| 6:34 am on Feb 19, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Like yourself I have tried everything in my power to improve rankings in Inktomi for the last year. I'm in the same situation. Excellent rankings in Google but Inktomi bury my PFI pages deep, deep, deep, down in their spam ridden database.
Have tried every optimization trick in the book, have paid for professional seo, bought seo software, contacted PositionTech (they weren't much help) and still nothing.
Surely I have been penalized for something but no one will give me a straight answer.
Today is the day I was dreading. Yahoo moving to Inktomi results. My only hope is that Yahoo change their algorithm soon to suit my site.
I'm sure there are plenty of other people experiencing the same problem. I'm glad that I have only paid for my home page to be indexed and not 4000 pages.
| 7:19 am on Feb 19, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I realized that all my ASP.NET based dynamic sites are doing way better in Y! SERPs now as before with G.
Will study some more and try to nail down possible impact areas to report here...
| 8:12 pm on Feb 20, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I have also focused my efforts aimed at optimizing for Google. Now it seems that there will be 3 major players, Google, Yahoo and MSN. Iíll worry about MSN when they launch. For now I am trying to decipher the new Yahoo.
Unlike Google, Yahoo seems to like dynamic content and has indexed about 1500 of 6000 page catalog.
So now I am wondering why they indexed just a part of my catalog.
It seems Google has also started indexing my dynamic content, probably to respond to Yahoo.
| 9:22 pm on Feb 20, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Based on what I have been able to find and from observations on my web sites, it looks like any PFI stuff is getting preference... Some of my site dropped in yahoo, but the one that has an XML feed has had a drastic increase in traffic.
For the natural stuff, I found this <snip>. Don't know how much help it is, but there are some things a little different in there that I am going to try.
[edited by: WebGuerrilla at 5:12 am (utc) on Feb. 25, 2004]
| 9:26 pm on Feb 20, 2004 (gmt 0)|
There was not one useful piece of information in that article. That was pure beginners/basics SEO...nothing to do with INK SEO.
| 10:06 pm on Feb 20, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Remember that the Ink engine is old school, AltaVista type. Keyword density was big with these versions, as was the keyword meta tag. H1 tags weigh in strongly as well. These algorithems typically did not acount for incoming linkage or PR. This is how they were. Now what Y! has changed, if anything, shall be revealed in upcoming updates.
| 10:26 pm on Feb 20, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo isn't using Ink.
I'm sure of this.
It seems to me, the optimization that is working is using both Ink optimization methods + google optimization methods.
I'm fourth for my keywords on Yahoo, but 9th on MSN (msn uses Ink, but if Yahoo did I'd have the same rank there, and I don't.)
Read a few Ink optimization articles about how
Ink is all about on the page optimization. Use the <B> at beginning and end of document containing what your site is about. Use a h1 tag on your homepage. Use alt tags to contain your keyword phrase but re-arranged in each alt tag.
Do optimization tactics for Ink, then build links. I've built 60 for my site. I can't appear on Google - but I gave up on that a while ago after Google just didn't make sense anymore.
I just did Ink optimization and built links and then I was good.
Just do a search on google or whatever for inktomi optimization and you'll see some good pages telling you exactly what to do.
| 11:43 am on Feb 23, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I set up a new blog with Blogger just before christmas. I made it on a popular two word keyword phrase.
The H1 and Title tag only contain this 2 word phrase.
I added a short and relevant entry ever other day for two months.
The kw density is high (15-17%), I used lots of synonms and linked heavily in the paragraphs to relevant pages on other sites.
To my astonishment I came out top in Ink and 5th in Yahoo.
In total I have spent 5 hours max on this website from start to finish - well worth it.
| 11:50 am on Feb 23, 2004 (gmt 0)|
OK - just a couple of quick pointers from very brief research:
1) Short titles may be working better. Put the most important keywords/phrases at the start of the title tag.
2) Use commas, no spaces, for the meta keywords tag.
3) Write a useful meta description tag incorporating your keywords.
4) Use a unique description and keyword tags for each page.
5) Use headings appropriately - e.g. H1, H2, H3, etc.
6) Use bold headings where appropriate.
| 1:41 pm on Feb 23, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I'm not sure if it still this way but at one time the Ink algo was very on-page oriented. The nice thing about Ink PFI was that you could tweak the pages and see your results withing 48 hours. You need to play with the total word counts in the title, metas, content etc and the keyword densities.
See what works then run it up the flagpole.
| 2:27 pm on Feb 23, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Not quite optimization, but... on Ink my index page is nowhere for one KW but is at 13 on Y! thanks to a directory listing.
| 4:35 pm on Feb 23, 2004 (gmt 0)|
One thing that works for me is using the <H1> tag with main keywords in it.
Then use <H2> with an EXACT copy of your title.
| 11:50 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Our site is doing extremely well with Google after the Brandy update (#1 for most of our KW phrases), but just so-so with the new Yahoo! serps (some first page listings, but overall just average).
My question: Will using H1 tags, etc. hurt my Google placement? I read on another WW thread that Google doesn't like those tags. Just curious, as I would prefer not to build another site from the ground up to get good placement on Yahoo.
| 12:04 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I was one of the crazies that wondered if H1's were hurting in G after Flordia. Not by themselves mind you, but as one signal among many that might reveal enough SEO to cause a problem...e.g.: IF H1=kw1 kw2 AND 90% backlinks=kw1 kw2 AND 90% of Titles=kw1 kw2, etc THEN "Ouch."
Still wonder about it actually, but it sure ain't true since Brandy. Not even close.
| 12:06 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The reason I was wondering is that we are not using H1, H2 tags at all right now, so I hate to mess with a good thing. However, if it really helps on Ink/Yahoo to have the tags, I would consider adding them.
| 12:28 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"Will using H1 tags, etc. hurt my Google placement?"
Of course not.
| 1:06 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
i agree with Steveb.
Using H1,H2 tags is a great way to tell the SE what your page is about.
Of course Ink gives more importance to it than G. But it is definately not a source for penalization.
| 1:51 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Optimizing is one thing. First you have to get your page indexed. I have found that Ink Slurp is a very slow bot. Much more than Googlebot.
I have several sites and not too many pages were Slurped.
| 1:56 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Skuba, did you pay for inclusion?
| 3:33 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Some folks analyze competitive markets, but my favorite technique to dig into what's going on is to check out non-competitive keyword phrases that are unlikely to have been manipulated by SEO's.
Everyone seems to have a different approach, but does anyone have anything to share on how they go about figuring out what's important or unimportant?
| 8:27 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
clarify "important or unimportant"
| 9:12 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I find that H2 tags is an added incentive while title still plays an important role
| 1:54 pm on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Everyone seems to have a different approach, but does anyone have anything to share on how they go about figuring out what's important or unimportant? |
Read WW one hour each morning, paying particular attention to comments from mods and senior members. ;-)
Also, I like to compare the characteristics of clusters of sites in the rankings: sites 1/2/3 vs. sites 18/19/20 vs. sites 98/99/100. We always find good stuff that way.
| 5:18 pm on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"skuba did you pay for inclusion?"
No, I didn't pay for inclusion. Should I?
If I pay for inclusion of the site, will th ebot come and crawl the rest of the site?
"h2 is good"
The problem with h1, h2 and all hs, is that they are pretty ugly. The h1 and h2 are huge, and they force a double line break.
How do you get around that? CSS?
Even with CSS we still get that big line break.
| 6:26 pm on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
it still is possible with CSS
| 7:39 pm on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The problem with h1, h2 and all hs, is that they are pretty ugly. The h1 and h2 are huge, and they force a double line break. How do you get around that? CSS? Even with CSS we still get that big line break.
You can make the H tag look pretty much as you like:
font:bold 30px times new roman,times roman,serif;
No line break :)
| 8:52 pm on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
You realise that what you just wrote plain as day is a complete spamming technique that a whole bunch of ignorant webmasters are now going to use to hide H1 tags.
I've never mentioned using css to disguise H1's as a whole bunch of webmasters are currently using the technique to spam search engines.
Now you've gone and announced it, loads of newbies are going to abuse it and eventually H1's will be given no importance by search engines.
Nice one ...
(Same thing happened here with alt tags)
| 8:55 pm on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
What I just wrote is called CSS
"spamming technique" is your opinion. Stick around and read up, you'll surely learn the difference.
| 8:58 pm on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Altering an H tag through CSS is NOTHING new and was certainly not "given away". It's been around for at least a couple of years and is a valid use of CSS to customize the look of the page.
Can it be used for spamming? Certainly, but so can just about anything else discussed at WW.
| This 39 message thread spans 2 pages: 39 (  2 ) > > |