homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.145.191.14
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 41 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 41 ( 1 [2]     
Major Dupe Filter Change
bakedjake

WebmasterWorld Administrator bakedjake us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 12:42 am on Sep 29, 2004 (gmt 0)

Anyone see a radical dupe filter change this weekend?

Seems like they cranked the trip on comparison percentage down 10-20%?

 

Mr_Roberto

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 5:16 pm on Oct 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

Would there be a problem with having your page:
[oursite.com...]
simply drop a cookie to the user (with the affiliate ID in it), and immediately do a 301 redirect to the actual prod321.html page?

This way you would avoid the whole dup content issue, and get the benefit of transferred pagerank for all of the affiliate links. (Though I am not sure if this would trigger the google "page hijacking" problem that has come up in other threads?) Is this kind of thing viable?

4crests

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 6:11 pm on Oct 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

caveman...

Yes, i am thinking of building affiliate only pages. I may just create some Landing pages on the same site, or i could create a whole new site.

mr_roberto...

The cookie thing might work for WebFusion, but i'm not sure i can do that with a Yahoo Store.

Thanks for your input.

caveman

WebmasterWorld Senior Member caveman us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 6:46 pm on Oct 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

<MORE OT>

Personally I think you're better off building a whole new site.

It relieves you of all the issues you're dealing with, and you needn't worry about the site's ups and downs in the SERP's, since the function of your aff site is not to rank well, but to convert traffic already generated elsewhere.

Also, it may help you WRT business building and idea generation to think of the aff's as a totally distinct and unique marketing channel.

</END MORE OT>

--------

Anyway, back on topic, all I can say is it's interesting to me that there may have just been this looseing of one aspect of their dup filters, since my own opinion is that much of the pain people are experiencing with not getting sites ranked in the past six months has to do with three things:
- the quality, relevance and number of inbound links,
- the size and content of the site,
- dup filters (link dup, anchor text dup, page similarity dup, etc.)

WebFusion

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 7:41 pm on Oct 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

Would there be a problem with having your page:
[oursite.com...]
simply drop a cookie to the user (with the affiliate ID in it), and immediately do a 301 redirect to the actual prod321.html page?
This way you would avoid the whole dup content issue, and get the benefit of transferred pagerank for all of the affiliate links. (Though I am not sure if this would trigger the google "page hijacking" problem that has come up in other threads?) Is this kind of thing viable?

We had considered that, but decided against it for just the reason you mentioned (i.e. the page hi-jacking problem, or whatever it is).

Eveidence does suggest that google was interpreting these pages as duplicate content, as soon after the pages started dropping from the idnex, the "real" pages began returning, and slowly moving up in the serps.

cabbie

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 8:34 pm on Oct 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>>The affiliate in this case doesn't have any way to change the page to make it rank higher. <<<
I haven't misunderstood 4crests.
The way the affiliate makes the page rank higher is by anchor text.If they are linking using the aff code you gave them from a combination of higher pr pages than yours then they will replace you in Yahoo and Google serps for the kws and maybe others in that anchor text.If you have optimised your site well,then there is all sorts of kw combinations a affiliate can make you rank for.But you should not begrudge paying them their commision.
Sorry about the Hijacking of this thread.:(

4crests

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 8:48 pm on Oct 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

cabbie, you may be correct.

However, put yourself in my shoes. I receive a TON of traffic from these listings in Google. I am not ranking any better with their listings as i was with my own. So basically, i'm losing 16% of every sale now. I don't want this to happen, so i will have to change things. I don't begrudge my affiliates. It just doesn't work for ME. It has made my affiliate program no longer useful. The amount I am now losing exceeds what I am gaining. It's just plain economics.

Thanks for the input though. I wasn't really thinking of the anchor text. Good point. But, now i need to get my own URL back.

cabbie

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 8:54 pm on Oct 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

Position understood 4crests.Afterall its your site.Just be mindful that the "TON of traffic from these listings in Google." could be in part due to your affiliates linking to you.
Cheers.

4crests

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 9:09 pm on Oct 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

well, thankfully it didn't last long.

Just checked... My listings are all back to normal with a Sep. 30th cache date.

I guess i just had to wait for Google's algo to work.

whew!

ogletree

WebmasterWorld Senior Member ogletree us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 11:50 pm on Oct 1, 2004 (gmt 0)

The problem 4crests is that if you cancel the aff program they will just take that traffic to a competiter and you will not get anything from it. If you cancel the aff program they will still rank for those terms. Even if they changed their sites to do something else you would lose money until G updated. They may just stay there to make sure you lose money because they do not like what you did.

4crests

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 7:33 pm on Oct 2, 2004 (gmt 0)

good points... thanks.

luckily, it fixed itself.

caveman

WebmasterWorld Senior Member caveman us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 25988 posted 2:32 am on Oct 3, 2004 (gmt 0)

Getting back on track I'd like to learn more here.

Jake, or others, any chance that this was a loosening on internal link dup filters, rather content or template fliters, etc. Or was that including in your thinking Jake?

caveman

This 41 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 41 ( 1 [2]
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.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved