| 9:44 am on Feb 22, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Internetheaven >> THEY do the manual reviewing of the Trusted Feeds on behalf of Inktomi/Yahoo
I'm surprised to hear this.
| 2:06 pm on Feb 22, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I assume you are talking about Search Submit. The answer to what happens if you do not renew your subscription is:
1)If you were in the index before subscribing, you should still be in the index
2)If you were not in the index before subscribing you will probably not be in the index when you unsubscribe UNLESS we find you in the free crawl during the annual subscription of PFI.
Think of it as two different databases. One is always looking for content (free crawl). If you go into PFI then your URL is indexed daily and this is the URL that shows up to searchers. This overrides your free URL if you had one. When you unsubscribe, if the free page is there it will show up. During your subscription the free crawl may find you and it may not.
The answer to whether Positiontech can ban you because you don't renew your subscription. This does not sound like proper business conduct and if you had met Jim Stob who runs Positiontech at any of the Pubconferences you would probably not be asking that question. He will be there again in Florida and I would encourage you to meet him.
| 4:52 pm on Feb 22, 2004 (gmt 0)|
internetheaven, see this: [webmasterworld.com...]
for some reason I have a penalty and site was not included for free. Now that I paid they removed al the free goggle ones and my sites is the last one.
I just wish I knew what it was. It could be legit (maybe something I did once 4-5 years ago), or, it could be a mistake /glitch in Y!'s part. That's the frustrating part. No one (that answers) to contact. Also, is a penalty for life?
| 8:44 pm on Feb 22, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I have a couple of domains in positiontech and guess what none show up in the Yahoo index or they're last in the searches, so it appears that using positiontech hasn't been a good bet .But these were domains I renewed , old ones I didn't renew are doing fine in Yahoo.
| 9:05 pm on Feb 22, 2004 (gmt 0)|
PT used to have a service where they continuously submitted url's from a website to SE's, one of them being Ink.
I subscribed to the service and the Position Tech report then showed me as having 1,000s of pages accepted.
My guess is my site was banned from Ink as a result of this process and therefore like others my site doesnt show up in Y searches today, only the home page is in the index.
While Im certain this isn't something that was done intentionally by PT, the more I read about similarly situated sites, the more likely it seems that this is one of the major reasons why some sites aren't showing up in Yahoo
| 9:18 am on Feb 23, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for all your input. As for Tim's comment about meeting the guy from PositionTech, I'll take your word for that. Unfortunately I'm in the UK and any UK webmaster will know just how bad any UK department of a US company is. I have had abismal treatment from PositionTech UK and PositionTech US obviously just keep referring me there to deal with the problem. It's the same with Commission Junction UK, Yahoo UK, Lycos UK and so on and so on.
The understanding and belief in the internet and the services provided by the USA are given the same treatment as their regular high street stores. Here in the UK the internet is still seen run by spotty IT college failures who spend all day playing Computer Games and downloading porn. We've got a long way to go ...
| 9:49 pm on Feb 23, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The common factor here for a site not being included in the Yahoo serp's is Position Tech submission.
[edited by: WebGuerrilla at 5:56 pm (utc) on Feb. 24, 2004]
[edit reason] TOS #26 [/edit]
| 2:38 am on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Cabos - Bingo!
I use positiontech and am not showing up, It appears to be a rather large problem not just with our sites.
| 3:05 am on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
This is not coincidence. This is because most people use Positiontech as their reseller of choice.
| 3:26 am on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Why penalize people who have paid Yahoo's reseller?
If PositionTech isnt the problem, then it means the common denominator here is people who have in the past paid to advertise with one of Inktomi's resellers and at some point cancelled their advertising.
Once cancelled, some sort of penalty kicked in, that isnt removed even when an advertiser signs up with another Inktomi reseller.
If you have this penalty, all newly paid for Inktomi results show up at the bottom of Yahoo results, even when a site specific search term is used.
While this conclusion is based on a limited amount of information, there is sufficient evidence building to make people think twice about using an Inktomi reseller, especially in the situation where they are already in the Yahoo search results.
Tim, is it worth it to Yahoo to have decent sites excluded from the results, because advertisers paid one of Inktomi's resellers in the past?
Why would Yahoo want to impose such a harsh penalty on web site owners, who are a growing source of Yahoo's revenues?
| 4:09 am on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
It just does not make sense to me, when I search for the title of our website (not the domain) Yahoo returns results of a bunch of websites that link to our website, our website is no where to be found. It does not appear that our website has been banned from yahoo as a fairly recent cached site can be seen when I do a search for the domain and click cached.
Tim, what do you recommend to do?
1. Does paying Position Tech for Inktomi spider help to get into the Yahoo search results?
2. If we are currently listed in the directory but have not paid, would it help to pay the $299?
3. Is Yahoo going to come out with a new paid inclusion program? Do you expect it will be a one time fee, or ppc?
Any help is greatly appreciated Tim, thanks
| 8:45 am on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I think, from the tone of Tim's recent messages, that you will not get an answer about what Yahoo intends to use as their paid inclusion system. He seems to be building up to some huge announcement at the conference. I've got £10 on Tim kicking the living daylights out of Googleguy on the day! Anyone want some of that action?
| 9:09 am on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
>I've got £10 on Tim kicking the living daylights out of Googleguy on the day! Anyone want some of that action?
Thanks, but I will pass on that bet!
Yahoo is doing the right thing, they can't be held totally responsible for their resellers, they will obviously defend them to a point though! Again trying to do the right thing IMHO, although a tad more complex situation.
The bottom line is that Yahoo will index sites for free if they have good backlinks and are therefore seen as important.
I have posted this message at least 10 times already....DO NOT USE PFI from anybody, you will rank much better and achieve a much more stable position by building link popularity......and you will achieve it for free :)
| 9:47 am on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
To be perfectly frank, I'm not so certain that we can be expected to fully buy into anyone's tale of woe without reservation and be expected to automatically assume that they've got a 100% clean bill of health as far as quality control is concerned. We simply don't know, and we certainly are not going to find out here; nor do we need to know.
From my POV, we did 4 new pages through PT a number of weeks ago on a site, they're all in and so are the others that were in before, all alive and kicking. Smooth as silk, showed up at MSN in a couple of days - no problem whatsoever.
It really isn't rocket science. You do not submit the homepage because that is what will get found through links and the rest of the site will get gradually included from there on. You submit selectively chosen targeted interior pages PFI and leave the rest to be found. It's cheap, it's easy and it works like a charm.
| 11:49 am on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|During your subscription the free crawl may find you and it may not. |
Given that the vast majority of pages on the web will not be submitted via PFI, it sounds like Yahoo's new results are going to be terribly stale.
Sorry Tim, but the notion that the "free" crawl "may or may not find you" sounds almost like Yahoo is blackmailing web page owners.
Isn't it in the interests of the average searcher that the index should be as inclusive and as up-to-date as possible?
| 6:11 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|if you had met Jim Stob who runs Positiontech at any of the Pubconferences you would probably not be asking that question. |
I couldn't agree more. Jim's a stand up guy. He's the last guy in this entire industry who I would ever even consider questioning his integrity.
|Given that the vast majority of pages on the web will not be submitted via PFI, it sounds like Yahoo's new results are going to be terribly stale. |
I don't think that will be the case. Ink already tried that approach once, and it turned out to be a big mistake. From everything I've been seeing, I think they understand the importance of free-crawling. The sheer volume of eyeballs Yahoo gets will guarantee they will do well with paid inclusion. It won't really matter whether or not you can get in without paying. People will still pay.
| 7:04 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|It won't really matter whether or not you can get in without paying. People will still pay. |
When Positiontech adds the selection for Yahoo paid inclusion I'm going to be near the front of the line holding my credit card. Sales have been growing consistently month to month and I have to maintain the trend. It's a cost of doing business.
There may be some grumbling (the title of Mike Grehan's Yahoo article, "Pay for Exclusion" captures the feeling), but I don't see this avalanching into a LookSmart debacle.
| 7:59 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I have to totally agree with cabos.
>It really isn't rocket science. You do not submit the homepage because that is what will get found through links and the rest of the site will get gradually included from there on. You submit selectively chosen targeted interior pages PFI and leave the rest to be found. It's cheap, it's easy and it works like a charm.
I went the interior route you suggested and it didn't work. Newer sites and newer pages don't seem to have Positiontech problems. Older domains do.
Positiontech in October blamed my problems on being listed with Speed City plus a number of other search engines. They said I should go to each of those individual search engines and request removal of my site listing. PT said their listings would be viewed as duplicate content. Good thing they weren't crawling Google content or they would be suggesting I eliminate my listings with them.
In November PT suggested I reword my sites.
In December PT suggested I remove certain sites linking to mine.
In January PT said I might be penalized by Inktomi.
| 8:02 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
There have been a couple of people so far who have stated that they submitted only a few links of their site via paid inclusion and then Slurp found the rest of the site on its own. Is this true for the majority of people? The only pages of one of my sites that is listed on Inktomi is the ones I paid for, in 10 months none of the non-paid pages have shown up despite excellent link popularity and over half a million (5,000 a month for 10 months) Slurp hits. Every other search engine has indexed at least 70-90% of the same site.
This (^above^) is the case for several of my sites which is why I'm stating that I believe that if you pay for any of the pages of your site, the rest will not be included in the Inktomi index.
Please could those who disagree be a bit more specific, instead of saying that they will be indexed please state whether they actually were indexed, how quickly, and what percentage of your site was paid inclusion before the rest of your site was indexed for free? Thankyou
| 8:05 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
As of the 15th of April, Yahoo will exclude Inktomi paid inclusion URLs from its main results.
I hope that this means Yahoo will exclude whatever old penalties Inktomi has imposed on websites and start to screen for bad sites with their own algorithm.
| 8:10 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
are you sure about the date?
| 8:24 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
read Yahoo v. Google algorithm
date is in that article
[edited by: DaveAtIFG at 6:47 am (utc) on Feb. 25, 2004]
[edit reason] DeLinked [/edit]
| 8:25 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
sorry the date is mentioned in the Article about
Yahoo To Exclude Inktomi Paid Inclusion
| 9:13 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
It's definite, stated right at the Ink partner sites
|Yahoo! has transitioned to its own search technology and will soon launch a new inclusion program. As a bonus for current Search Submit customers, Yahoo! Search is providing a free trial of Yahoo! traffic that will end on April 15th, 2004. |
| 9:50 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
For any specific domain I paid Inktomi for it only crawled the pages I paid for.
PT needs to take a look at it's own site and remove the following page accessed in its left hand menu.
| 10:10 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I get a kick out of those articles. If you paid Inktomi we’re kicking you out of Yahoo on April 15th. If you didn’t pay us you’re probably, in all likelihood, listed in both Yahoo and Inktomi now and past April 15th.
Bottom line if you’re stupid enough to pay us (at Inktomi) we’ll get you at Yahoo now. Oh, by the way. Even though we own Inktomi, use the Inktomi database, and utilize the same resellers as Inktomi we at Yahoo are entirely different.
Gotta love the ___.
| 10:27 pm on Feb 24, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|You do not submit the homepage because that is what will get found through links and the rest of the site will get gradually included from there on. You submit selectively chosen targeted interior pages PFI and leave the rest to be found. It's cheap, it's easy and it works like a charm. |
Marcia, first time I ever read a post of yours I didn't nod yes to. Seems like a lot of people in here, me included, have found that if you pay for some pages of a site, most of the other page not paid for don't turn up for a very very long while, if at all. Unless you left unspoken that it might take a year or two for that homepage to acually appear in the SERP's, albeit free?
I have seen with our own sites that if we never paid, we often do great. Once we did, we only did great for the paid pages of that site...
I'd love to know that there was another side to this. It's possible other factors could be at play I guess, even if they are not obvious presently.
| 11:18 am on Feb 25, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Thanks caveman, someone on topic! Any chance a moderator could remove the several posts on Inktomi/Yahoo removal dates as they've got nothing to do with this thread.
Is there anyone who can give us a bit of info on if the unpaid for pages of their site were indexed after paying for a few pages and in what timescale?