Trending - I am starting to see SEO firms charging monthly fees to build links regardless of quality. I can't argue that you need links to rank for traffic terms but the missing ingredient here is QUALITY! It finally dawned on me what is going on and why some companies are still building hundreds of low quality links. For the money! That's it. They are just charging monthly fees to build a certain number of links each month. As far as I'm concerned this is a scam. Yes you are doing what you said you were going to do, build links, but you are not helping the client. You are just creating monthly income for yourself. Those of you that *think* you have proof that your 500 article submissions with targeted link text has improved search results for targeted terms need only refer to the J.C. Penney debacle. This is a house of cards and I hear the wind blowing.

SEO community at fault? - Almost every top SEO blog has multiple articles about how important it is to build links to your website. These articles are then used by SEO agencies and individuals to justify their work. Maybe more Top SEOs need to write a post or two about shoddy work. If you have to "out" someone then so be it. People are using top SEO blogs to justify risky and low quality link building. There have been a few like Stop Building S*&t Links over at Hobo-Web but that's dated and apparently an ignored concept.

What needs to stop? - I understand how difficult it can be to acquire quality links for a small business but that does not excuse some of the practices that are going on. It amazes me that some SEOs are still using semi-automated link swaps and mass links pages. Sure, 3 or 4 years ago this boosted rankings but trading links on database driven link pages between a Japanese Restaurant in California and a diesel engine mechanic in Alabama is lazy SEO work. I question your motive. Is it to fill a quota and get paid? The next issue is article submission. I admit I have done article submission but 2 or 3 articles on a few of the top article sites was a great way to introduce a new site to the search engines. Sometimes, if you submit quality articles, they might actually generate traffic and that's really what the motive should be, targeted traffic. Here is the problem, some of you are submitting  a hundred or more low quality articles per month and charging your clients because you reached your monthly link building quota. If that's not the motive then the only answer is that you think you are doing what J.C. Penney was doing and you don't think you will be caught. Neither motive is respectable.

Google's Part - Google appears to be doing its part to some degree. They need to continue discounting mass article submissions and non-relevant links. I don't think they can penalize for it because competitors could use it as a tactic to hurt their competition. I'm not a fan of penalties anyway because some of these business owners (unlike JCPenney?) had no idea what their SEO was doing, other than charging them monthly fees. There is talk that Google is lowering the value of article networks too. When the Farmer Update (Panda) came out it definitely hit top article networks like eZine so there is bound to be a trickle effect.

Summary - Recently I have considered turning down 2 new clients because of their link profile. I am always worried that this thing is ready to implode and it's going to fall on me. In most cases the customer has no idea which SEO they hired in the past performed what work. I have to document the current link profile, explain what it means to the potential client, and then tell them what parts might come crashing down. So here I am holding the bag while the link spammer already got paid and moves to the next victim. I'm ready to see a change but sometimes I think, so what? Let it go, do good work, get more customers. The problem is that it does affect me. Potential customers have been bled dry and their house of cards could fall on me.

Did they? Not according to Alan Bleiweiss in his Top SEOs Continues Deceptive Practices article.

After reading Alan's in depth article it looks like the only way to stop fake SEO ranking services like TopSEOs and Verified SEO copycats will be to nip them in the bud. Once they bloom into a money making machine there is little anyone or any community can do to stop them. The more we publish and link to complaints the more we can slow them down but if they have SEO traffic to sell then they will have agencies keeping them in business, that's the hard SEO truth. It's still dog-eat-dog and ethics be damned at this level of the game.

Read the Alan Bleiweiss story Scam or Clueless? at Search Marketing Wisdom.

So how is it that so-called search experts are not aware of the destruction of Verified SEO and the current situation at TopSEOs? If you insist on implementing an SEO verification system or approved SEO directory, you might try spending some time with the "community" before you make the same mistakes. Maybe someone needs to write an e-book, "How To Start Your Own SEO Vetting Directory For Profit". It will have one page. On that page it will say DON'T!

For those of you that want the only badge that means anything in the industry, you can copy and paste the "Just Say No To Verified SEO" badge on your website, it's no charge while supplies last.

Top SEOs an Independent Authority? Follow this TopSEO story at Sphinn

April 29th 2010: TOPSEOs Apologizes – Legit or more Deceptive Business? by Alan Bleiweiss

April 26th: Top SEOs Deceptive Practices an Interview With Jeev Trika by Alan Bleiweiss

April 18th: Is Matt Cutts Moonlighting at the Knowledge Zone - Edward Lewis tries to contact Matt Cutts via the TopSEOs website. Why? Because it appears to be an option!

April 13th: Top SEOs an Independent Authority? by Mike Halvorsen

April 9th: See what a TopSEOS Congratulations Email looks like.

April 3rd: SEO Consultants looks at the TopSEOs 2010 Media Kit in detail.

Ash Nallawalla fired off a post about his experience with Top SEOs and why he doesn't display his numerous TopSEO awards.

April 2nd: Top SEOs and Visibility Magazine by Edward Lewis

March 31st 2010: TopSEOs membership Statistics posted at SEO Consultants

Alan Bleiweiss posts about Top SEOs - One More Complaint About Top SEOs

Rand Fishkin speaks out against TopSEOs via Twitter

March 30th 2010: Aaron Wall Chimes in with a review of the TopSEOs Paid Rating Service Aaron has information relating to one of the firms rated highly by TopSEOs service.

Older Top SEO story on Sphinn

March 29th 2010: Edward Lewis is back on the attack: This time he has TopSEOS in his sights with his finger on the trigger. TopSEOs appears to be a self proclaimed independent authority on the best SEO and SEM companies in the industry.
Read Edward's story: Complaints About TopSEOs

March 28th 2010: Edward Lewis draws attention to all of the badges offered at TopSEOs website - Badges Badges Badges

As usual Edward, known to most on Twitter as @pageoneresults has done his homework and builds his case as he waits for a response from someone at TopSEOs.

So it looks like there is  still no answer from the people at TopSEOS. Is anyone home? Maybe after they read this new post at SEO Consultants where Edward Lewis picks apart the Top SEOs 2010 Media Kit they will surface or return from the dead.

If you haven't been keeping up as the news and research unfolds then be sure you read TopSEOs -  A Pay to Play Service.

It looks like more and more details are coming together on this silent company that claims to be the Authority on the Top Search Optimization companies in the world.

Clearing the Air on Verified SEO at Sphinn by Edward Lewis

Verified SEO Challenge by Rishi at SEO Bullshit

Later in the day more posts appeared about Verified SEO and Charles Preston

Verified SEO = Verifiable Failure by Alysson

When an SEO Expert is Not an SEO Expert by Kim Krause Berg

Verified SEO: The Latest SEO Scam? by Robert Weatherhead