| 1:42 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Any other observations of double-listings collapsing? |
Nope, quite the opposite in fact. Seeing more of them.
| 2:10 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
For one term I see the top 6 positions are spam, with indented listings of course.
I'm thinking I can learn from spam now.
If this stuff can do so well without any real content, I think a human trying to copy the methods of the spam, but with actual content on the pages, might do well.
| 2:12 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I've seen no movement in SERPS in my market. My sites have been hammered by the new Gbot, however all of my links in the index are now just URL's no title and description.
| 2:25 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Overnight a term I had been watching went from 250,000 sites to 400,000.
My site that had been knocked down to page 19 (partly because google hates me now, partly because of all the spam in the first 10 pages) is now on page 27 of serps!
I could swallow this easier if the crap all over the first 10 pages wasn't 50% so blatantly useless and generated by a couple of people.
Some people are figuring out how to spam like it's 1999, and Google is happily making room for these sites as if they don't have a clue.
| 2:28 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
<quote> There is a slight change in SERP for popular search terms </quote> My usual search term now produces 1,300,000 results up from 830,000 with very poorly related sites up front, yet my two year old has now totally disappeared. If this is an update shouldn't a search produce better related results at least?
| 2:54 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I see for my search term a drop in the SERPS went from 366000 pages returned to 134000 pages returned. Of course the first few pages are full of older crap sites that in many cases are spam sites.
| 3:22 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|If this stuff can do so well without any real content, I think a human trying to copy the methods of the spam, but with actual content on the pages, might do well. |
Alarmingly, content has minimal effect on Google positioning.
Try it for yourself...
| 3:22 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Last night produced the biggest change up we have seen in over three months. For some key words very wild swings of over 100 positions.
| 3:32 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I don't see how google can miss networks of domains with nearly identical spam. At least dozens of domain names with thousands of pages each.
Rediculous, and getting worse as 2004 goes on. Quality sites that used to stick together on the first couple of pages are now mixed in with a heavy filler of spam.
It's like going from the fresh squeezed juice google of old, to a thimble of juice in a glass of water.
The spam networks can't be that hard to detect? It wasn't this bad before...And I'm not blindly calling all the stuff that ranks above me spam, it's the computer generated stuff with no genuine content.
| 3:35 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"Alarmingly, content has minimal effect on Google positioning.
Try it for yourself... "
Well, as I removed 100% of my content from an old domain and moved it to a new one, and the old site hasnít budged in position... I'd tend to agree.
| 3:38 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing movements in our industry keywords as well. We were #1 for several years till May of this year, until we disappeared from the SERPS. We're finally back at #3. Good for us.
| 4:09 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
cache on 1 of our pages reads
"as retrieved on 31 Dec 1969 23:59:59 GMT."
| 4:21 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Between things like that, and what I'm seeing ranked on page 1, it's like google has cancer.
The question is, what organ?
| 4:36 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Yes, I think things are definetely on the move - seeing some big shifts in sector where it is normally really stable - one main search term I follow just went from 1.3m to 1.9m results
| 4:37 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|The question is, what organ? |
That remains a mystery, however if the situation does not improve I think we can assume it's a vital one!
We have several old websites that sit at the very top of SERPs and never move an inch, but none of our new sites stand a chance - and I for one am bored of waiting.
I sincerely hope this new update evens up the score between old and new...
| 4:45 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I agree with Pethall, this is getting boreing, I have even stopped using G to do my searches for the most part...I got better things to do than wait for a multi million dollar corp to get its &^%$ together.
| 4:50 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I agree. I have started using Y more than I used to for my own searches. More often than not they are more relevant. I continue to think G is too smart for their own good. When I search for a blue widget I just want to see the results on blue widgets - LSI imo threaten to obscure the results as do some of their other "innovations."
| 5:05 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Wow, one of the spammers even has specific robots tags in their headers telling googlebot and freshbot what to do.
I wouldn't try that stuff with my clean site, and yet they do have that stuff on their spam, and I get buried.
It almost makes me wonder if they just got lucky, as it doesn't seem like a sophisticated SEO spammer would put much faith in that kind of tag.
| 5:19 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Google has increased the Index size. Anyway I still can't find any major change in SERPs.
| 5:23 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Likewise here and I have trashed their useless, senseless, tool bar crap as well.
|I agree. I have started using Y more than I used to for my own searches. |
| 5:47 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I do love it when threads go this way.
Google is crap now cause our sites are not making money from free Google traffic, so now me and all my friends are using Yahoo.
On a serious note, we are seeing many more search results but no major change in SERPS. I buy the theory mentioned about Google doing big updates on a 3 monthly basis. The 3rd is now due. At bit like Mount ST Helens, nobody really knows what is going to happen or exactly when. I also think that Google themselves don't really know what impact big algo changes will have until they start reading the threads at webmasterworld. Then if anything drastic is mentioned here, then the manually thing kicks in.
Googlebot still very busy on most of our sites.
| 5:57 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I'm not leaving google, they are a player, but for my personal use I'm going elsware for results when I search... as far as my sites and traffic and SEO...Not much we can do until the plug is pulled. I'm tired of checking everyday for a change and trying to predict what is next. That was my point.
| 6:03 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
So exactly what is it that they don't know! How to make algo changes, or how to read?
|I also think that Google themselves don't really know what impact big algo changes will have until they start reading the threads at webmasterworld. |
| 6:04 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Google has become a stale engine. Results are old and tired. New sites aren't allowed in, thus limiting the amount of available information to users. Sites that are doing well are doing so due to blog backlinks, and other spammy techniques. Good sites with unique and useful content aren't doing well, while sites with template garbage content rank well. Whatever they were trying to do has failed. A change in the algo is way past due. And I am not saying this because we don't rank well, I am saying this because of the poor quality serps I am seeing in our categories.
| 6:20 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I think Google may have "lost" backlinks for a number of sites.
One of ours dropped from 400+ incoming links to just 29, whereas all of the other sites have increased slightly.
The above is just one of many backlink comments I found in this thread. My own site's backlink (link:www.site.com) has not changed for at least four months - I check every week. It has been rock steady at 4097. Yesterday I checked and found it to be 1201.
That's quite a radical change. Someone else in this thread saw a 30% increase in backlinks.
Btw, no change in SERP.
| 6:33 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I think Google is rolling out all the heavy spidering it did lately.
The other day I check on the word "the" and it returned around 6 billion pages, today it returns 9.4 billion.
| 6:44 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I have been watching that as well, last night it showed 5.8. They have added alot of pages, so it seems, my guess is they are url only, not title and description. From what I have read that means they know they are there but have deep crawled them yet to add to the SERPS.
It appears that something is going to happen soon, however I thought that last month as well...
Here is a thought maybe they reversed the algo so that all the crap sites show. At the same time they are building a new index. At some point they will bump the 2 together and remove all the sites in the old index from the new one. Then everything will be fine!
In any event my frustration is the fact that I have a site that is 10 months old and still no movement from 500th and below position in google when I'm 1 through 10 on many key words in other engines. I just want to know if google thinks the same about my site so I can move on and tweek if needed. At this point I'm afraid to do anything for fear of having good SEO and changing it the wrong way. My assumption is that I'm ok, based on rankings in other engines.
| 7:48 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I got 9,57 billion pages here now. Few hours ago it was 9,58.
I got two subdomains on a big site who gains 7k and 8k new pages from yesterday!
Another medium site gain 25% (2k) more pages in the index.
It's the bigger step ever make in the Google index!
| 10:03 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Im still down 70% of incomming visits from Google since late Oct. Im not sure why,but I dont think it has anything to do with a update, I think like yahoo search (inktomi) they are starting to have trouble keep all the sites indexed so some of us have lost some power of our site, that includes the site to drop a little. Its like new sites they get a PR and all, but they still dont have the power wich first comes in 1-2 month.
I also tried to make a site: search when I clicked it says 1400, when I clicked 2 sec after it was 3400
| 11:18 pm on Nov 9, 2004 (gmt 0)|
They could have 20 trillion pages in the index and it won't matter. New pages have no value in Google and they were better off stopping at 4 billion. But Google can keep adding new pages that they have no clue how to handle. Sooner or later the bottom is going to drop when a competitor puts something half way decent together.
| 12:11 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
With regards to this thread. No there is NO UPDATE going on. SERPS changes are only daily flux, Google is crawling heavily at the moment, something major may happen soon, but then again it may not. Xmas is very near. What do Google really want for Christmas? More ADWORDS revenue. Google is now ONLY about making money. They are now playing with other peoples cash and these investors expect to make money. They do not want to say "I invested in a search engine company who's results became "So Good" that nobody needed to pay for advertising anymore"
I don't like it, anymore than you do! But it's true.
| This 260 message thread spans 9 pages: < < 260 ( 1 2 3  5 6 7 8 9 ) > > |