| 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.
| 12:17 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Now that they know MSN is releasing their New search on Thursday.. well maybe G plans on stealing a little of MSN's thunder that day?
Could be an interesting week
| 2:07 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"I think Google is rolling out all the heavy spidering it did lately."
The increase looks to be tons of url only and supplemental listings. In other words, nothing new here.
| 2:23 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Is MSN really going to launch this Thursday? If so who is hadling the ads?
| 2:26 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|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. |
That's just not true! To my knowledge there is not a single blog backlink pointing to any pages on my site. I avoid anything resembling SERPS spam because I like my positions, for the most part.
I've got top 10 positions for hundreds of keywords throughout my site. I got those positions through careful consideration of EVERY page on my site. In a few cases I've managed to topple the old dinosaurs that reigned at number 1 for so long. None of this happened overnight. I've been working toward this goal for the past year.
| 4:12 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Agreed. A while back Google had indexed all my subdirectory indices for which there were no index.htm pages. They got it fixed but now all those pages are listed again when using the site: command. Of course, these pages don't include the word 'the' so they are not included in that 9.7 billion results.
|The increase looks to be tons of url only and supplemental listings. In other words, nothing new here. |
| 4:40 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
You said MSN was launching there new search on Thursday. Any more info on that you can share?
| 4:46 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Microsoft Is Set to Unveil Its Internet Search Service
| 4:47 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I just saw the thread on msn, it looks like Thursday is the day. It could be an exciting Christmas season with the new msn search and the possiblity of a google shake up.
Makes you wonder who will get their Christmas wishes and who will get a lump of coal! I hope they both double check to see who has been naughty and who has been nice!
| 6:34 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Wow... I just went from a white bar to a PR4. No change in ranking though... yet.
| 7:23 am on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
All this stuff about Google trying to make more adsense revenue is nonsense.
Look at the bigger picture. Google has attracted users via good results, without them they are nothing. There are hundreds of companies and thus potential advertisers at any one time not in the top ten for a keyword, whoever they rank top.
If google can keep its users, then there will be plenty of advertisers. They are not going to deliberately risk showing 'not quite relevant results' so that people click adwords. The reality is that the public like good results and 'non sponsored' listings are a magnet for users.... that is the key. If google only showed sponsored results or poor free results to manipulate their sponsored 'clickability' then the overall result would be less users because credibility would fly out of the window.
Every element of a google search result page is an attempt to provide the best they can, somtimes they screw up, but not in a deliberate attempt to manipulate the user. That would be a very short sighted strategy and as a very high percentage of users will never click 'sponsored listings' because the perception is 'free = credible' then they need to keep this bulk of users to attract advertisers in the first place.
| 12:04 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I completely agree with you.
| 1:10 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
One main result I follow went from 1.3 to 1.9 million results two days ago - has now gone to 3.1 million results - so they are certainly rolling out the extra pages that we all knew were there
| 1:24 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
MHes is right, and here's something else to keep in mind: Most searches are for information, not purchases--which means that delivering intentionally poor search results would simply drive away users who wouldn't be clicking on ads anyway.
| 3:15 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The increase to 3.1 is consistant, or it is flipping back and forth?
| 4:17 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I find that sweeping statement to be a bit naive, no offense. Do you think the gradual switch from the colored background of sponsored results to a white background is not an attempt to get folks to click on the right (i.e. manipulate the user). While I am not a firm believer that Google would make changes to its search algo in order to manipulate results, why wouldn't they? The amount of extra income they could bring in is staggering. The chance of it biting them is remote. They would IMO be acting against their shareholders by not doing it.
|Every element of a google search result page is an attempt to provide the best they can, somtimes they screw up, but not in a deliberate attempt to manipulate the user. |
People also say that the sandbox is not an intentional attempt to get new site owners to join adwords and I believe that. Intentional or not, however, it works. I never considered using any PPC prior to the google lag. When I get out, assuming my sites ever get out, I will probably keep my programs running.
| 6:14 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
getting back to teh original topic. Ahem
Yes there is/has been an update, my site is now out of the sandbox and appearing in the serps. Or at least one page is Ill have to check on the rest.
Submission was in September appeared todayish.
8 weeks total. This is comparable to other sites pre 2004 that I have submitted.
| 6:36 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Webhound "The increase to 3.1 is consistant, or it is flipping back and forth?"
It's staying constant - have checked via a couple of different connections
| 6:39 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
All of my pages are in the index, I noticed that for various search terms relating to my site that serps are very very specific.
Could this be teh cause of your/our belief in teh google aint working correctly theory?
With a chnage of algo the serps change until people get an idea as to how it works and the serps fill up again with good results. What im trying to say is I think currently the serps are over specific for search terms and getting wrong - a situ that will change given time.
Of course I could be wrong but Ill let you know.
| 7:35 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
People here talk like making money from adwords is googles number one goal. The trueth is the vast majority of queries don't even have bidders advertising on them. A user will only come back if they have good results, and that is where all the conspiricy theories break down.
| 7:52 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Keep in mind I have not read throught the entire thread. But this it what I just noticed on G.
A huge drop in backlinks, they were all there a few hours ago. No change in rankings though. Am I hallucinating?
| 8:35 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I don't know. What are you on?
| 8:47 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
>>What are you on?
A 2.4 gig PC with 512 ram, with a cool little mouse that has a fan inside to keep my hand dry.
| 8:51 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Now that was funny!
| 8:52 pm on Nov 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I feel the force young apprentices...My meet with Googlebot last night over tequila, chips and salsa and the algo told me - "Update your pages I'm coming to check on you"
| 1:35 am on Nov 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
[in Yoda Voice]
On the horizon a dark cloud I see, Hmmmmm?
Know you not that Darth Google moves to the dark side every november, hmmmmmm?
Find out you will.
[End Yoda Voice]
| 1:54 am on Nov 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Not sure why my last post is not shown here, but I predict a MAJOR shakeup in Googleland this weekend. Search counts for all terms are WAY up - by millions. Most people will be crying this weekend, some will be happy, and a few will be going to vegas. This is my prediction. Good luck all -
| 1:59 am on Nov 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
>>>fan inside to keep my hand dry.
Rugles, killer comeback. :)
| 4:03 am on Nov 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The Google home page announces 8 billion pages indexed.
So the answer to the original question is, "Yes, there is an update going on."
| 4:09 am on Nov 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Google's index nearly doubles to more than 8 billion pages.
No change in SERPs yet, but I don't suppose it will take long for them to recalc across the whole index. Certainly before we lunch with them next week.
Read all about it.
| 4:11 am on Nov 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
One hour before MSN debuts their new search technology.
Still no appreciable changes to the serps in my area. Seems like there's 4 billion urls sitting idly on a hard drive somewhere. I am looking forward to this weekend however. I want to like Google again.
| This 260 message thread spans 9 pages: < < 260 ( 1 2 3 4  6 7 8 9 ) > > |