| 9:04 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Yessir, thanks for the heads-up. Very nice!
| 9:13 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for spotting the change.
I'm seeing significantly different results too. Not necessarily better or worse, just different. I don't see many spammy sites in the areas I'mlooking at.
| 9:20 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Teoma is very frustrating. I have quality sites that are half a year old still not in the db. Links pointing to the sites are in the db and updated, but not the sites themselves. I guess AJ wants to try to force people to pay for inclusion.
This is another classic example of getting into the db early really making a difference. Yet, this barrier to entry is very short sited of AJ.
| 9:56 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I have very good ranking in Teoma, but as long as they fail to deliver any significant traffic I do not really care about it's update frequency or pay-for-inclusion scheme.
| 10:12 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Terrible search results! For some reason they find words within words. These results are just plain rubbish!
| 10:22 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I also have good rankings, including No 1 spots for some keywords.
Towards the end of last year I was getting almost as many visitors from Teoma / Ask / AskJeees as I was from all the Googles (.com, co.uk, etc).
Since the relaunch that has plummeted. I get one Teoma (etc) visitor for every eight from Google.
I like the new Teoma look, but may be my potential visitors just don't get it. That doesn't explain the Ask/Jeeves drop as they have not been made over.
| 11:03 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I just compared results for the same keyword in Teoma and Google: no comparison. What is high on Google doesn't even make the first page of Teoma.
Whilst this might be a fresh change from Google's dominance in the search engine world ( I am again beginning to think that all search engines are the same), the results are not as relevant.
Overloaded titles are given too high a priority, pages with a low text/graphics content are rated highly and even flagrant copyright violations! They can't do anything about that but it is annoying anyway and somehow I have never noticed those pages within Google.
The only page I would consider useful as a surfer comes in at #6, and my specific site, which has been around since 1999, is in DMOZ and which used to be #1 on Teoma's older results is nowhere to be found.
No, I am not impressed with Teoma's new database.
| 11:04 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I have one page from a site I submitted god knows how long ago.
Just the index page and it is a very old.
The spider has been sniffing around some other pages over the last 2 months or more but just the index page (and old at that) gets in.
I am not very impressed, hopefully they get a bit fresher as time goes on.
| 11:23 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Well placed for certain important key phrases. However, referrals are negligible.
| 11:27 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I've promoted for a trademarked keyword. I searched for that keyword (two words together, not seperated), and got the "Superintendent's office" of some school in the US. Teoma not only split my keyword, it found the word buried in another word!!!
| 11:40 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
At least there has been a refresh on some very old pages, at last.
> this barrier to entry is very short sited of AJ.
Agreed. The same goes for any other service that does not refresh. Surfers soon realise and vote with their mouse.
The web really needs fresh SERPs.
| 11:50 am on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I am seeing some nice results on my usual test searches. Most of the top results are relevent with some oddballs thrown in.
AskJeeves traffic is slowly increasing. It is good to see traffic growing from a engine rather than dying.
| 12:13 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I can't figure out, how the text from one page appears as the description for a pure image pages. :(
On top of this the data seems to be really old, more than 6 months I'd say.
We submitted this site to Ask Jeeves/Teoma back in March via ineedhits, so it's somewhat confusioning as to where they found these old pages?
| 12:34 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
i've got my 2 main sites fully listed in teoma including recent updates, and similar ranking to google (lots of #1 places!). some client sites are also listed, but a fairly important one isn't. all those that are listed were in the database last summer and were free entries.
askjeeves.co.uk is still showing results from espotting and direct hit.
| 1:51 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Well, I'm all for encouraging alternatives to google - but, boy, do they have a long way to go....
I thought relevance on my search terms was poor - looks like they don't weight page title very much in their algo....
| 2:11 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
certainly nice to see, been awaiting it for a while.
Serps for me are all the place, 2-k-term are both up and down on the first page, 3-k-terms, i am happy with they seemed to have gravitated generally to the top of the SERPS, i'm still shocked the update has happened, hence will do allot more checking, to see exactly where sites stand.
| 2:54 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Actually on further investigation, i noticed > i can't quite get my head round this one, that my index page is not in the SERPS, at all, as well as over half the site. Definetly need to do more investigating.
| 3:51 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
well, I guess I should be happy I have some of my sites in there, but I have to admit, it didn't look good for me.... mega sites at the top.
For example, if you search with domain name oriented keywords, you get sites like ICANN, NetSol, etc. ...no little guys.
... no way to fool that system without going out of your way.
| 4:48 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Yipidu ... i'm on top of 215,212 results for my most important allthough very general and competitive keyword! Uhmm ... i like teoma ... today... :-)
| 5:15 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
It appears Teoma may rely rather heavily on the Google directory. It seems a significant number of the "Link Collections From Experts" contain Google directory categories. At lest they did this morning. Looks like things are still changing.
| 5:49 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
My personal site is listed, but the pages they have listed haven't been on the site for 3 months. They may update, but only if you pay them. :)
| 6:03 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>They may update, but only if you pay them
My index page improved significantly for all KWs and moved up 7 pages for one KW and I haven't paid.
| 6:03 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Well now I'm really unimpressed! The #1 and #3 spots for 'maui vacation rentals' are Kauai vacation rentals! And that blinking computer company is still ranking higher than my site.
| 7:58 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The pay for inclusion model will only work if A) the db *first* has the critical mass to produce relevant results, and B) has enough usage to produce a acceptable ROI.
You can't get B without first having A in year 2002.
| 9:40 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>And that blinking computer company is still ranking higher than my site.
namniboose, you'll not beat them, they have too many contextual sites linking to them. Go hunting for *anything* maui that's halfway related to get links from. I can prove to you how it works with half a dozen sites linking. Another site only has a couple linking and it's right up there.
>They may update, but only if you pay them
No wiseinator, I had a site, unpaid, updated that only got changed around the 20th of April. Yet another was changed before then and it's still the old way. Neither one is paid, but I might pay for the one that hasn't been.
| 10:06 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Not really that impressed myself with the update. Personally, it's so hard to understand why these other search properties let Google eat their lunch "month-in and month-out."
I mean, doesn't it seem strange to anyone else here that with all of the money that these search properties have at their disposal that they can't keep their indexes updated anywhere close to that of Google? How many millions of dollars would it take to make teoma competitive with Google in terms of qulaity and of results, and frequency of updates?
| 10:25 pm on May 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I'm always adding Maui links to my site - I presently have about 50 high-quality links from maui vacation rental pages!
I still need to check that the links have 'maui vacation rentals' in the link text but honestly, how many do I need?
| 12:48 am on May 23, 2002 (gmt 0)|
just a quicky, how many pages has your competitors site got, and is it well themed, with it theming down to the other sites ?
| 1:26 am on May 23, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Well well well. Some adult sites I know of finally got listed today in Teoma, beautifully ranked for a number of critical kw phrases, too.
Interestingly, these same sites were ones the owner PAID to have included. A query with "ineedhits.com" shows those sites still sitting quietly in the queue for inclusion.
So the additions are due to a Teoma crawl, not paid inclusion. The owner is a happy camper.
| This 34 message thread spans 2 pages: 34 (  2 ) > > |