Episode 51: The SEO process with Seb Atkinson

Play this episode:

Or get it on:

• Apple iTunes
• Anchor
• Breaker
• Google Podcasts
• Overcast
• Pocket Casts
• RadioPublic
• Spotify
• Sticher

What's in this episode?

Mark and Seb Atkinson, Head of SEO for KnowYourMoney discuss the whole SEO process from content ideation to link building. Seb gives his insight into processes and tools he is using in the competitive industry of financial price comparison.

Transcription

MC: Welcome to episode 51 of the Search with Candour podcast! Recorded on Friday the 6th of March 2020. My name is Mark Williams-Cook and today I'm going to be joined by Seb Atkinson, who is the head of SEO at Know Your Money and we're going to be talking about the whole SEO process; everything from technical SEO, ideation for content and link building.

Seb. Hey, welcome. Thank you very much for joining me.

SA: Hey, thank you for inviting me in.

MC: So to be very transparent, from the beginning I've known Seb a while now, I actually used to work with him at an agency which is one of the ways I know he's very competent and knows what he's talking about and we actually had a developer conference last week in Norfolk, where a technical SEO speaker dropped out and I was trying to find a replacement and Seb was one of my go-to people, he unfortunately couldn't make it but luckily for me, he agreed to come on the podcast, thank you again, very much.

Seb is currently the head of SEO at Know Your Money, I believe he's got around eight years - is that right?

SA: Yeah, something like that.

MC: 8 years of experience in search and he's one of the people that's lucky or unlucky enough, depending on your views, to have experience in both agency side and in-house. So Seb to give us a little bit of background, do you just want to talk a little bit about your role at Know Your Money and what you're responsible for there.

SA: Yeah absolutely. So the company grew more as a PPC business, that's where they made their money, but they quickly realised that to really grow they need to invest in SEO. So it's been a bit of a journey for them to build the right team. I've been brought on to take that role essentially. So when I came in I was the first SEO person; they dabbled in SEO before, but I was the first specialist. My first task really was to just build up the team, get a few people on board that know what they're doing, looking after various sections of the site and making sure we had all the main functions of SEO covered and yeah, so that's been the process so far - getting those people in place.

MC: So for those who don't know, just to give you some context without plugging it, Know Your money is like a price comparison type site, right? That's fair.

SA: Yeah, that's right. A financial product comparisons site.

MC: So I think a really cool place to start will be since you've worked both agency and clients side, what do you see is the differences in the focus and priority of SEO?

SA: Yeah so actually I think it is quite different, to be honest. So working in an agency, obviously, I’ve been in agency background for most of my career but you really have to focus on these more short-term, quick wins and there's obviously an expectation of the clients who get some results almost straightaway sometimes, sometimes unreasonably so and you really to focus on what are the quick wins.

MC: Sorry I can't help but laugh because yeah, definitely been there. Sorry, carry on.

SA: So you need to show credibility because if you're not delivering something, you might sign them up for a six-month contract, but if you're not delivering something of value in that time then your credibility quickly goes out the window, you need to really reassure the client. So even though they might have signed up for a contract, they might have signed up for a certain amount of work to be done but really you still need to build that credibility and therefore the kind of activities you do are mostly going to be focusing on quick wins.

So I think really the difference is, working in-house at least, is that there's a lot more time available to actually go into a lot more detail, into the nuts and bolts, more analysis. So you can really go into detail on why is this particular website ranking, why are your competitors ranking over you and really go into detail on what you can do to actually improve your results. Whereas with a client, maybe you can't necessarily go into that much detail because if you're charging - if you're doing, say a five days a month of work and you might spend three days of that on some really in-depth analysis, ultimately your client is not going to get much out of that, it's going to take a lot more work to actually deliver results off the back of that. So I feel like there's a real difference there. So while you still need to obviously prove credibility when you're working in-house, you have a bit more time after that to really do the results, you can look a lot longer term, you can plan for the future a bit more because you know you're gonna be in that role for a longer period or hopefully. But with an agency relationship, you might not necessarily think that far ahead because you really are focused on what you can do to make the most of those five or six days of a month so there are some results.

MC: That's a really interesting point. I think as SEO has got a bit more competitive as well, we're certainly seeing clients from our agency side getting more in-house resource so we are trying to help upskill, train their team and try and get them as you say to do things like the longer-term planning and their analysis because those things do happen value and that's how you win you know the long-term gains, it's not about you know short-term tricks.

SA: Definitely.

MC: That's really interesting. I think some agency people may also be jealous; listening, thinking, “oh, wouldn't it be nice if we had really patient clients for that”.

Cool, so I had a very quick look at Know Your Money before you came on, it's not a site - to be honest - that I've been on much before and I noticed just from a technical SEO point of view, the site seemed pretty fast, so that’s great and you seem to heavily use, what I think most people would refer to as a hub-and-spoke approach for content. So by that I mean, for those that are listening that haven't heard that before, when you're putting content on your site rather than just sticking it in a blog and then it it disappears down into the archives of March 2017, you seem to have built quite a few static sections that are around specific subjects and then you've obviously got links to all the guides and the informational content there. So I thought it'd be interesting just to ask you really, what do you think nowadays, not necessarily specifically for Know Your Money, are the most important technical considerations?

SA: Yeah so I suppose maybe a bit more background around that; so take it back few years, the site really was focused on landing pages that were bottom of the funnel, spreally content that was ready for someone's convert on, but from their point of view there wasn't really much content there to show our credibility. So we're thinking like, expertise, authority trust - there wasn't really much for that content to support that so yeah you need some content that's a bit higher up the funnel, so that's what they were created for.

So I suppose one of the things to consider, first of all is when we talk about ‘hygiene’ content - which I think is a horrible term, it sounds like you're going to dentist or something - but when I say that term I mean, content where customers are looking for information about some of the products you might have on your site, but they're not ready to convert yet and there's going to be probably a finite number of questions that people with asked around those products. So you're going to have a limited number of pages potentially for those different topics, so make sure that's accessible. That's why a static hub becomes so beneficial, for that reason I think because you want to make that content discoverable.

MC: So this is really like you say, this is where the user experience stuff is lining up really closely to the technical SEO because you're talking about users finding that content easily.

SA: Yeah definitely. So I think making sure that content is discoverable. So for our website for example, you might be looking at a mortgage but you might not know what the right mortgage is for your needs, so you need an explainer for that - so as long as that content is discoverable, you’re providing a root here to get that. And then also, that's an SEO factor as well - so if you're burying that content deep in your website, that page on what type of mortgage is right for me, that might not be picked up very well by Google and therefore that page might not even rank in search engine, so that's definitely something to consider but with a more static approach then you can promote all those pages that are most likely to perform better in search; you can promote those so they're accessible for Google and also just for users that should come across and that's probably quite important information for someone who is new to that product, being able to explore that and learn more about it when they might not yet be ready to actually convert.

MC: So the content you or I guess your team produces does sometimes come up in various feeds of mine, and I try to resist clicking on it because I know what you do and I feel tricked sometimes when I'm like, oh I really want to read that but that's what he wants. I think that the last bit I noticed was about car recalls around who recalled the most, which I did have to click on as I did want to know the answer and that made me think, oh I know Seb is doing a good job here because he's getting me, someone who's quite content cynical - I know what's happening here to click on it.

It'd be really interesting - can you talk me through, now we've got on to content, so I guess it is a good time to talk about it. Can you just talk me through, from the beginning what process you use to ideate content, how do you validate those ideas, how do you go about getting them produced and sign-off internally, and as we go through fill out a little bit about the team you're working with. That would be really interesting, I think.

SA: Yeah absolutely. So I say to start with it is a very collaborative approach, so we get a lot of people together to start off.

First of all, I think it's really good to get people to come up with some initial ideas individually and then we come together and discuss that. So we might get a few people in the room, so first of all I will come in the room, we would get our content executive to come in who obviously is managing our content production - she's got an idea of what people are looking for - part of the role is looking at search trends and we also keep a tab on the news as well, so we want to know what's current because ultimately if you're going to get some links from the content, you need to have something that's relevant to what journalists are after.

So we’ll then come together, we also work with, while we are building our in-house team, we also do work with Excel and other parties as well, so agencies, PR executives, PR experts and people like that and we get them to come up with ideas as well and and then we come together, then we discuss those. So what we normally do is come up with four or five ideas, we then work through those, we've discussed those, we really think about - okay what's in the news about this at the moment, is it something that's timely, is it something that's maybe oversaturated and actually being a challenger brand maybe it's something where we're not really the best position to talk about that, maybe we're gonna get drowned out by more influential publications.

MC: When you say come together to talk about that, is that like a session that one person leads? Do you lead that or does someone else?

SA: Yeah, so we just literally get around the meeting table and really just discuss it. So the person who has come up with some ideas, we come together and everyone who's thought of some ideas will bring this table, we'll have those people introduce the ideas and the main talking points from how they see it but then we dissect that and then we think about, okay what other ways could we improve that, could we make a variation of that every time you do a meeting like that. Someone else comes in and thinks, okay I've seen something like this in the news, how about that kind of angle or it might be okay well that's a seasonal thing, we might do some research around seasonality and actually it's not really the right time now but that might be something we can look at say in six months time when that's a seasonal thing again.

MC: That initial ideation process, when I've heard other people talking about content creation they say sometimes that's the hardest part.

SA: Yeah.

MC: What percentage of time would you say that ideation phase takes, if you consider from there to when something goes live on the site? That’s a hard question.

SA: Very long. We do think about these in batches actually, so we might have a plan of doing three campaigns over six months for example and we usually come up with a quarter, with a year at a time, maybe even half a year. It depends what comes up in the sessions because you might think of something that is ready and that something is viable for six months time and then we'll have that on the back burner and we'll come up with that so it can take a while. Obviously things might happen in the meantime and then it might mean that that idea isn't suitable anymore, we might find that there's something else that's a lot more topical or the idea can evolve over time. But I suppose, let's say we've got one topic that's ready to go, it will probably take about two months. So bear in mind we also need to think about what data that we have. So it needs to be something; if we're going to get coverage in the media, we need something that's unique to us - so we need to have some data whether that's a survey, whether it's O&S data and it might be that the idea we have doesn't actually work because maybe the data is not actually available.

So then we need to spend some time actually mining that data so we need to see if that data is available in the format we need or it might be we want to survey a certain type of person but maybe there's not enough people to make it viable. So for example, if you're surveying the general public, you need at least 2,000 people otherwise the journalists think the sample size too small or if it's someone more specific, if it's B2B, it's around like 250 but if you can't find the right kinds of people then it might fall flat because actually, you might only have 100 people and therefore the results just aren't really significant enough, so then that kind of story could go out the window. But from there it might be that the data reveals, okay there's something else we can do, there's something else in this topic we can talk about, so it might go for a few variations before we actually come up with the hook. And this is I guess where we would work with like, we need a sounding board essentially. So I think that's a big recommendation actually - just to have a sounding board, maybe of journalists, of other industry experts that you can talk about these ideas. maybe pitch these ideas to journalists.

MC: So this is like a validation point?

SA: Yeah validation, absolutely. So it is a good idea and this is something we do with our PR agency, so they might go away and talk to some journalists and say we're going to rework on this topic, is this something of interest and then at least you've got an idea of what the uptake might be and and through PR agencies, they should really be building up relationships with trusted journalists, so then you've got these good connections. So when it does go live then you've already got someone to go to get some publicity off the back of it.

MC: So when you say a couple of months, does that include the content production time. So are you maybe spendinghalf the time on this ideation and validation or over half the time?

SA: Yeah, about one month would be on coming up with the idea and it might be about a week or two weeks to get the data - assuming it's all right - then it might take another month to put it together because then obviously we'll go away, we'll think about what the final hook is for journalists. We'll then work on the structure of the content, so we work with an agency to help us with that because these are quite big pieces we normally do longer form content, although we are looking at some other options, like tools. So we've got to pull that together and then we also try to make it look pretty good, we want to have some good graphics on there as well, so there's a bit of development time as well. So it can take a bit of time to put that together so you know around like a month really. Maybe we could do that faster. But yeah it is mainly about quality, this is the big campaigns that hopefully are going to bring in good links for our site.

MC: I just think that's an interesting takeaway to people listening because one thing I've come across a lot of time with in-house content production is there just isn't enough time spent on ideation and on just coming up with enough good ideas, it seems to be sometimes I will just write about this or you know just go for this key phrase and not a lot of thought that's gone through it. So I think the important points here you mentioned are getting people individually to think of these ideas, bringing them together, actually then cross-examining those ideas and seeing how they fit in with news topics, seasonality, when they might be appropriate and you can come up with multiple ideas at once. The validation of those ideas is really important as well and the uniqueness, getting your own data you mentioned and of course then the hook; what's the narrative. So you mentioned the ONS data which obviously lots of people can get access to, but it's about trying to find a narrative that's interesting around that.

SA: Absolutely, yes and if that hook is missing, if there's no interesting narrative off the back of it then you will probably find that the campaign just won't work because how are you going to get someone interested in talking about that. It is all those different factors coming together to make a successful piece.

MC: So that’s the “so what” test at the end.

SA: Exactly yeah.

MC: After you’ve got the idea and then you can just say “so what?”

SA: Definitely and also it might be the case that you don't necessary have a sounding board to come up with your idea, so there might be other people outside of marketing in your company that you can talk to you and see if they're an average reader, is that something they'd be interested in and if the answer's no - it's a sanity test - if the answer's no, then maybe it's something to rethink and maybe try some of the other ideas. So that's what I think, it's a really good idea to just get a lot of people involved in that process. Sometimes it's a bit difficult to come up with something that's compelling, if you're heads in the marketing mind frame all the time, you need to get some other input on that to make that worthwhile.

MC: You briefly mentioned the word tools, when you're explaining that to me, do you have any specific tools you particularly like for this process or your team that you're using?

SA: Yeah so I suppose from a content point of view, there's a few tools we use. so Google Trends is a good one - so looking at seasonality. So it might be the mortgage industry, so a lot of people look around for houses in like January. Guarantor loans; there's a massive lull in those in the summer because guarantor’s are on holiday so that doesn't really work. So if you can do a campaign there, is that going to affect the bottom line, probably not. So Google Trends is a good place to start.

Then you also need to look at obviously, well not obviously, but with our campaigns at least, we want to get coverage in the media, so we also link building is important for that, we want to then get some SEO results out of that. We would also look at competitors; has anyone else done a similar piece in the past? It might be a few years ago. We would use a tool like Majestic or Moz to look at backlinks and see how they acquired links like that in the past, is it something we could approach and we can say, okay we could update your page or here is some new information on this. So we would go out with our PR agency and get some links straight away, there's no reason why you can't just take this piece of content and do some of your own link building to it afterwards once the main campaign is gone, you can then build more links later.

MC: So that's maybe seeing a specific writer or a journalist who say has written about a survey in 2016 and you're doing a new version for this year, so you could contact them and say, hey I saw you wrote about this, we've done an updated version, if they want to run that kind of story again because a lot of those stories I guess they were interesting year-on-year.

SA: Yeah, absolutely. So keyword tools work well obviously and if you want to then get that page to rank for something you need to think about what it might rank for quite early on I say, although to be honest, ranking that page might not be the main priority - if you want to get links, you can obviously then put some internal links for you to the main landing pages. I normally use SEMrush, so keyword magic tool, obviously SEMRush is a bit of a jack-of-all-trades to be honest. But there is a really useful tool in there; I think if you were going to get one tool, if you can only afford one SEMrush is good because it's got such a big toolbox of different tools in there.

But then content specific tools as well - so AnswerThePublic, I think pretty much everyone in SEO is aware of that tool and there’s this one called AlsoAsked…

MC: Yeah, I’ve heard of that.

SA: Yeah, I think a Norwich Agency published that, but yeah use that, as it is pretty good.

MC: If you didn't say it, I was going to. Brilliant. Just very quickly, because we're pretty far through now, I just wanted your very top line opinion on this and do you think this process - by that I mean the process you're essentially going through to get ultimate SEO benefit, has changed in terms of - now it feels to me and I don't know if you agree with this, people spend a lot longer on content than they're used to and the outreach has changed quite significantly do you agree with that or?

SA: I feel like spending too much time on content maybe isn't the best idea. While you do need to have great content it needs to be worthwhile, it's really about quality over quantity. I do think you still need to spend a lot of time with outreach and so from my point of view, I've just been doing a lot of competitive research on other competitors in that market and I'm still finding a lot of those pages, all of those competitor sites have a lot of links directly to the main landing pages and you can see correlation with, for example, I categorise the competitor site down into different groupings based on the products they're selling and then maps the estimated traffic of those using SEMrush data and I found that the pages with the categories have more links correspond with higher rankings, so I think there's a clear case to say where they're getting links, they're getting better SEO results. but at the same time you need to have good content to be able to get those links in the first place. So if you're thinking about the different linkable assets you have, content is one of them, if you haven’t got content then you're just resorting to money, so paid links, and that's really risky so it makes sense to invest in enough good quality content to use that as your linkable asset and you're probably going to get much better quality links off the back of that.

So I do think that's important but I think it's the balance, you do need to have a plan and when we plan content, what we also think about is, is this a topic we can link the build to as well. Let’s say it's like a shorter piece of content and we'll look at competitors, we'll look at what links they've got to those pages, we'll think about whether we can do some links to this page. It might also be that we can repurpose some of the survey data and put that information on other pages and turn those into linkable assets because there's now something of value, like unique data that people can't get elsewhere, so then there's a reason to reach out with with that piece of content to get links. So yeah I guess in summary, I still see link building is a very important part of the process. Content is a precursor essentially; I think you need the good content in the first instance, but be wary of spending too much time solely producing content and not promoting it whatsoever.

MC: You mentioned the word value a few times there and mentioned about buying links for instance and saying it's probably better value to work on your own linkable assets, longer term. Do you have a process where you go about assigning value to the outcomes that you're getting? Because again, I've seen all kinds of things agency side that other agencies and clients have done - down to things like formulas that calculate the pounds and pence value of a particular link based on trust flow and Domain Authority and traffic and do you have a way internally that you're forecasting or justifying the investment you're making to get that coverage and links?

SA: I think it's an interesting topic actually because you have come up with an algorithm to work out the value of the link but the thing is, Google isn't using that value itself so all these tools that you see that measure the value of a domain, they've all inherently flawed because Google isn't using that. So I probably wouldn't bother actually, to come up with my own metric. So we really try and keep it simple it's a little bit crude, but all we look at is what's the domain authority of the site and that's knowing that the domain authority isn't necessarily the best metric, but then again there aren't really any other - obviously there's multiple metrics similar to that - but none of them are the source of truth essentially.

The way we do it is, we just look at what links have we got this month, what is the domain authority of the sites we've got and then when we think about our progress or performance, we then just have a cumulative total of the domain authority we've achieved that a month and then that gives us an overarching metric and it's a little bit of a crude way of doing it, but then obviously we drill down and think about what was the average domain authority across all these different sites, we look at the links individually as well. So some links are worth more than others - it might be like a link directly to a landing page or a useful piece of content, it might be linked to the home page or it might not even be relevant to the content itself, so I think you need to look at them individually.

MC: So how are you judging if a campaign is successful or not?

SA: So again, it is crude but how many links have we got - this is excluding some of these like lower quality sites, we wouldn't really go after those, we were only looking at what we call that tier 1 and tier 2 links - so mainstream press and then quality niche industry sites. I just don't think there's a perfect way of doing it, so that's why we've kept it really quite simple and just based it off that.

Ultimately it comes down to, are we moving the needle in my rankings and traffic and if we're not then it means, yeah okay maybe those links weren't worth while but at the same time we need to be comparing ourselves to the competitors, so that's why I gave the example earlier about looking out what links our competitors have, what pages they're going to and can we replicate what they're doing that's clearly successful, can we avoid things that don't look like they're working.

MC: No, I’m a fan of that. Always a fan of keeping it simple.

I mean I’ve gone so far as to, with some clients when we're talking about the value of links just actually saying well, do we get or did we get much traffic from it because if it's on a relevant site I feel that's trusted well, it will probably have traffic and if the link is in a prominent place, you know it's not yeah hidden somewhere amongst 300 other links, then you'll probably get some traffic. So if you're getting links from it - sorry if you're getting traffic from it, it is probably a good link, if you haven't had any traffic for a year from it, it may not be so great.

SA: I suppose it's also a case of looking at the kind of link building a competitor has done. So if they're ranking really well and they've got a lot of backlinks and then that means you probably need a lot of backlinks as well and offer similar quality and similar topic to what that competitor has.

For some industries, links are less important and therefore you don't really need to put too much weight on that, it might be more around the kind of content you have. You might only need a handful of links from a few specific domains in that industry, so that's why it's really good idea to just look at competitors and learn about how they ranked and this is coming from us as a challenger brand - we're catching up with competitors so we've got the benefit of seeing what they've done and learning off them, so a little bit cheeky but they're doing the research for us.

MC: They’d love to hear that. While we're talking about links, at the end of last year and this year we've had a few changes to how Google has said they're handling rel nofollow links. So last year they said they're moving rel nofollow to be a hint, so they may choose to ignore the fact that there's a nofollow on there and then I think it was yesterday or day before day before maybe was the quote-unquote “nofollow day” where Google was meant to then flick a switch, I guess that's how it's done there's just someone flicks a switch, and then we're gonna start using nofollow links for discovery and indexing, although they've clarified that doesn't seem to have happened yet but whatever. My question is really around nofollow links because we all know as SEOs, they are a natural part of a backlink profile. I'd say my professional opinion is if you've got thousands of backlinks and none of them no follow, that's probably more suspicious than having nofollow links, but my question to you is, if you are earning links with these placements there are no followed links, knowing what we know now which is Google saying well we'll just make a judgment call on how we feel about it, are you still going to the effort of trying to get people to make them follow links where you can or if you've got a nofollow link, would you be happy with it or you're trying to specify they're followed or you're just getting what you're getting?

SA: Yes, that’s an interesting question. I think the whole announcement Google have made about it, might be down to the fact that a lot of mainstream press just blank it, nofollow everything.

MC: Yes they do.

SA: And then so we're talking like UK newspapers, they're basically just not giving out any kind of SEO value and the thing is, Google tries to like replicate popularity in the real world and if a brand is being mentioned in the press, surely that's a signal this is a trust for every brand and it should be considered. so maybe this whole change is all about we want to now kind of count some of these links on sites that blanket nofollow everything. So yeah, I would actually say it probably depends on the website to be honest because it might be like a niche industry site, they might nofollow certain pages, but then maybe that site didn't have as much value anyway. But if we're talking, newspaper or websites and everything is no follows, that's probably a signal to Google that okay all of these links are treated identically no matter where they are on the page, even if they're inside the body text there being no followed and that's the case across the whole domain, then that might be where Google's going to start using that signal and then decide, actually this is now a hint and we're going to take the value of this, we're going to treat it like a followed link because otherwise maybe they haven't got the right data to go off it.

I mean it could be business that only does PR, that doesn't really focus on link building and the kind of SEO sense and has a lot of these brand mentions.

MC: And that's no good for users.

SA: Yeah exactly and it might be a case of Google trying to find a bit more data on that to take these press measures into account a bit better, because I do think over the last few years, maybe like the last five years, more and more sites have gone to this. So we're talking probably 2014, around that period, when basically any kind of link scheme Google would go after you and so many webmasters were just terrified of it and no following everything. So I think that's probably why they've done it.

Yeah, so it might be like smaller websites that might see a benefit, but I’d probably say that maybe bigger brands, where they're getting a lot of press mentions anyway, there might not be much difference for those so it's probably gonna be like case-by-case. It'd be really interesting to see if there are any actual ranking changes off the back of that.

MC: Lastly, we'll wrap up here, just put you on the spot. have you got any favorite content pieces or campaigns you've seen recently?

SA: Yes actually! So I guess the background of it is, we were trying to do a Christmas campaign and it was moderately successful, it was alright but then we saw one of our competitors knock out of the park, they had a really good piece.

So money.co.uk, they did this gift index and basically it’s this tool, where you can go on you put in like where you are in the country, you write down what the occasion is where you click a box and this is the occasion, so it might be a Christmas present obviously being Christmas but you could also choose it's Mother's Day, Father's Day, parents anniversary, you put in how much money you're planning to spend then there's a present and then it shows you the average across the UK and different areas of the country and then it can either shame you into saying, well you haven't spent enough money - say me with my £15 anniversary present, that wasn't gonna cut it when the average was about £45 or some like that.

So I thought it was really good, they got loads of coverage across the regional press, being a regional piece they could break down by region. So that's where the journalistic hook comes in, you’ve got a regional interest.

MC: That’s smart.

SA: Plus, this was one piece of data so they did the survey, probably 2000 people and obviously they got a lot of coverage now but they could then reuse that again for Valentine's Day for, I don't know, when other people give presents - Easter, if people give presents at Easter, I’ve no idea - and yeah so they can reuse that that's now an evergreen piece of content, they can do loads of link building off the back of it. So yeah great idea, kind of wish I thought of it. I’m not smart enough for that though.

MC: Brilliant, Seb, thank you so much for your time. Really, really appreciate it. you gave some really good advice there. We are going to be back next week, which will be Monday the 16th of March. If you've enjoyed this episode you can get the show notes, with links to things we've talked about, along with the full transcription at search.withcandour.co.uk and as usual if you are listening on the web and you enjoy the podcast you can subscribe on pretty much any platform whether it's Apple, Google podcasts, Spotify, we’re pretty much everywhere, just look for Search with Candour and I will speak to you all next week.