| 8:06 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I just checked Adwords for 1-21st Oct and 22-25th.
The impressions for early Oct was 8000 per day for all the search terms in my campaign and I was converting 3.6%
For 21-25 the impressions dropped to 3000 per day and my conversions dropped to 1.7% Average position was 3.4 and 3.7 respectively and all clicks were fixed at 5 cents!
Aound the sam time I edited all the sub groups in the campaign to change the destinatiuon URLS to tracking URLS, nothing else.
Any one figure that?
I wish I had your problems with a hike in impressions!
| 8:06 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
martini, I had a record day on the 13th.
| 8:14 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My AdWords spike was the 13th, too.
Looking at my website traffic reports, I see that in terms of unique visitors October 13th was a regular day. However, October 21st saw a spike of roughly 25% over the average, then settled down to around 15% ABOVE of the average level.
What the hell does that mean?
I'm kinda busy doing analysis for a client so I can't put my noodle to work on it.
[edited by: martinibuster at 8:16 pm (utc) on Oct. 25, 2003]
| 8:15 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Sooo.. the bump in google referals experienced by jimbeetle and myself etc is not down to 'an increase in user search'?
Any other sugestions ideas...anyone.
[edited by: tantalus at 8:19 pm (utc) on Oct. 25, 2003]
| 8:19 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
We had an outstanding 'top' week from monday 29th September till Friday 3rd October. About 15% traffic less before and after...
| 8:20 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|'an increase in user search'? |
In my case, it is. Looked at via AdWords, the impressions are up month over month by 15%.
Website traffic stats confirm that there is a month over month increase as well. According to my stats, the forecast is for a 22% increase in October traffic over September.
Those are TWO metrics indicating a traffic jump. However, those are my metrics. My serps remained exactly the same month over month.
If anybody's site was knocked down a peg or two in the serps then comparing that site performance with mine isn't valid.
As far as tantulus, you say you don't watch the serps, but I advise that you should. It will help you make sense of the traffic variations. It could very well be that your competitor redesigned their website and screwed themselves with flash and dynamically generated pages :).
I don't think there was an update on the 21st, just the regular algo knob twiddling.
The only update I nowadays see occuring, that I call an update, is the somewhat monthly PR update.
| 8:45 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I had thought about a competitor dropping out and still donít discard that.
Maybe youíre right thatís its just an algo tweak or both. I was more interested in whether other people were experiencing a similar rise/fall.
And I would be interested to know though whether your spike of 25% on the 21st was due to Google referrals or across the board.
Iím not complaining, just curious :)
| 8:56 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|whether your spike of 25% on the 21st was due to Google referrals or across the board. |
That's an excellent question:
The percentages don't indicate a Google spike. The distribution of search engine referrals has been relatively stable.
| 9:04 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I am seeing a big difference at www-in as well. They are very different and seem more relavant. One search I am back at number one for my biggest keyword. I had fallen to number 2 for about 3 weeks. There is another one where I am not showing at all. All data centers except www-in are showing the sites that are poining to me with anchor text. I am still not there but it is funny that Google would put unrelated sites that just have my anchor text. The page that they are pointing at are still not listed. I wonder if that is proof that they are looking closer at anchor text.
| 9:07 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Hey I wasn't asking for proof, just a friendly 'across the board' would have sufficed. :)
Anyway as no-one else has come out and indicated similar rises/falls it looks like your above diagnosis accounts for the increase.
| 9:15 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Just checked my traffic stats. I've hit my recent monthly average already so I guess that means a 20% increase. However, a couple of freaky spikes probably accounts for that.
A couple of people have mentioned DMOZ. Well, they appear to be having technical problems again. For the last few days, their search function has been pretty well knackered. It's possible that I am partly responsible for this. I reported a minor fault with the search function and a couple of days later it was a full blown monster. Perhaps they tried to fix the minor fault and made it ten times worse.
| 9:21 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
last weekend i had a 3x increase in google referals, for a period of 3 days my site jumped to number 1 for 40 to 50 keyword combinations. Then come sunday afternoon they all droped back to positions 500+.
| 9:26 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Last month, Page rank and backlinks were updated on the 26th. This month.....
| 9:32 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Side note - alltheweb has updated their "backlinks".
| 9:34 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Martinibuster and Kirby,
I saw about a 22% spike on the 14th. The most hits EVER on my site, and by a wide margin at that!
We had done nothing that would cause it and it settled back into a normal-looking pattern (albeit very slightly higher volume) on the 15th and has stayed there since then.
I saw something by Kaled earlier in this thread, that really caught my eye:
"It seemed to me that an update started (and may have even completed) last week and then reverted back just after I posted a message saying all seemed well at Google."
(Sorry, guys. I haven't figured out how to put quotes in the grey box.)
I'm just wondering if there is a way to connect the dots. Or are they just dots and I'm being dense?
| 9:43 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Look for a thread with 60 posts where there are a multitude of people claiming the same thing. That's usually an actual phenomenom.
Occasionally you get 2-3 stubborn thread posters who keep insisting the sky is falling, although you have more people claiming it is not.
Go through one of the forums and go backwards and you'll see the patterns arise.
This thread is a good example of people coming together and teasing out what is or isn't going on. I think it's safe to conclude that there hasn't been an update (more likely an ongoing algo tweak), and that it's more a case of a general increase internet traffic more than anything else.
| 9:56 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
As usual, Martinibuster, you seem to be spot on. I've been chewing my way backwards through the threads for quite some time, but I often get the feeling that around here we're a bit like the nine blind men and the elephant. I get a vague sense that we're missing something.
here's another dot
Laser8 mentioned something similar
Also www-sj still seems to be down. Could G be pulling resources to work on this? And could this be a part of why we haven't seen the expected PR update?
| 10:11 pm on Oct 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|the true pattern may be steady throughout the month, but with a gentle upward trend |
If I were seeing this I'd jump right in and agree that it's attributed to a rise in user search. But for the one site I'm talking about it ain't. It's a distinct increase starting the 20th, not the steady increase I would assume as we approach the busy holiday season. And while I am seeing a slight across the board increase from all other SEs, I'm seeing a very sharp increase from Google.
But yes, increase in search has to account for a couple or few of those percentage points.
|I don't think there was an update on the 21st, just the regular algo knob twiddling. |
I'd push it back a day to the 20th. And is probably another part of the increase as it just takes a small jump up the SERPs to drive traffic with some keyphrases.
|It could very well be that your competitor redesigned their website and screwed themselves |
Yep, all it would take is one site ahead of mine to get knocked out to see a significant increase in traffic from all those keyphrases that deliver .1% and .2% of visits.
It might, and probably is, a confluence of factors. I'm interested in if this is going to hold the same through the weekend and following days. If it follows the same pattern, well, still not sure what I think now so...
| 4:15 am on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Well my site fell back down to number 2 on www-in.
| 7:16 am on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Never mind. It's late. Just got back from a Halloween party.
| 7:50 am on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I went to one today also. Whats up with that? There's still six days left and the anklebiters are already bouncin off the walls. I wonder how different their chocolate induced buzz feels?
|It's late. Just got back from a Halloween party. |
Someone tell me again about the lack of directory descriptions on -in.:)
| 8:41 am on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
...and I've noticed some site backlinks have just shown up today.
| 8:43 am on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
backlink and pr update is shown own www,
yahoo with 759.000 links
| 8:55 am on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|backlink and pr update is shown own www |
Definitely a change. Shame that we still seem to be missing our dmoz entries in the backlinks. A thread went around a little while back about this when they first went missing.
Has anyone else got theirs back, or still AWOL?
| 10:23 am on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Okay, if itís an interest to anyone, the pages where I experienced a 50% bump in traffic are the pages where I received a significant PR boost.
Is it possible that the new PR / back-links are being reflected in the SERPS a week earlier than we are seeing them?
| 10:54 am on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think -gv has the most up to date index at this time (however that may be changes from frshbot finding changes in the content of existing pages that I am looking at).
| 2:38 pm on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I don't want to speculate on traffic trend increases.
What I have seen is about 600,000 sites drop off my search results. Usually I see around 750,000 sites show up on the serps, now it's down to 140,000.
Is this unusual?
| 2:42 pm on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Never mind. It's late. Just got back from a Halloween party. |
And at some ungodly hour of the night, martinibuster checks in at WW dressed as...?
Back on topic. Does anybody have any followup to or substantiation of TJ's first post?
|google is returning far less, but far higher quality, results |
Is it sustained, or was it just a passing fluctuation as trillianjedi and Earwig were first surmising?
| 4:42 pm on Oct 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>What's afoot at google?
I believe that it is still 12inches.
(Why are fire engines red?)
>Is it sustained, or was it just a passing fluctuation as trillianjedi and Earwig were first surmising?
It is beginning to feel like the old dance days.
| 5:41 am on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|It is beginning to feel like the old dance days. |
So true, so true.
IN is dancing ever so mildly with some odd new algo..., right now.
It was doing this 48 hours ago, now it is back again.
I think we need all worry (I do) about what is going on at SJ..., it could be a real SEO bomb...
| 7:01 am on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Not sure if anyone else has noticed this - for keywords I tend to keep an eye on google is returning far less, but far higher quality, results. |
I was a bit bewildered by the above, because I've been noticing just the opposite. Unfortunately, I've been overwhelmed by deadlines this month and haven't been able to monitor closely or across the board for a range of sites.
The increase in the number of pages returned for a competitive two-word phrase I monitor, though, on which we do well, has been so dramatic that I've printed several searches so I'd have a record "suitable for framing."
A couple of months ago the phrase returned something like 6-million results. On Sept 30, it was over 9-million. On Oct 4, it was 115-million (and we'd moved up). On Oct 9, it was 123-million... and right now it's 77-million, and we're still holding. Maybe the move down to 77-million is what you're seeing. Did anyone notice the move up?
I don't know what these numbers say about anything. I can't believe there's been that kind of an increase in pages, so I assume that Google is counting something differently.
Just quickly checking some other searches on which I've kept historical data, I'm seeing that some searches, compared to a year ago, are now returning 2-3 times the number of results (both atw and exact), and some are returning more.
One I monitor is returning 5-6 times the number of a year ago... going from 150K to 900K returns for atw matches, with exact matches going from 2K to 10K. Possibly I might trust this... Can't quite get my head around the 120-million.
I'm not sure, with these figures, how to evaluate competitiveness at the moment, since I use the number of atw pages and of exact matches as a rough way of gauging the competition (one of many gauges I use).
| This 92 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 92 ( 1  3 4 ) > > |