maybe this updade is the solution of the problem
i believe Google have solved it with a few victims this time.
1) Back links seem to be quite old data for ranking purposes and recently acquired backlinks are showing but may not be factored in yet. Hence old sites that used to do well are back.
2) On page factors are currently important but as the back links data continues to be applied, things will change. Its almost as if the serps are like they were 6 months ago but not quite. Where as a site used to do well on many search terms, currently it will do well on some but not on others.
3) Very established sites that used to be bullit proof even during an update are effected. This to my mind shows a big change in progress.
I think we need to wait this one out as there must be many complicated issues still at work, not least different back link data flying around. If they were going to do something big, now is the time.
Good, it's way overdue for Google to make some MAJOR changes to the serps. We all know they've been screwed up for ages.
Good to see em making a change.
|1) Back links seem to be quite old data for ranking purposes and recently acquired backlinks are showing but may not be factored in yet. Hence old sites that used to do well are back. |
I've seen some old directory sites that I hadn't run across (or even thought about) in years.
I'm also seeing a boost to large network sites like Yahoo, Expedia, MSN, and autogenerated directories (and I don't just mean AdSense scaper sites) in some of the areas that I watch. On the other hand, some of the top 20 sites for my important keyphrases are showing relatively few backlinks (fewer than 40 in one case), so who knows?
|2) On page factors are currently important but as the back links data continues to be applied, things will change. |
It could take a while, though. I haven't seen any changes at all since last night.
|Very established sites that used to be bullit proof even during an update are effected. This to my mind shows a big change in progress. |
I've definitely seen that (and no, I'm not just talking about my own site).
What's interesting is how quiet Webmaster World has been. Are the SEOs, affiliates, e-commerce folks, etc. doing pretty well with the latest changes? (Normally any kind of update would have launched a flood of "Google is trying to hurt people who make an honest living" and "Google wants to make everybody buy AdWords" posts by now.) Or is everybody just busy with Easter or Purim this weekend?
|(Normally any kind of update would have launched a flood of "Google is trying to hurt people who make an honest living" and "Google wants to make everybody buy AdWords" posts by now.) |
I really feel like folks are just plain used to the horrible serps from Google over the past year. I mean, think about how many 302 threads we have had....one which was over 700 posts long. At some point, people just give up and get tired of talking about Google. There are other engines to think about.
>I'm also seeing a boost to large network sites like Yahoo, Expedia, MSN, and autogenerated directories
Yes, here also, especially yahoo.
I have an old 'directory ppc content scraper' site with hardly any links in and which has been out for six months return big time. Meanwhile the 'proper' site with great links in and original content is now below it.
I think all these "Yahoo, Expedia, MSN, and autogenerated directories" will go over the next few days.
I love this old update scenario, I have really missed it, although with 'sandbox' the stakes are much higher if you lose a site :(
maybe many webmasters didn't even notice this update yet.
My site is not yet affected. Still remaining in post allegra state: low impressions. I can only see changes when checking more datacenters. Some DCs are showing a little hope to me.
|What's interesting is how quiet Webmaster World has been. Are the SEOs, affiliates, e-commerce folks, etc. doing pretty well with the latest changes? |
The differences between DC's is still quite significant - it seems too early to judge. From what I do see, this is like the 5th straight major update which has taken google backwards in quality. Their ability to recognize authority pages has almost vanished entirely.
Also it's partly this:
|I really feel like folks are just plain used to the horrible serps from Google over the past year. |
[webmasterworld.com...] posts #7 and #9
This was posted two weeks ago.
Could the results of this be what you are seeing?
"Very established sites that used to be bullit proof even during an update are effected. This to my mind shows a big change in progress"
This update proves that no site is "bullet proof" and nobody can manipulate rank positions but Google itself.
Nobody so far in this thread mentioned about Google's quality results. Do you guys, even people who lost traffic, think the new results are good?
[edited by: ltedesco at 10:40 pm (utc) on Mar. 26, 2005]
yes they are.
|Nobody so far in this thread mentioned about Google's quality results. Do you guys, even people who lost traffic, think the new results are good? |
I'd say they're a modest step backward for the topics that I follow. I'm seeing too many pages that appear to be there because of network size or subdomains (e.g., Expedia pages with lightweight syndicated content, Amazon pages, and computer-generated sites with filler content). . Some of the SERPS have an almost "deja vu" look and feel, with old bare-bones directories of unannotated links getting high rankings.
My son commented that, when he was looking for a company's Web site last night, he kept finding job-site pages with listings containing the company's name. That observation confirmed my own feeling that sites with huge numbers of computer-generated pages were getting a boost in the SERPs.
>Do you guys, even people who lost traffic, think the new results are good?
Take the time and the information sought can nearly always be found. We can expect no more from google than what they are achieving given the circumstances. I often think it is our own expectations which is the problem, a result of the obsession for instant gratification we demand.
If we want information, we should learn to accept it takes time.
"Do you guys, even people who lost traffic, think the new results are good?"
Google is a darn yo-yo. With Allegra our traffic boomed. Now it's back to early December levels which I'm not complaining about. New results? Not many changes until you get to the second page. I do see a few newbies and wonder how they got there. Newbies as in smaller mom and pop types.
I also wonder why we don't see an update thread? Must be the moderators are tired of seeing them and zap 'em.
>>Do you guys, even people who lost traffic, think the new results are good?
It depends on the query.
I've lost my 2 major #1 positions (now at #2) for the first time in 3 years. The pages that usurped me are my equal though in quality, and one is more of an authority site than mine and should have always been #1, so no sour grapes here.
For secondary queries, I'm seeing absolute cr@p. psuedo directories, scrapers, cross linking ad naseum creep into the top 10 along with my stuff and 1 or 3 other legit pages relative to the search.
Is Google bipolar?
Whats strange is that I'm definitly seeing similar results as december, where my traffic got zapped down about 25%. It had since recovered and had been doing well, and now zap - the worse yet over 75% traffic gone, if not worse. I don't think I've had this little traffic since I first started the site two years ago.
I'm also hoping that because it's the easter long weekend in a lot of places that traffic will be down anyhow until next week. But hopefully google gets all this sorted out.
I'm wondering if the weight given to different words in multi-word searches may be causing some of the so-so but not necessarily awful results that I'm seeing.
Take a phrase like "Shelbyville travel." How much weight does Google assign to each word?
If the emphasis is on "Shelbyville," then the SERPs will probably show more travel pages that are directly related to Shelbyville.
But if the emphasis is shifted slightly to "travel," the results will tend to favor pages at sites like Yahoo, Expedia, Google's ODP-based directory, and other sites that may have tens of thousads (or even hundreds of thousands) of pages on the topic of "travel" but little material on "Shelbyville."
This is probably a simplistic example (and the workings of Google's algorithms are obviously a lot more complicated than that), but I trust that you get my drift.
(BTW, of the two examples, the second is what seems to be occurring right now--at least for the two- and three-word phrases that I've been watching.)
|Take the time and the information sought can nearly always be found. |
A search engine is judged on how it orders results - the faster you find what you are searching for the better the SE. Info sought can also be found on MSN and Yahoo. The question was if the update is GOOD, not does google still function as a search engine.
That being said, the slow decline seems to continue for the big G. On the bright side, more than ever, if you throw enough sh$t against the wall... :)
You are absolutely correct. My sector is recruitment. Our site was top for searches like "sales jobs Birmingham" because we were strong on placenames rather than the job type. Now we have dropped and been replaced by sites that are strong on the job type phrases and not the placename.
as with many things in this forum we cannot know for sure but what is the general consensus? is this likely to change or do you think we are stuck with these new SERPS for a while?
Only GoogleGuy can answer your question, anybody else will be only speculation.
That is what I am asking for. There are many experienced webmasters here who monitor such moves very closely.
As I said in my post, am just looking to see what those experienced members think.
Added in: I do not monitor the SERPS so closely as for the past 6, 7 or 8 years we have not moved on G so much. Position was always around the same place roughly. Until now.
"This update proves that no site is "bullet proof" and nobody can manipulate rank positions but Google itself."
I wish you are right, but donīt think so .. sorry. There are several threads on this forum which illustrate how 302 hijackers are manipulating the results on Google serps. I.e one can say:
"This update proves that no site is "bullet proof" and nobody can manipulate rank positions but Google itself and 302 hijackers." :)
I've been suffering from this update since the 24th/25th but I've seen some improvment in my rankings today. There is hope if you have lost postitions in the SERPS. It certainly seems like off page factors are being gradually filtered in.
"Do you guys, even people who lost traffic, think the new results are good?"
Mostly yes. Except where we don't rank and then they're terrible ;)
I re-ran checks on our site this morning and our company name is back but our products are still hit. A search for a 7 word phrase and a scraper site with our text on the page ranks number 1 and we are 55 out of 108 results just below another scraper site with our text!:
Adjective adjective adjective noun with side noun
Now a search for
"Adjective adjective adjective noun with side noun"
4 Results, the two scraper sites are top, we are 3 and 4!
Oh well, we're busy rewriting some of the weaker pages anyway, so its no great loss.
Yes, I can confirm this. My old 'bullet proof site' was ranking normally throughout this update for 50% of its targeted keywords and on Friday was ranking about position 30+ for the rest. These have now all recovered to about position 5-10.
Many completely new big sites are still knocking around (like yahoo and hotbot pages) but fading. My 'ppc content scraped site' is still hanging in there but I think will fade also. This must be off page factors kicking in, especially the shift from pure pr of links determining ranking to a more discerning look at the quality of links in. Perhaps 'theme' and 'authority' considerations are being applied via a hilltop application.
I have been looking at some different SERPS today, and am beginning to see what EFV mentioned earlier.
When searching for two or three word phrases, the results tend to focus on one or two of the words but not the three.
This gives semi accurate results but by no means what I would expect of G. As a searcher I would still not have found what I was looking for.
And these are not just terms where we used to rank well for years.
Interesting Visit Thailand
That makes sense of my observations as well. Is there a pattern to the words that are being almost ignored? There's lots of talk about 'money words' and sandbox so perhaps there is a filter for certain types of words which has not been fully applied yet. In my case placenames were counting for less yesterday, although much better today.
Agree, seeing exactly the same thing, SERPS back from two days ago, area/location back with equal weight in a four/five string search.
However, I have noticed that backlinks have not settled yet. On our site we were showing 991 pre alegra, 881 after the update. More recently a number of data centres were showing us as 1140 now i find most data centres still have us as 881. Its like other parts of the algo are being tweeked prior to them applying PR and backlinks and we are being given old SERPs results whilst they test a few new things.
Its possible the entire SERPS could change after this next PR update due anytime now by the looks of it.
I have not seen any major changes re my own sites at least over the past two days, but have seen some changes in the SERPS.