homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.237.95.6
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Website
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 819 message thread spans 28 pages: < < 819 ( 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 28 > >     
Google Update Bourbon Part 4
GoogleGuy




msg:736898
 12:02 am on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Continued from part 3 here: [webmasterworld.com...]


I did the rounds to check on the state of various data updates. I'd estimate that the "0.5" (not algorithmic changes, but rather responses to various spam/porn complaints + processing reinclusion requests) should go out this weekend sometime or possibly Monday. There should be a binary push this week to improve a corner-case of CJK-related search, and that new binary should have the hooks to turn on the third set of data. Regarding finishing up the second piece of data, there's still two data centers with older data. Those data centers will probably be switched over by Monday. By Monday, 2.5 of the 3.5 things will probably be on.

 

clearvision




msg:736988
 3:38 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

I am looking for facts that people are finding relative to there site (opinions are great, but sometimes, they are just your opinion). I think that is what EFV may be talking about.

My Opinion ( I'm going to be a troll for a minute:)
Think of it this way...there are only going to be 10 top 10 sites out of(God only knows) how many other sites. In our eyes, our sites are the most important and not everyone can be in the top 10.

I don't know many peoples sites that post here and maybe there is a darn good reason their sites have been removed. For the longest time we complain about scrapper sites etc. Now that they are gone, maybe some of the scrappers are here complaining.....I just don't know. All we can do is regroup and make another plan.

Our site is not a scrapper site by any means ( scrappers steal from us). We lost rankings this update, like most of you. I just realize "You can't be #1 forever" because something better may just come along...maybe Google should remember that too...and maybe that is what they are attempting to prevent with the update :)

[edited by: clearvision at 3:40 pm (utc) on June 4, 2005]

JudgeJeffries




msg:736989
 3:38 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

EFV, I'm with you. I'm not sure that this is the right forum for a few of the more vociferous and aggressive members. Most of the intelligentsi who could perhaps have helped to shed some light on this conundrum legged it a long time ago and I cant blame them. I'm surprised BT or a mod hasnt stepped in due to the content of the last few pages. It might be an idea to cool it and move back on target with less personal comment.

Clint




msg:736990
 3:41 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

......If you want to resolve your non www to the www version it is best done on your ANAME RECORDS where you create the non www version to point to the www version. You will obviate google suspecting anything and it is the cleanest and safest method. Doing a 301 in the middle of the most outlandish update in internet history will play havoc on your website because google will have to recalculate everything about your site whilst it may be having problems or indeed it is a sinister update.

There are some guru's here such as theBear who can advise on a multitude of ways to do a proper 301 redirect taking into account the type of server your website is on. Don’t also forget the earlier post I made about possible detrimental effects depending on what your server is etc. ......

Japanese: Ok there's a lot of great info in this post of yours (only part of it is quoted). Unfortunately, most of it is over my head. :( TheBear was one of a few that were kind enough to help me off-list (thank you again) with the redirect of the non-www to www issue. I've already changed it (and many others here have as well) to these 301 redirects as well as my domains that are pointed to my main domain. When I run the domains and the non-www version of my main domain through the header checkers, they all show a "permanently moved 301". So, since this is apparently bad?, can you please tell me exactly how do this via "ANAME RECORDS" and how might that differ exactly from the 301 permanent redirect? I'm sure many would like to know this.
Thanks.

...We all helped them go to the top and now we are paying the price of their success.

You hit that perfectly. You'd think they would at least help those of us here that have suffered (possibly) irreparable damage with some specifics. You're so right about their "webmaster info" page. The generalizations there that they say NOT to do, are just what most if not all sites that rank in the top ARE indeed doing!

Clint




msg:736991
 3:49 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

I don't know many peoples sites that post here and maybe there is a darn good reason their sites have been removed. For the longest time we complain about scrapper sites etc. Now that they are gone, maybe some of the scrappers are here complaining.....I just don't know. All we can do is regroup and make another plan.

What that reason may be, still has us all scratching our heads.

Interesting point. I wonder if those few here that got better G SERP's out of this have the scraper sites and the like. Just for the record, my site was all original content that dealt (PAST tense) in "sales", and not any scraper site. BTW, the scraper sites are NOT gone. In searches for the terms where I was on top, the scraper sites still fill the first few pages.

europeforvisitors




msg:736992
 3:50 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Has anyone that was hit hard with the Bourbon update recovered yet?

GoogleGuy has said the update isn't over (and won't be until later in the month), so it's a bit hard to know what's likely to last. I got slammed really, really hard during the first weekend of the update, losing a heap of Google referrals on top of the 70% or so that had already disappeared after the largely ignored mini-update of March 23. But I recovered three days later, and Google referrals are now back at their record levels of February and early March.

I have noticed some oddities:

- A few high-profile hotel pages from a long-established section of my site appear to be gone from the index. If I search for their page titles with my name added, the SERPs show scraper pages that link to them, but the pages themselves are MIA.

- I created a new section of the site about six weeks ago, redirecting existing pages on the topic into the new section's directories and adding a bunch of new articles. The new articles show up in the index, and the redirected pages show up at their new URLs, but the index.html page for the new section is missing from the SERPs (though it's referenced by several scraper sites that come up in a search for the title and my name).

I can't think of any reason why those hotel pages and that index page would be missing, because similar hotel pages in other directories are doing fine and the index.html pages of my other "sites within the site" continue to rank well in Google. (I'm not going to obsess over the missing pages; they'll probably turn up eventually, and in the meantime, they get plenty of internal referrals: for example, the index.html page that's missing from Google's SERPs usually ranks #3 in my daily traffic report.)

Jane_Doe




msg:736993
 3:53 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

At least one person who was complaining about their site being hit has many pages that are nothing but affiliate links. Plus they have lots of Amazon datafeed pages with uncloaked links that have the words "product feed" in the URL. It stuff I'm not surprised tanked. I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did.

Another person here has a site that is not template driven site but to a 'bot would sure look like it is. It has all the same characteristics of spammy autogenerated pages, even though it is actually a pretty nice site. But it doesn't have a natural looking link structure at all.

Just some food for thought for the next major update....It does help to have a number of sites. Then when some go up others go down. I had relatively few changes overall with this update, but the few I did have netted out. Having various sites means spreading your risk, like buying index mutual funds.

Some people have questioned if Adsense was hurting their pages. I don't know what is in the algo of course, but I do see a lot of pages that are more Adsense ads than content. That style works great in the short run, but those kind of pages are not ones to get lots of natural links. So maxing out on Adsense profits methodology may favor short term profits over long term sustainability of your site(s).

[edited by: Jane_Doe at 3:57 pm (utc) on June 4, 2005]

reseller




msg:736994
 3:55 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

DAYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO_UK ;-)

I see the serps on my Google.com (66.249.85.104) the same as from before friday. How about google UK?
Do you like what you see?

europeforvisitors




msg:736995
 4:08 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Just some food for thought for the next major update....It does help to have a number of sites. Then when some go up others go down. I had relatively few changes overall with this update, but the few I did have netted out. Having various sites means spreading your risk, like buying mutual index finds.

Editorial diversity within a site can help, too. Whenever I see a Webmaster World member complain about losing referrals to his or her home page, I can't help thinking, "Maybe the site needs more good inside pages." Every inside page on a new subtopic is another unique point of entry for your site.

(Side note: On my own 4,300-page site, index.html seldom represents more than 4% of total traffic, and most of that traffic comes from internal referrals.)

Atticus




msg:736996
 4:26 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

1) There will be no 'serious update thread" because, for whatever reason, G no longer treats websites in a consistent manner. There is simply no way for us to compare our experiences and develop a new G strategy because there is no longer a single, identifiable, reasonable set of rules by which G ranks sites.

This may be because G wants it this way, or it could be the result of something like 302 hijacks/domain poisoning ripping the heart out of the G index. Who knows? It doesn't really make any difference, except that if it is G's plan, then no fix is coming and if it is a problem with their algo due to some sort of poisoning, G may be able to fix it 'some day.'

2) No need for government intervention. Adam Smith's invisible hand will drop G in the trash can if they deserve it. I for one no longer use G as my primary SE. I believe that G will continue to lose market share if they continue down the road they are on. Disagree? Fine. Whatever.

3) Whether G "owes" anyone anything is beside the point. If a drowning man screams for help, you might throw him a rope or tell him to kick his legs and keep his head above water, but telling him that "Hydraulics doesn't owe you anything," is more than useless and cruel, it is just plain stoooooopid.

4) Many websites give away bits of free information and earn a fraction of a cent per visitor in return. Does anyone really believe that a publisher should spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on billboard and TV advertising to get a .5 cent return on the investment? Of course not. And when the day comes that your tomatoes have fungus and you have to pay a gardening site a subscription fee to find out how to combat said fungus rather than getting the information for free as you can today, you can blame whoever put the small information farmer out of buisness with their screwy algo.

Richie0x




msg:736997
 4:28 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

I've been thinking about why Google might think my site is a spam site. All pages have black coloured links, which underline on hover. Could Google think I'm trying to create hidden links by doing this? Also most pages have several <h2> tags (some pages have 20). Might Google think this is too much (it's not deliberate)?. Also my site is about a tourism destination, and the destination name is mentioned at least once in all the meta description tags, lots in the content itself and once in all the page titles, could this be a bit too much?

oldpro




msg:736998
 5:49 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

I know by the common theme among the post in this thread, bourbon is costing some revenues and in some cases their very livelyhood.

Our company is one of those that does not rely on adsense or adwords. You might consider us a merchant site...one that inventories and controls an actual physical product. Always ranked pretty good on all the major SE's...even through these google gyrations. What has worked for us is that it is easier to maintain position of Yahoo and MSN. If we fall a few positions on Google...it does not hurt us. When we are in a good position on Google...that's just a little more "gravy".

As such, we closely monitor which SE's bring the most referral traffic vs. those that actually convert to sales.

By far google brings the most traffic, but by far has the lowest conversion...less than 5% conversion. Yahoo is second in traffic, but produces around 20% conversion. MSN brings the lowest traffic, but curiously about 35% conversion.

Okay...you may ask, why is our conversion so high? Well...the only thing I can figure is that we have strong brand recognition and very little competition in our niche. Also, we are the low cost producer. If someone types in our primary keyword, most of the time they are looking to buy.

Why am I posting this in a Bourbon Update thread?

My point is...

Look beyond the shear numbers google can bring in regards to traffic. It is the conversion that counts. Do SEO to diversify. Rank well on all three. Depending on the product, one type of product may do well on certain SE simply because for some reason your target market may have a propensity to use a search engine other than google.

My humble belief is that if you solely basing your business model on google...you are going to have these ups and downs. As you would if you base your business solely singlely on any of the other SE's.

Base you business on all the more stable SE's. Think of Google as gravy.

What is bourbon all about? If I were the controlling shareholder in google right now I would do something about the scrapper publishers. The 301's, duplicate content and the such are just side issues and not the big picture. Look for Yahoo and MSN to follow suit soon.

Will Spencer




msg:736999
 5:56 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

The serious update thread is:

[webmasterworld.com...]

walkman




msg:737000
 5:59 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

> The serious update thread is

not for long ;)

Atticus




msg:737001
 6:13 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

If folks want to have a serious update thread, I say, go for it. I still think that no good can come of it, because as I stated above, G no longer seems to apply the same ranking criteria across all sites. The serious thread linked to above has numerous examples of, "I'm sure the problem is A," followed by, "the problem can't be A because..."

Somebody suggested that Brett set up a form to poll users on various info about their situation (what industry do you work in, do you publish static or dynamic content, did Bourbon help or hurt you, etc).

This would be the way to go, because not only would it gather relevant data in an unemotional way, but it would also include industry and keyword data that we are barred from including in our posts.

MikeNoLastName




msg:737002
 6:21 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

>By far google brings the most traffic, but by far has the lowest conversion...less than 5% conversion.
>Yahoo is second in traffic, but produces around 20% conversion.
>MSN brings the lowest traffic, but curiously about 35% conversion.
--------
Aha! Maybe that's it. Must be that Google knows this too and is banning from Google all sites showing adsense ads and having low conversion numbers in order to boost the conversion for Adwords advertisers. i.e. Increase the ratio of Yahoo/MSN referrals to an adsense publisher and increase the overal conversion for adsense ads :-).

Clint




msg:737003
 6:22 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

....By far google brings the most traffic, but by far has the lowest conversion...less than 5% conversion. Yahoo is second in traffic, but produces around 20% conversion. MSN brings the lowest traffic, but curiously about 35% conversion.

Okay...you may ask, why is our conversion so high? Well...the only thing I can figure is that we have strong brand recognition and very little competition in our niche. Also, we are the low cost producer. If someone types in our primary keyword, most of the time they are looking to buy.

Why am I posting this in a Bourbon Update thread?

My point is...

Look beyond the shear numbers google can bring in regards to traffic. It is the conversion that counts. Do SEO to diversify. Rank well on all three. Depending on the product, one type of product may do well on certain SE simply because for some reason your target market may have a propensity to use a search engine other than google.

My humble belief is that if you solely basing your business model on google...you are going to have these ups and downs. As you would if you base your business solely singlely on any of the other SE's.

Base you business on all the more stable SE's. Think of Google as gravy.

What is bourbon all about? If I were the controlling shareholder in google right now I would do something about the scrapper publishers. The 301's, duplicate content and the such are just side issues and not the big picture. Look for Yahoo and MSN to follow suit soon.

I understand what you're saying, but not everyone is going to be lucky enough to have the same "conversion" as you, you're lucky yours is like that. As another member "Chard" pointed out: "I can see the point about having all your eggs in the G basket, but for many site owners, like myself, it wasn't originally like that. When we started, there were about 10 worthwhile search engines, suppose Yahoo was the biggest, and we ranked OK/good on all of them. If you dropped on one of them, it was no big deal, you were ok on the others. Now, through no choice of mine, the big G has squeezed out all the others to the point where their (other SE) results are irrelevant, and I now find myself in G's hands. I didn't ask them to take over the internet. ....but G has got so dominant that any downward move hits me in the wallet. I was always aware that it was a bit of a free ride, getting any free advertising from organic search, but I didn't want, or expect it to end up being down to one SE.".

Even though most of us (I am) still on top for most but not all of the search phrases on other SE's where I was at G, when you just do happen to have received the bulk of your traffic therefore sales from G, it stands to reason if you're not in them you're screwed. Even with one's "business based on the other SE's", if so few are using the other SE's, it's not going to help and never make up for the damaged caused by G. I don't think anyone intended to "solely base their business model on google", it's just the way it happened due to their user-base. As I mentioned earlier, we are sort of "victims of their success" in a back-handed way.

You mentioned "The 301's" in your post as though you're also saying they are now bad, is that the case and if so can you please elaborate on that?
Thanks.

enotalone




msg:737004
 6:27 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Atticus, i agree. discussions like this are great. but combining data from all of us and outputing it with simple charts even simpler html tables would be one great way to conduct research that might provide some common elements between sites being dropped and sites being elevated in SERPs. i hope Brett or someone out there will consider establishing some research lab type thing which can be companied by a thread like this maybe where we can share out views on gathered data.

Dayo_UK




msg:737005
 6:30 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

The serious update thread is:

[webmasterworld.com...]

There is also a serious (well more serious than this one:)) update thread in the supporters - but hardly any posts - because people still know it is brewing :).

Atticus




msg:737006
 6:31 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

MikeNoLastName,

That theory is not as crazy as it may sound to some folks.

I check my AS stats more often than I check my referrer logs. Any time my sites experience a serious drop off of G traffic, the first indicator I notice is an increase in my AS CPM.

This effect remains consistent over time. I have several months worth of data, running through a few ups and downs on G SERPs, that shows that the lower my position on the SERPs goes, the higher my AS CPM rises.

I always figured that folks coming to my site from Y or MSN are more likely to click an "Ads by Google" link than someone who came in via G. It seems that a visitor from G is less likely to click on "Ads by Google" because they probably think they'd just be running in circles.

Will Spencer




msg:737007
 6:32 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Another serious update thread is:

[webmasterworld.com...]

oldpro




msg:737008
 6:47 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

clint...

sorry, i mean't 302's in the form of scrapper directories using them for the purpose of stealing your PR or outright hijack.

I did not mean to make a blanket generalization with my comment. Of course, a certain target market may solely use google for search...maybe, I suppose, younger people say 25yrs and younger. It all depends on your product and what age group it appeals to. If your product is advertising, say with adsense for products catering to the younger generation, then maybe your fortunes will rise and fall depending on google's mood at the time.

Of course this is hypothetical. I can't say for sure my above example is true without spending tons of dollars for market research for your particular niche. Maybe take a look at your product and do some analysis as it relates to where you are advertising (ie;google). If you are in the adsense publishing business and your product is more often searched in google...and you are not stuck with carrying an inventory. Maybe diversify your publishing to target a different product niche that is not so dependent on google for its traffic and income stream.

Keep in mind I am an MBA in corporate management. Not an IT guru like theBear who I have the utmost respect. In regards to my expertise, it certainly seems that google is now a SE that will remain in flux. Maybe that is the way that want it...to have ever changing serps to give the user more diversity of information. I could see how this would give them an edge over Yahoo and MSN, but it certainly does not help folks like you and I.

bobothecat




msg:737009
 7:03 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

One thing I will agree with is making sure your html is 'valid'. I have a page that's been around for 7 years, always kept a position of 1-3 out of 19 million returns - then all of a sudden it disappeared.

I update this page quite frequently, and must admit that I don't always follow-up with an html check just to make sure there's no 'goofs'.

After spending several days trying to figure out what happened ( was it a scraper, did someone steal my content/duplicate )... I decided to run an html validity test and low-and-behold ... one error. :(

I fix the html error, then 2 weeks later, not only did this page return to the serps (#2), but the entire site saw a great boost.

This occured some 8-10 months ago, but I can't help but feel that this could be what's affecting most. The page/site continues to do very well, and have not been touched by Bourbon.

Several other's expressed the same theory ... so just wanted to add mine too. :)

sailorjwd




msg:737010
 7:16 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

My site is a SPAM site! (according to G).

I've been going over and over pages still in index with description vs url-only or completely excluded pages.

I'm getting a very high coorelation between pages with words in the filename matching words in the page Title.

It had been a sure-fire way to get into the first 10 serps by creating a page such as widget-tools.htm and having a title of 'Widget Tools'... and often an H1 of Widget Tools.

Since this method is exact method scrapers use it is no wonder I am considered on of them.

Every page were this had been done to varing extents is gone from G results.

Anyone else experience this same issue?

Atticus




msg:737011
 7:30 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

sailorjwd,

My situation is exactly as you describe.

Why were we ever so dumb as to use relevant titles on our pages, use filenames that make it easy for us to maintain our own sites and include actual content about the subject of our page in the text of the page?

There is some sort of "too relevent" filter at G. It may be by design or it may be because these techiques do/did work, making our high ranking sites easy targets for scrapers, thus poisoning our domains.

But I'm really having a hard time caring anymore. Just wasting some time here as the Y and MSN forums are so darned dull...

confused ellie




msg:737012
 7:36 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Hmm.. I dunno, my competitors are heavy on the keywords, hi's, etc and they haven't been hit at all. :/

fearlessrick




msg:737013
 7:37 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thank you oldpro

Your post on the conversion rate of your various traffic was most illuminating. It makes sense that G traffic might not convert as well, as it is the most popular SE (80/20 rule).

Low quality G traffic is what produces the high click-through on Adwords/Adsense and that's a major consideration for all webmasters. In the end, eyeballs are eyeballs, I suppose, but high quality traffic would be preferable.

For some, maybe even me, being lost in G's SERPs could be a blessing in disguise.

sailorjwd




msg:737014
 7:38 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

And, I guess after you have so many of these spam pages the entire site gets a penalty.

This spam penalty seems to be a bit more sensitive for some highly spammed and valuable keywords.. I bet G has made a list.

The filename/title issue combined with highly bloated HTML causing dup content penalties on low-contents pages probably answers most all my problems....

How long till the next update?

steveb




msg:737015
 7:39 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Long thread. Somehow I missed the posts from all those wanting Google to disclose their business model where they disclose everything about their own company's business.

Google is a business. They can suck at what they do if they want, and even if they don't want. The posts saying Altavista ruined your business because they don't send you visitors anymore must be in another thread.

sailorjwd




msg:737016
 7:43 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

ellie,

Are they using Exact filename and title matches? (I was also using a short phrase matching the subject in the header of the page toooo.)

I'm noticing literally thousands of scraper sites dropping out in my programming niche (me being one apparently :(

bobothecat




msg:737017
 7:44 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

The posts saying Altavista ruined your business because they don't send you visitors anymore must be in another thread.

I love it! Am still laughing... :)

Johan007




msg:737018
 7:49 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

sailorjwd you seem to be stressed and jumping to the wrong conclusions. It sounds like you have database driven site like me and I too have been penilised because some part of the site are unintentional considered spam… nothing to do with file naming (think logically man!)

Look more at pages of your site with no real text content, possibly only title, filename and a product picture with AdSense. This is what I had on my Future Movies and at the time I thought adding AdSense to these pages would give my users valuable alternative to the pages but Google thinks these pages as spam and wrongly penalised the whole site… I would not have minded just the penalised pages.

What made me really stressful was why did Google penalise my whole site and not just the pages considered spam! that really sucked for me because my site was considered to have exceptional content and the “spam pages” was unintentionaly provided by a very large leading US company and only a side line (I did not know they had added 60,000 pages!).

Its sad we will probably be waiting for 6 months for the penalty to be lifted… Jesus that’s like next year! Looking on the bright side I guess this update has killed off spam… well what about all those price comparison sites that show up for technology product reviews but contain no reviews at all....you all know the sites and I consider them all to be spammers.

[ooo I like this post - I may print and frame it!]

[edited by: Johan007 at 7:54 pm (utc) on June 4, 2005]

This 819 message thread spans 28 pages: < < 819 ( 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 28 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved