have to make links still actively. I will use that time to do other stuff and create scalable, evergreen link-building strategies. Danilo said those less good Link Builder, Luke Runner, Jason Melman, and many others. So, I know the panels are more generalist than just link-building specialists. So, I may not get the straight answer the audience will seek here. But I’ll sum it up into one question, which, you know, feel free to keep brief if you want. What are the new tactics for link-building versus outdated link-building tactics? Does someone want to jump in there?

Tom Pool

Yes. So, I think positive PR is a better way to build links these days. You’ve got to put way more effort into acquiring links that work. I mean, you can go out onto Fiverr and buy a shit ton of links that, you know, will work for like two seconds, and then you’re going to see a negative impact from those. I think many good link-building efforts are focused on getting to know journalists and putting effort into that side of things rather than just chucking a load of money at it and hoping it works.

Hannah Thorpe

Yeah, I would completely agree. One of the things that I find with link building, like at the moment, like for us, because we’re not willing to do the whole ship tons of links or Fiverr. Many of our link-building is PR-based, but we also try to make the lowest effort possible to get the link. So, for example, we take data sources that already exist, and we did quite a successful piece for a client. We just scraped all of the times of politicians’ major speeches and tweets with the most engagement and plotted it against the exchange rate of their country for finance clients, and showed the impact, like should politicians be allowed on Twitter. And giving that data to journalists worked well to get the link for us, rather than us trying to be the expert in the space trying to be the source on it. It was much simpler to do it that way. And that analysis takes, like, what, 45 minutes an hour rather than a lifetime.

Jenny Halasz

So, I don’t provide link building as a service. We hope it comes from creating great customer service and experiences. However, I do link auditing. And I can go another way and tell you the ones are working very well right now. I’m rushing porn spam links, working well. And there’s a ton of it out there. The other one I’m seeing a lot of is cross-site scripting injection. And then bookmarking links are having a resurgence lately, where people put articles out on bookmarking sites and link to the articles, and then the articles link to their site. And so it’s kind of this, one step removed, that makes it a little harder to find.

Dixon Jones

Okay, Bill, do you want to come in? And then I’ll sum that up because I think there are some interesting things there.

Bill Hunt

No, I agree with what everybody said. I tried to spend more time fixing links going to the wrong page and the homepage versus an internal page. I rarely hear anybody ever ask if you talk about link building. Where do you need links? So that’s what Tom and Hannah were saying about where we need them. And what kind of content can we curate to get them? I think it’s very important to understand like Jenny was saying, the back look at what you have and often compare your page to somebody else’s. Using Majestic to do that often talks people off the wall in terms of thinking they need elaborate link-building programs. So that’s how I look at it: what do we need? And it’s good to hear the young group focusing on quality context rather than sheer quantity.

Dixon Jones

So, I think there is a divide there, which is interesting. The young worker put that positive foot forward in that PR thing. What’s interesting is that the old is still seeing the bad stuff. Working. I mean, Google did a pretty good job, way back with the penguins and stuff, stopping us from getting all the bad stuff out there. But, you know, there seems to be niggling stories suggesting that they’re all coming back in again and maybe doing things that they shouldn’t be.

Tom Pool

I have a question on that. How long would that old stuff work? Is it sustainable, whereas the PR stuff is surely far more sustainable? Right?

Jenny Halasz

There are 20,000 in its place. They win on sheer volume and fire-hosing. Everything instantly blows a firehose of links at Google. That’s really how they work. And it’s always been that way. It’s not like it’s a new thing. I think one of the things that I always find interesting about getting to dabble in that kind of darker art is that it does make us, as white-hat SEOs, more effective in knowing what the black hats are doing.

Bill Hunt

I think a lot of it is to, you know, throw in why so many people are doing it. And I don’t think it’s for an SEO reason. I see much programmatic spam being done to influence sites renting remnant inventory. So people are pumping and dumping stuff all day to boost up a site to trigger, you know, the million-visit site of that. So we’re seeing a lot of old Blackhat networks, and that being resurfaced just for the sole reason. So, that they can make, you know, $100,000 off of remnant inventory and programmatic. So that’s why, and then, SEOs are getting sort of the brunt of it because they have to clean it up because of stuff that was done before. So, I don’t know that it’s focusing on effecting something today for an SEO reason but more for the other profit motive of programmatic spam.

Hannah Thorpe

Can I jump in and ask a question? I just saw something I’ve never seen the other day. So, a client who had pitched aid showed us their disavow files because they’ve had a manual penalty for nearly two years. And they’ve disavowed nearly everything. And I’m like, if you’ve been disavowing so much, the link profile is not the worst I’ve seen. There’s some Russian porn, and that’s the only bad thing. Everything else is fine. And it’s quite a well-known and respected brand. I’ve never seen Google not acknowledge such a solid disavow file. Do you think that it’s putting towards them for removing penalties is changing?

Dixon Jones

I think that probably what they’ve done is when they’ve tried to resubmit, so obviously, it’s a manual penalty. They’ve not explained what they’ve tried to do. And they should make a good effort to use comments in those disavowed files. And trying to talk to somebody when they when they put it in. I suspect they’re just putting in and not properly arguing their case.

Hannah Thorpe

I gave almost the opposite advice. Because they’ve written essays explaining the process, they’ve sent emails to people asking to remove the links, as they’ve manually done a lot. And I’ve never seen that happen.

Jenny Halasz

Most likely, there’s a friendly fire somewhere. So they’ve got a domain that controls or previously controlled or something. And the manual reviewer is looking at that going. You’re just making excuses when you could be taking this down. That is, by far, the most common thing that I’ve seen in that situation.

Hannah Thorpe

Okay, thanks.

Jenny Halasz

We’ve got a comment from one of the people watching us. Frank Watson jumped in and said that most questionable links last about six months, for he says some of my plays, so those are things he’s doing something.

Dixon Jones

Okay, I’m going back to what you guys brought up right at the start, and Tom started with the accusation. I’m going to call it an accusation because I think controversy is more fun than that, then agreement, that the old stone innovates that we’re scared we’re doing the old things, we’re carrying on doing the same things. Do you think do you want to defend that? Oh, you know, Jenny, Bill, do you think that’s true?

Bill Hunt

I’ll defend it. I work in the enterprise space, so when we try a gimmick or something innovative, like the big one, I’m getting asked a lot about the service worker stuff. When people get hundreds of millions of visits, and the idea of putting things out and service workers to affect title tags that they have a business rule to fix will never work, it will never be sustainable. So, while it’s very innovative, it’s a great way to do it. Getting them to change their business process of how certain things are done on the site works well for me. And that’s the pushback I get. This is old school, changing our business process. How is that going to fix anything by getting certain things in? I get the one a lot from younger SEOs internally that we’ve read that you know that # tags don’t do anything for us. It’s like, but then they don’t hurt you. And they’ll get a developer to remove the h1 on an e-commerce site. And in a particular market. And in one case, they lost $40 million in a month. So, we put it back. The revenue came back. So, you could argue that it doesn’t help, but it neither doesn’t hurt. And if the only thing that changed was that, the only risk I see is we do tend to stick to, for me specifically, having been here from the beginning, many of the fundamental things that look like old school stuff still work insanely well. That stuff is tried and tested. But not just for the sake of doing that. I mean, I still hear from older people to Jenny’s point that are sort of, you know, big, bad, scary Google not to do XML sitemaps. Because, you know, you’re you don’t want Google to see all your content or some crazy nonsense like that. So I do see a lot of people, you know, sort of sticking to old stuff, without any support that it still works or, and the same thing true on the other side, the innovative stuff that it necessarily will work in your scenario and be that there’s any proof other than we’ve done it on a magical black box, and it worked. You know, it is proof that something radically innovative should work. So that’s, I mean, that’s just my perception.

Dixon Jones

Okay, so what the other side of that was the other divide between the old and the youngest was attitudes towards Google. The old ones said you trust Google too much, and some young ones said you fight Google too much. So, Hannah, what makes you think that Google is are good guys?

Hannah Thorpe

I don’t know if I’d call them good guys. I think deep down. I’m an old soul. I understand why you would be suspicious and shouldn’t trust it. But I think there was a talk when I first joined SEO, one of the first conferences I went to. And the guy said you shouldn’t be using structured data of any variety because you’re giving Google your information, and it will steal it from you. I said that’s cool and all, but if they don’t steal it from you, they’re going to steal it from a competitor, like, they’re not just going back to 10 blue links. And that’s it. So you have a choice between getting a minimal bit of brand awareness and the potential, you’ll get a customer, and you can retain them, and like, get that loyalty back to come direct to you. Or, you give up and hand your business to Google because they will go through competitors anyway. So I guess it’s like, accept defeat and do your best with the tools you’ve got.

Dixon Jones

The argument for the structured data is that I’m now involved in structured data left, right, and center. So, I believe all of the Lean structured data these days, but you could argue that structured data turns the ideas and the concepts into a machine-readable language. It’s in a database, so nobody gets their hands on it because Google owns it. So everybody loses. So, I think that’s the argument behind that. But you know, I think your point is well met. You have to deal with what’s laid out on the ground and go with it.

Jenny Halasz

I was going to say we use structured data because we need to because of the reasons Hannah outlined. But at the same time, I find an inherent disconnect in saying we need to structure all of the data while saying we want to understand natural language. These two things don’t go together.

Dixon Jones

Okay. So I’m going to get one more question, maybe. And before I go further on before we wrap up. So, Martin asked what is in the old versus young must-have SEO checklist. SEO on-page and for blog posts, link building best practice, I’ll tell you what, just come up with two or three things on your must-have SEO checklist. What three things do you think are important for SEO right now?

Tom Pool

Technical SEO, everything about it. Number two would be having a good reputation. So whether that’s PR, link building, or whatever, number three would be knowing your customers.

Hannah Thorpe

So, more specific than technical, I’d go with the site being able to be crawled by Google, but also how the authority can move through pages in the site, the internal linking, and how it’s linked externally. And we do a lot on internal page ranks based on how our site is architected. I would say relevancy with your content, and not just producing pages. And then the third one, I would say, is not technically SEO but measurement. Like I like views. SEO can sometimes be a performance channel and sometimes drive direct revenue. But also, quite often, it’s an awareness channel. So we need to look at measurement, higher up the funnel and how we do that, and all the kinds of direct like, let’s make some money kind of start SEO.

Jenny Halasz

Yeah, it’s one thing that changes the more they stay the same. I agree with both Hannah and Tom. In terms of the things they’ve identified, I would only add that it is a viable business in the first place. If you are building or creating something with no value, you’ll probably not be able to rank it.

Bill Hunt

I don’t like this concept of people talking about technical SEO. I think that’s the biggest scam going on today. It’s just, but I’m going to leave that there. So, my two areas are each of the sides of what I call the SEO equation, which is indexability as, to Hannah’s point, is it crawlable. It’s fascinating how many people have no idea how many of their pages are indexed, and Google gives us that coverage report. And nobody cares. We’d rather try a gimmick to do that. So, number one on my checklist is, am I getting indexed? And what percentage of my pages? The last one goes to Frank’s other question he posted. You know, with this whole featured snippet, I’ve always had my fourth sort of leg of the table as a click ability. About nine months ago, anticipating this change from Google, I started calling a click ability to slash in formability. And in the strategies I’ve been dealing with clients is, you know, are we there? Yes or no? And then, are we there in the right context? Yes or no? And then can we inform someone? It’s like the one we have now with how it is made. We have the answer box. There is absolutely no reason anybody can give me why somebody should click through that link. So, I’m answering it correctly at the top of the page, and now that I’m the first one on the second page for clicks, we’ve never only had clicks when we weren’t answering the question. So now that we’re answering it. So, my last one is to look at your snippets, look at whatever you have, whether their answer boxes or proper, you know, text links, or whatever they are in, are they answering questions, because you can be number one all day long. And if nobody clicks because you have a crappy snippet? It is all that effort is wasted. So those are two things. Focusing on those two and doing everything else in the middle when you can get to it solves many of your problems.

Jenny Halasz

So, I just wanted to add to featured snippets that I’ve been testing things like teasers. So, seeing how many characters Google has included in the featured snippet and trying to add something to the end, that would be like in the case of absolute. Check out the five-step process or something like that. You give them the first bullet. They’re going to click through to see the other four. So, stuff like that has been working well. And I think maybe we’re calling it the same thing. But I think the young are doing an amazing job of learning about scripting, specifically how server-side versus client-side versus hybrid renderings work and how Google functions with all that information.

Dixon Jones

I think I think it’s an interesting divide, though, between the old and the young there. I mean, of course, the technical SEO is a cliff. It’s a binary thing. If you don’t get into the technical SEO right. But the interesting thing is that I think the youngs, I agree with you, are better at doing that. The youngs probably know a lot more programming than most of the olds, and it’s more up-to-date programming, and they get it a little bit quicker. But I would say that I think there are those index abilities. As Bill put it, it’s more about search engine visibility, not optimization. But then if you’re going to do a how to make sure you got more than four points, so that, you know, sort of the feature snippet, then forces you to click on to the, to the site and things like that. That’s kind of optimization for me because that forces people to come through to your website. And I think those are still things that maybe, you know, the youngs are working on that, you know, that trust Google kind of idea. And the odds are saying, how do we get beyond Google? Anyway, I’ll leave that and go on to the last question because we’ve gone over my time a little. Last question from Michael Bonfils. How many years are left until old SEOs have to wear nappies? So, the guys that were in there before 2000, how long have we got left? I’ve got to admit that civility is starting to crawl into my head sometimes. I, you know, I can’t remember some of the conversations I had yesterday. And so I reckon I’ve got five years tops. But do you think the old eventually will have had their day? And if so, when? When should SEOs retire?

Tom Pool

When they’ve had enough of the industry, I guess?

Bill Hunt

That’s my answer. I’m right there, where I’m tired of being tired. But I think that’s what it is when you no longer can contribute both on a client side, I think, more importantly, when you no longer enjoy it, for whatever reason. That’s time to hang it up. But I think this is, to me, it’s something you can get a lot of enjoyment out of. The challenge, the rush of fixing something and beating Google, or when that starts to wane away, I think you need to seek employment elsewhere. But I tell you one thing about the actual question. I’m in that bracket because Facebook, like I’m seeing the ads all the time, for it depends. So clearly, I’ve tripped the switch. So maybe that’s my sign Facebook and Google have conspired to.

Dixon Jones

Yeah. Okay. All right, guys. So if anybody wants to follow up with anything, and you want to, they want to contact you. Where can people join in and talk with you? Bill?

Bill Hunt

Yeah, you can reach me at Bill at back-azimuth.com. My blog is with hunt.com. You can see me there. @billhunt on Twitter, I’m old enough to be able to get my name on most things. So, I don’t use Twitter much. But go ahead and, and find me there.

Jenny Halasz

I’m @jennyhalasz on Twitter, and I’m often on there. Probably more than I should be. And my website is, well, the short link is jlh.marketing. So come on over and check me out.

Tom Pool

I am Tom Pool, and I work at Blue Array, @cptntommy on Twitter. Check us out.

Hannah Thorpe

So I’m @hannahjthorpe on Twitter. Or you can find me over at found.co.uk. I’m quicker on Twitter than on email, though. So, definitely go down that route. Because, like Jenny, I have a problem.

Dixon Jones

And I want to say again, thanks, everyone, to Majestic. Thank you to all the people who signed up and asked questions.

Or if you want to catch up on our webinars, you can find them on our Digital Marketing Webinars page.