| 12:58 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I am on a customers site. when I search www.google.co.uk my keyword search places my site #1. I have remote controlled to my office PC and the SERPS it display for the same search on google.co.uk are completly different. I have cleared the cache and tried a difernt PC.
| 1:02 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Anyone noticed the datacenter been down.
Checking from North London, UK.
| 1:10 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Not working in Kent either.
| 1:10 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
yea for a long time now! almost 2 weeks here.
| 1:10 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think it would be a mistake to think a couple of days and filtering all data in will change things dramatically.
Based on expereince from the other major issues in the past (dom/esme) it will take weeks for things to improve. Google first needs to accept there is a problem - 600 odd posts, some from long standing webmasterworld members should be saying something!
I think we are in for a long ride as this time it looks even worse than dom/esme to me.
With regards to reciprocal links - I see lots of sites with recip links and, bought links for that matter, all still ranking highly in the SERPS.
There is no pattern, no trend, no consistency which does lead one to think that Google is broke! - Again
| 1:13 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
gosman this is normal behavior. Different results are couhged up for different IP's. Address the datacenters individually and try again.
| 1:15 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
We have found the only way to get 1 of our back pages to show is to add uk to the search, and then it only shows in the uk index at around #13 and then only 1 in 4 searches!
There is no consistancy in the searches, and yes we have cleared the cache.
| 1:16 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Not working from Germany, too
Are the Guestbook-Filters down?
| 1:16 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
One pattern I see is that Florida looks like Dominic.
| 1:20 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|One pattern I see is that Florida looks like Dominic. |
Yes a mess :)
You may have noticed a search that normally returns 80,000 results is currently giving 160,000 results and every datacenter is pretty much the same just a couple of thousend results less or more.
This shows that alot of filters are missing and your site has to compete with many more sites then usual.
| 1:23 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My googlebot visitings seem like stopped at 15Nov, and i havent a fresh date in the SERPs. what about yours?
| 1:24 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Well, my first accomplishment for the week. I got through this thread ;-))
| 1:26 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I think it would be a mistake to think a couple of days and filtering all data in will change things dramatically. |
Based on expereince from the other major issues in the past (dom/esme) it will take weeks for things to improve.
That's where my money's at.
|some long standing webmasterworld members should be saying something! |
They are: [webmasterworld.com...]
| 1:40 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
very nice, my site was #2 with my main keyword and now #1134
i still having PR5, i was penalized, or still the damn florida update?
| 1:44 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
5 of my sites have dropped that I have been working really hard on for months. Just about cracked the top spot for a really good keyword and this comes along. In the place of these are people who do not add content and have a few backlinks. The sites that I have been working hardest getting links to are the ones that are gone.
Where is the logic in that? Work hard, get links, add content then get replaced by dross who work 5% as hard.
| 1:46 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Ref: Anchor text.
One good thing about this update is it's made me take more notice of anchor text. There are a couple of sites that have remained consistently above me in the SERPs, despite having a lower PR and fairly poor optimisation.
With Allinanchor:'keyword1 keyword2' they both rank much better than my site - that's the explanation.
But note this is the case right now - during/after Update Filey (North Yorkshire)
So at least in my niche the 'anchor text now has little weight' theory doesn't stand up.
I can't see why Google would want to give anchor text within sites any weight though - anchor text from external sites is likely to be much more relevant. But, as posted before, the problem is that it's easy to buy up domains.
| 2:05 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Near the beginning of this thread folks said -in was where the update was first noticed, so do you reckon this one freak result is a bad sign or not that significant? |
The results I was seeing on www-in for 3 days last week were nothing close to what the results are now.
My fiancee (who knows nothing about SEO and rankings) was reasearching for a paper last night. She said she could hardly find anything on Google. What did she do? Moved to a different search engine.
| 2:19 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think there are just some filters not online yet
| 2:33 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
So, what's the significance of Yahoo showing results from www-zu? That's what I've been seeing too - and www-zu has a vastly different result set...
| 2:37 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Just wanted to make the point. I am not dumping all my links or saying anyone else should. I just said I am not adding anymore until I see how things pan out.
I do agree looking around that some sites with big links directories are still doing well. However many other sites which have been doing very well in SERPS recently with such tactics have disappeared altogether. I have also noticed that some sites that I keep an eye on that are heavily cross linked amongst their own sites have been penalised (IE dropping from 5 - 78th etc...)
It will be interesting to see what happens if / when the backlinks are updated.
| 2:38 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm not sure where Yahoo is picking its results from. For my searches, Yahoo results match NONE of the data centres!
They are also better!?
(They aren't from Inktomi either)
| 2:42 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
We are getting a 4th postion on yahoo, not showing on Google.
All seem to come from Googles listings as the other sites match.
| 2:43 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My menu until Florida is adjusted:
Breakfast: Toast and Coffee
Lunch: Bread and Water
Dinner: Bread(2) and Water
| 2:45 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
You can tell the difference between the professional SEOs and the DIY SEOs here. Pro SEOs rack up the billable hours; DIYs suffer sales losses.
| 2:48 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Early in this thread, GG pulls two quotes out of the thread and then comments:
|"I can see some change on www-ex, very pleased to report that on this datacentre one of my blatantly spamming competitors appears to have been dropped - woohoo!" |
"If this is a new set of results, as opposed to a rollback, then mirror-merchants and keyword-in-link are deader 'n disco..."
GG: Hey everyone, we're always looking for ways to improve the quality of our rankings and algorithms.
We have a keyword1-keyword2.com site. So far it's the one that has been pummeled (from #3 to #53). Some others have said that sites like these might be under fire from G. I sure hope not and here's why. Several years ago, we registered our keyword1-keyword2.com because the versions without the dash were all gone.
At the time we were *not* thrilled with dashes in the name (since users don't tend to add dashes), but, our goal with this site was to be a category "authority," so a more generic name made sense.
Eventually, GG and others started saying that having dashes in the URL string was a plus since G could read those words and better know what the site was about. We saw that dashes in URL's were good. But...the flood gates opened and spammers jointed in. Now all the sudden all sites with dashes in the URL's are taboo? Talk about collateral damage. Any idea how many mom-and-pop operations have sites like this? Tons. They're not all spammers.
Yes - I *hate* doing searches in some categories and seeing the top ten results as: www.keyword1-keyword2-keyword3.com/destination-keyword1-keyword2/discount-keyword1-keyword2.html ... but how about this as a remedy, rather than blowing up all domains with dashes:
G, maybe you should penalize blatant repetition of keywords in total URL strings, rather than hyphenated domains, *many* of which are innocents, or at least are knowledgeable and doing nothing wrong.
www.blue-widgets.com/large-sizes.html is, at least IMHO, not spam. It's a page that has something to do with large blue widgets. ;-)
| 2:49 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I know that Google has a right to do what ever it wants and some people are not unhappy with what they are seeing....
but I feel that this is not a good time to change any rules or do an update that will take awhile to settle.
This is the holiday season. This is when most e-commerce sites make their money for the entire year.
Save this stuff for the first of the year. People are already hurting enough
| 2:50 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think that google has not yet used many of its filters. I've seen the number of 'matched' results rise for my keyword from 1.1m to today 2.2m - If google filters are off there would be more 'less important' sites found, therefore an increased number of matches.
But this is just my 2 cents!
Right, time for a lie down.
| 2:54 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|professional SEOs and the DIY SEOs |
Dont think it matters which side of the water your on.
Those who don't optimize sites are doing well at the moment, so why should they need SEO?
Many are complaining because they have good relative sites suddenly disappearing.
How can Google tell us one day that the results are the best ever and then completely change it, so todays results are now the best ever.
I remember in Dominic that the results are going to get rid of SPAM etc and all we be far better.
This update is the same as Dominic but without the PDF's and Amazon.
Google cant you explain why last week a search would give 80,000 results and today it gives me now 220,000 results?
(please don't tell me because they have more indexed pages)
| 2:55 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
GoogleGuy said (Saturday) that it would be 3 - 4 days before things settle down. Question: GoogleGuy, have not heard from you lately. Is your prediction still on track? Now down to 1 -2 days?
Cache date of Nov 16 for many sites that are listed in the top 10 for my major keyword.
6 of 10 have Nov 16, all of these are sites that have never been in top 10. Brand new names to me, never hear of them before.
Other 4 of 10 that do not have cache dates of Nov 16 are 2 pages each from 2 regular top 10 sites. But the pages listed are not their normal pages but very deep into their site pages.
Anybody else seeing this? Maybe Google purged everything and is rebuilding as they go with a 'continuous' update and as your site/pages get picked up they get included. Maybe they are crawling by industry or keyword order, so those areas that have been crawled see little difference and those that have not been crawled have big differences.
| 3:01 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Definitely the top 20 or so sites for my kw phrase this morning, all have Nov. 16 fresh dates. My site, which is down beyond the 500 mark (was #1) has no fresh date listed. So I tend to think your theory may have at least some merit. I would like to be in a coma for the next 1-2 days, so I wouldn't be stressing so much through all of this.
| 3:15 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
One trend I noticed after this 'Florida Effect' is that for many of the competitive keywords (where we lost the top rankings) the sites with dmoz listing is now buried down, which earlier use to be on the top..
anyone else experiencing this..