homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 23.20.149.27
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

    
UK Algo - Web Algo
lower ranked for UK serps
soapystar




msg:197415
 9:22 am on Jan 6, 2004 (gmt 0)

I have a UK hosted site that shows at 12 for the UK only search and 6 for the whole web search. Anyone else with a UK hosted site seeing an apparent contradiction in serps?

 

dawlish




msg:197416
 11:31 am on Jan 6, 2004 (gmt 0)

Soapystar, I have been seeing this for one of my sites for many months. Despite the Florida update the situation has remained the same. Position 13th globally 19th in the UK?

The site is UK hosted with a co.uk domain.

antrat




msg:197417
 11:33 am on Jan 6, 2004 (gmt 0)

Is this good or bad?

soapystar




msg:197418
 2:38 pm on Jan 6, 2004 (gmt 0)

have you done a breakdown of where your incoming link are from? I wonder if the UK filter only ranks UK inbound links for the UK filter, or maybe just ranks them higher than non-UK inbounds.

<added>.b.t.w it's got to be a bad thing if you are a UK specific site that ranks lower on the UK filter</added>

glengara




msg:197419
 3:26 pm on Jan 6, 2004 (gmt 0)

Would it not depend how UK specific the site is?
I could see where a .co.uk site targeting the whole world may well rank lower in the UK only filter.

soapystar




msg:197420
 3:28 pm on Jan 6, 2004 (gmt 0)

right, thats why i said this was UK specific site. Hosted in the UK and only for UK residents. The extension though is .info not .co.uk. Since Google work on IP's this shouldnt matter.

Shak




msg:197421
 8:52 pm on Jan 6, 2004 (gmt 0)

have you done a breakdown of where your incoming link are from? I wonder if the UK filter only ranks UK inbound links for the UK filter, or maybe just ranks them higher than non-UK inbounds.

interesting :)

any one done any tests or got some research on this.

Shak

antrat




msg:197422
 1:39 am on Jan 7, 2004 (gmt 0)

<added>.b.t.w it's got to be a bad thing if you are a UK specific site that ranks lower on the UK filter</added>

...or you could say you rank better on the world SERP's and that is a good thing. Or, to look at it another way, you request that both be equal and you end up at number 12 for both the UK and World SERP's.

theskunk




msg:197423
 1:59 am on Jan 7, 2004 (gmt 0)

OK - I have a UK hosted, UK orientated .com.

Before Florida I had a 2,3,4 Listing on Global Google. Post Florida I have a #6 on Global Google and a UK search brings me back on #1 for my index and a funky nustyle dev page that was never submitted or linked in at #2.

I almost get the feeling that the nustyle page has been listed purely because someone liked the design and not because of any ALGO myth.

Interesting yes, appreciated for sure.

theskunk

soapystar




msg:197424
 6:03 pm on Jan 7, 2004 (gmt 0)

<added>.b.t.w it's got to be a bad thing if you are a UK specific site that ranks lower on the UK filter</added>
...or you could say you rank better on the world SERP's and that is a good thing. Or, to look at it another way, you request that both be equal and you end up at number 12 for both the UK and World SERP's.

or you could apply some logic to the topic and see its an apparent anomaly to rank lower when the term is filtered for Uk sites given that on the world search that includes the sites that rank above you for the Uk filter has the same sites below you. But if you prefer to go for the standup comic approach then go ahead.

Michael Anthony




msg:197425
 6:14 pm on Jan 7, 2004 (gmt 0)

I have a UK hosted, UK target audience, .com

It is no 1 in Google.com for it's primary search term.
It is nowhere in Google.co.uk when I check the UK sites only option.

The site has five links listed by Google. One is business.com, one is Yahoo, regional UK, and the other three are from other sites that I own.

Weird, Huh?

soapystar




msg:197426
 7:13 pm on Jan 7, 2004 (gmt 0)

youd have to think it was by design rather than weird. But yeah, w-e-i-r-d!

Ross




msg:197427
 7:53 pm on Jan 7, 2004 (gmt 0)

Michael Anthony - I'd guess that Google has your .com site down as hosted in somewhere other than the UK. Are you 100% sure that it's really hosted over here, I read recently of a supposed UK host whose servers were actually in Germany. It might bw worth dropping a note to your hosting company asking them where exactly the servers are located.

Ross

Michael Anthony




msg:197428
 8:42 pm on Jan 7, 2004 (gmt 0)

To be honest, it's a sort of sub-site, which I created as a test to see if I could get to number 1 on G. My main site does well on both .co.uk and .com, so I'm not too bothered with the other one.

If I had to bet on why it is so, it would be the fact that it's a .com, not a .co.uk, domain, as I'm sure I've read other similar tales on here before.

theskunk




msg:197429
 11:56 pm on Jan 7, 2004 (gmt 0)

RE- .com not being google UK listed.

I'd wager it has ntohing to do with it being .com rather the content perhaps does not make it clearly UK. My SEO clearly says UK, and often I think about putting a UK flag on the site.

I'd say get refs to UK in there and then google wont need to scratch its head.

I have .com get #1 #2 UK google and #6 US Google

During Florida(I think) by #1 #2 #3 Global listing went right off the scale to #150. At the same time I time I got a #1 on google UK. Fortunately I then got #6 Global.

So I'd say make sure you clearly state you operate in the UK in all the nec bits.

antrat




msg:197430
 1:33 am on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

But if you prefer to go for the standup comic approach then go ahead.

Sorry, never realized you only wanted one side of the coin. Do you often throw immature comments at those that are not singing fom your song book?

soapystar




msg:197431
 9:31 am on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

Sorry, never realized you only wanted one side of the coin. Do you often throw immature comments at those that are not singing fom your song book?

There you go again. Mr standup. Don't give up your day job. :)

antrat




msg:197432
 9:40 am on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

I guess you do throw immature comments at those that are not singing fom your song book?

You have yet to realize the importance of my original comments have you? I was willing to spell them out, but I don't think I'll waste anymore time on this one. Best of luck one-eye :o)

kaled




msg:197433
 11:01 am on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

Though it must seem odd that you rank lower for a UK search, I think you may be looking at this from the wrong point of view. Do the sites that rank above yours for the UK search do so on merit or by a fluke? Or to put it another way - are the UK search results rubbish or ok from the user's point of view?

Kaled.

soapystar




msg:197434
 11:16 am on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

the actual serps from a users perspective are fine. Damnit!

engine




msg:197435
 11:18 am on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

kaled has the idea.

Don't simply look at your own page, look at the others in the serps - that's what Google does.

A UK based company may not host in the UK. If you don't know for sure that your hosting is UK, then I recommend you check it and know for sure. Don't ask the hosting company as they probably won't say or don't even know. There are other factors involved, however, the main key is the hosting.

soapystar




msg:197436
 12:52 pm on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

right, which is how i kicked off the thread. I was intersted in the factors that result in a different ranking for Uk sites which has got to be founded in Uk links.

irishaff




msg:197437
 2:14 pm on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

I have been saying for a long time that many of my sites ( which are targetted at the UK only in terms of content ) have a better positioning in google uk than any other search country i.e. .com etc. ....I am convinced that this is not while waiting for serps to propogate across different DCs . It has been this way for some time. Could the applied semantics thingy be in use?

engine




msg:197438
 6:13 pm on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

>the factors that result in a different ranking for Uk

It's the same principle as the global data.

Am I right, is this what you're asking, for example: if a listing in dmoz regional has greater influence than dmoz generic in the regional serps?

soapystar




msg:197439
 7:11 pm on Jan 8, 2004 (gmt 0)

>Am I right, is this what you're asking, for example: if a listing in dmoz regional has greater influence than dmoz generic in the regional serps?<

I can understand how a UK specific site can be filtered to be important if searching with the UK filter on. I dont understand how a Uk specific site gets to important for a global search but not for its actual UK audience. The only way i can see this happening is if the UK filter simply sorts out the UK hosted sites and then only uses UK inbound links for the serps or heavily weights them at least. Otherwise as far as i an see the algo is simply wrong.

zgb999




msg:197440
 10:56 am on Jan 9, 2004 (gmt 0)

I can't understand this either. This is not only related to the UK.

I have a site that ranks No. 10 for a German word on google.de or google.ch but No. 1 on google.com. It just doesn't make sense. I would understand if a German word on a German page ranked higher on google.de than on google.com but what is the sense of doing it the other way round?

engine




msg:197441
 12:19 pm on Jan 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

>soapystar
The only way i can see this happening is if the UK filter simply sorts out the UK hosted sites and then only uses UK inbound links for the serps or heavily weights them at least.

That is correct.

>zgb999
ranks No. 10 for a German word on google.de or google.ch but No. 1 on google.com.

Let's look at relevancy for a moment in the country-specific serps that are filtered based upon the above:
If a page is more relevant for the term, then it's logical that it will rank higher.
If the site is more relevant for the term, then it is likely to rank higher.

Now, look at the same situation regarding pagerank for the site and for the individual pages on the .com

A country-specific page/site may rank higher in the .com serps because it is likely to be more relevant for the term, in that instance, than the other data returned in the serps.

Why?
The following is going to play a part: consider the German links (for example: DMOZ regional and regional directories and sites) and the Global links (for example: DMOZ Global listing and other global directories/sites which won't play such a big role in the pagerank for the regional records), and the individual pagerank of the incoming links (including anchor text for the term).
I hope i've explained myself clearly.

It would seem logical to me for the serps you describe.

The only way to prove it is to carry out the research for the individual term and serps.

zgb999




msg:197442
 1:05 pm on Jan 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

engine

Thank you for your reply. I am not sure I am getting your point. When I understood you correctly then you are saying that if most incoming links are from German content / sites then it is more relevant for google.de than for google.com. This would be an interesting point for further research.

But this site has only one link from a PR 4 English site. All other links are from German speaking sites / pages. So I would understand if it ranked better on google.de but I don't understand why it should rank better on google.com.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved