Just ran across this Joshua Palau blog post/article at MediaPost and think the reasoning is flawed based on a bad original assumption. Palau references a DMnews article “Troubled Times for SEO FIrms” by Dave Pasternak of DidIt.com in which Pasternak comments on the Marketing Sherpa Search Marketing 2007 Benchmark Guide ($247)

The Guide apparently shows a flattening of revenue growth at search marketing firms in extensive graphs and charts on the industry. Here’s my take on why revenue growth for SEO firms may be flattening – because corporate America is realizing the value of SEO and bringing it in-house – therefore outsourcing less and flattening the rise in growth of SEO consultancies.

The dedicated SEO firms, as well as smaller freelancers will see less work as businesses hire full-time SEO’s and SEM’s. Do a search for “SEO Job Search” and you’ll consistently see substantial numbers of dedicated SEO Job Boards advertising corporate SEO/SEM employment offers. Ultimately SEO firms will find that the size of businesses they consult for will be shrinking as bigger companies hire search marketers for full time positions. The result is the same (less work for SEO firms), but the reason is different – search engine optimization is moving in-house.

Tags: In-House SEO, SEO Jobs, SEO Consultant, Search Engine Optimization