| 6:42 pm on Jan 29, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Pretty impressed with the results so far, clean and relevant. Havent been able to locate their new submission link as of yet. I have also seen the survey Albert referred to.
| 10:12 pm on Jan 29, 2004 (gmt 0)|
None of my PFI pages are in there, although neither are my top competitors (pretty competitive market), from a reverse competitive intelligence standpoint, it tells me which of my competitors are using PFI.
| 1:24 am on Jan 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Your right, the results are the same a hotbot.com. I didn't know that I had good ranking on all search engines, I hope it stays that way.
I still say that the results are mainly based on anchor text.
| 3:40 am on Jan 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
What is really interesting is #2... beta.search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=miserable+failure
I think dnbjason is correct about msn preferring anchor text.
| 10:47 am on Jan 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I also got the survey. Submission error when I was finished: no access to SQL Server, no acces to log file, etc. MSN still can't stand Opera I guess :)
| 11:20 am on Jan 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|from a reverse competitive intelligence standpoint, it tells me which of my competitors are using PFI. |
Nice point EquityMind!
| 11:27 am on Jan 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I see INK and ATW PFI!
| 12:01 pm on Jan 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Nope - no PFI for me.
| 12:54 pm on Jan 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I see sites indexed in INK and FAST, but rankings differ.
Results seem clean.I think that linkpopularity is an important key factor.
| 6:14 pm on Jan 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Results clean? Not for me anyway.
I am searching for a keyword "american widgets" (with no quotes). MSN tells me: "your spelling was corrected to 'americanwidgets'", and first 3 SERPs(!) filled with pages from our main competitor's site americanwidgets.com. Obviously, when you click "do not correct my spelling" link, you get a lot better SERPs with only 3 links pointing to AmericanWidgets.com and the rest to major competitor sites.
How is that not the same what Verisign did in the not so distant past?
"american widgets" is not a real keyword in this example
|King of Bling|
| 9:06 pm on Jan 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
hmm.. no PFI that I can see. Lotsa other advertisers though. Certainly an interesting approach. Optimize anyone?
| 9:04 am on Jan 31, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Still Directory results for me, both on beta and live version.
Installed toolbar, licence agreement is dated October 2003, so not new. It'll be nice for MSN to clean up their results but not looking forward to their market dominance...
| 1:25 pm on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
at msn.com I see Web Directory Results back this morning. When did they start appearing again?
| 1:28 pm on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Yes they are back again now!
| 1:36 pm on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
what directory are they coming from?
| 1:48 pm on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The directory they are coming from is looksmart. Thye are bouncing back and forth between look and INK depending on the day. Since they have not renewed their contract with looksmart, they only have access to this one set of results - no updates. I would not expect to see much look in the future.
| 2:14 pm on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
mfishy, I hope you are correct about not seeing LS in MSN in the future. I get a lot more traffic without LS in the way.
| 5:25 pm on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
afterburner, I think nearly all seo's/webmasters would opt for a "free" search engine other than Google for some well needed competition
| 7:19 pm on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Weird. Maybe they are still trying to test something...
If we knew that M$ cared mainly about quality, then it would be a surer bet that they would soon go 100% INK ... but since M$ is M$, who knows.
Maybe they will, despite their general bias, still come to figure out what G seemed to forget not long ago...that quality actually does matter.
It always amazes me how companies need to learn that lesson over and over and over again. ;-)
| 9:53 pm on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Microsoft may have problems at most everything, but it is safe to say they know going to Ink only for a year would be suicide.
| 4:03 am on Feb 3, 2004 (gmt 0)|
A year of a better index is still better than a year of a poorer index, and it gives M$ the time they (apparently) need to develop their own product.
Hmmm. I hope M$ doesn't join the G club and use us as guinea pigs for a year. ;-)
| 7:51 am on Feb 3, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"A year of a better index is still better than a year of a poorer index..."
Well that is part of the point. A year of Ink is not an option. Adding L$ is an improvement, but without the Zeal/free listings still basically surrendering the battlefield. Put the free/Zeal listings back in and they'll be where they were last year, which was at least not embarrassing.
| 1:00 pm on Feb 3, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Looksmart has as much spam/junk in it as anything else out there. For instance, I have a client I build sites for who has enough money to do whatever he wants. He hired me several years ago to build as many different looking sites as I could for him because he wanted to have as many spots in Looksmart, Yahoo, and DMOZ as possible. I can tell you he still has multiple sites in each of those directories I just mentioned. My point is the directories are full of deception as much as any other Search Engine.
| 1:16 pm on Feb 3, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Looksmart has as much spam/junk in it as anything else out there. |
More, IMO, but in fairness, it's really hard to generalize because it can vary so much by category.
I would agree that more edu/gov sites come to the top of the SERP's in LS than in INK on average ... but in a way that seems quite similar to the current G. In other words, LS SERP's are an odd mixture of mega non-profit sites, legit sites, and very spammy sites. Who needs another post Florida G?
At least where I look, INK is a lot closer to G's pre Florida SERP's, and whether one thinks that that is a good thing or not, it seemed to work for G, and the majority of surfers.
Perhaps it's true that just like the current G, the current LS SERP's are better in some of the non-competitive categories, when you actually want a .gov site. ;-)
| 12:55 am on Feb 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Looksmart is not showing up in MSN.com where I am at as of this evening in Pennsylvania. Can anyone confirm elsewhere?
| 1:53 am on Feb 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Yes, back to INK again here as well. Within the last hour or so.
Ping pong anyone?
| 2:05 am on Feb 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
From Southern California, I have not seen anything different from what it's always been - Sponsored Listings, Look$mart Directory then Ink Backfill.
Every time someone posts that there are new SERPs, I go look but nothing has changed at all.
| 3:16 am on Feb 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
No web dir.
| 12:26 pm on Feb 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I had the same thing happen with seeing directory results until I cleared my cache and reloaded the msn pages and then the directory results were gone. Try it.
| 8:30 pm on Feb 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|I had the same thing happen with seeing directory results until I cleared my cache and reloaded the msn pages and then the directory results were gone. Try it - afterburner |
Thank you for your suggestion :) I keep cache cleared consistently.
Just loading [search.msn.com...] displays the Directory. Those that say it isn't there must be referring to something entirely different.
Whether it's beta search, the search at MSN homepage, or any other MS Search, they all give Look$mart Directory results. Some search terms return less of the Directory, but from the region I'm at, none of what's being reported in this thread is happening.
Believe me, I'm the first person who wants MSN to dump the L$ Directory. 4 years ago, I paid to be included and the first thing they did was hack my site description to pieces so that it rarely matched search terms.
| 8:46 pm on Feb 4, 2004 (gmt 0)|
keyplyr, don't doubt for one moment that you are not seeing it, where you are. But we know the difference between the two, and we're seeing both all day today on refreshes. And that's different from the pattern of the last four or five days, when they've been going roughly two days with one, then two with the other. Apparently they are not doing this in all geo's. We show slightly better in one than the other, but generally the SERP's are quite different between the two in our main category, plus there's the Dir. thing. It's not hard to spot them both.
| This 93 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 93 ( 1 2  4 ) > > |