| 9:36 pm on Jan 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Did you send an email to webmaster @ google.com with the subject line
| 9:50 pm on Jan 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
If you did, you may well get the reply I did - the fact that they're in the SERPS at all means they don't need re-including.
One site I moved, the other site I deep-linked into.
That shook it up nicely....
| 9:56 pm on Jan 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
By moved - do you mean to a new IP?
Our main site does VERY well. Our secondary site does RATHER well. The only thing it doesn't do well for is the main keywords were going after - we're down around 600-700 on Google. Crazy thing is that for Yahoo/MSN beta we're top #7.
I've tried removing almost every reference to our main keyword, but it didn't help. One problem is that we reference our main keyword A LOT on our page. We can't really help it. Let's say we sell saddles, we have our list of saddle types: leather saddles, riding saddles, fancy saddles, US saddles, etc. etc.
I wish there was some way to confirm an OOP penalty, and I wish there was an easy way around it. We score #1 for the vast majority of our keywords, except that one phrase.
| 10:11 pm on Jan 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
IMHO the crosslinking of just two domains would not be a problem.
| 11:06 pm on Jan 10, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I didn't email for re-inclusion because the listings are there, but they may as well not be because they are so poorly listed. I'm curious if they fell so far in the SERP's because of over-optimazation or because the same IP problem?
Derek, you're solution sounds interesting. Are your two domains now on completely different IP clusters? Also, when you say "deep linked into" do you mean from one site to the other? Or from another site you may own? Thanks in advance.....
| 2:27 am on Jan 11, 2005 (gmt 0)|
how often do you update content?
i noticed with one site before, i did a complete overhaul of it's design structure and it started ranking again.
| 7:20 am on Jan 11, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Chris_1 asked if I moved to a new IP
For one of the sites yes.
| 7:22 am on Jan 11, 2005 (gmt 0)|
yes - I used to cross-link the two sites to each other's homepage, and they used to sit on the same IP.
I moved one to a different IP, and I now cross-link one or two selected deep pages as well as home pages.
The moved site has done very well in Google, and its deep links have got Google interested in THAT area of the (non-moved site), with a result that I can freshed the non-moved site more easily.
| 5:20 pm on Jan 11, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|But after being in the top 5 for the better part of two years for their key terms, they spent last year lost in the abyss, starting in January 2004. |
It looks like you were hit by update Florida; the major shake up was in November 2003, but secondary waves came in the following months. Telling by the date you joined WebmasterWorld, I presume you didnīt read about it.
Before Florida, a few interlinked sites with good PR and right keywords could boost you to the first page; after Florida, itīs another completely different game.
| 5:49 pm on Jan 11, 2005 (gmt 0)|
julinho thanks for the reply. I did read here extensively at the time and I remember a lot of people were making matters worse by tweaking their pages and adjusting to what they thought was happening. But as a couple months went by many started to say that the true changes of Florida were not consistent enough to be confirmed. There was a general feeling (if I remember correctly) that it was best to "ride it out" at least until more was known about Florida. Unfortunately, I stopped coming to the boards for a few months after that and missed a lot of important information, and I'm probably paying for it now (figuratively and literally!).
| 5:52 pm on Jan 11, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Was there a common trait(s) found among sites hit hard with the second wave of Florida?