soapystar
msg:847286 | 1:58 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
you make the assumption that Yahoo wants to have the best search engine. Other may say Yahoo is more profit driven and simply wants a search engine to compliment its other 'in yer face' products that appear first in every search. As long as it appears to work like a search engine they are happy. So your site isnt showing in serps since being indexed or spidered in January. Take a look at Yahoo today, do you really think 90% of staff are running around trying to get the serps as fresh and relevant as possible? Hey they have far more important things to do like build sitematch and other profit driven products.
|
DaveN
msg:847287 | 2:05 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
for the record. Mon 5th April released new website.
Tues 6th April got our link monkey to request links
Mon 12th April #1 in yahoo for the money keywords we targetted. Who needs a massive update cycle, they are adding and tweaking all the time..... FYI I didn't use sitematch. DaveN
|
helenp
msg:847288 | 2:15 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
Who needs a massive update cycle, they are adding and tweaking all the time..... FYI I didn't use sitematch.
<<<<<<<<<<
for the record:
So some is treated diferent than others.......or allan is penalized as well...........
|
dvduval
msg:847289 | 2:17 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
Yes, my newer sites are also indexed, but I must say that Yahoo has much to do to improve my attitude towards them. Every program I have ever been involved in has been problematic:
1) Email - changed spam settings
2) Overture - multiple problems (keyword matching for one)
3) Web Hosting - long waits to talk to customer service, 3 year old version of php, no phone support for php
4) Yahoo Directory - it's no longer a decent directory. Free sites are not a priority. Many quality sites don't pay. Their just not the "good guys" that Google is when it comes to business ethics. I'm not going to say they are evil, but they certainly are far from impecable.
|
anchordesk
msg:847290 | 2:27 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
Personally, I'd rather Yahoo not change a thing. Their handling of 301 redirects has me tickled ... and prospering.
|
caveman
msg:847291 | 2:31 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
DaveN what's your secret? We launched three new sites in the last two months. Good inbound links from a handful of independent quality sites. But these new sites are NOWHERE in Y! They did just start popping up in high places in G (where it seems that they had to pass some vetting process). Maybe you got lucky with your timing relative to Y!'s cycles?
|
steve40
msg:847292 | 2:36 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
Don't fret it
If they keep increasing the number of Adds and continue for those adds not to answer joe public search query , they will not be the force they are If we think about it in newspaper analagy
Does the Washington Post front page have news or advertising or a gentle mix of both , there is a point where even Joe Public will look at the results and realise that he does not see search engine results just same 200 companies on every search he does He may even think Yahoo does not give search results anymore if they go lower and lower below the fold
I wonder if Yahoo did many useabillity tests to find if searcher was happy or trusted the results
We as webmasters complain about google becoming more commercial but in general the public is not bombarded with it past acceptable point
Would you watch a TV show with 70% advertising and 30% content NOT ME
we will see
steve
|
DaveN
msg:847293 | 2:41 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
Caveman nope not lucky ;) just good backlinks from sites which are heavily indexed already in Y!. anchordesk : Their handling of 301 redirects has me tickled sorry dude i know they are working on this right now it will not last! DaveN
|
soapystar
msg:847294 | 2:55 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
Tues 6th April got our link monkey to request links
Mon 12th April #1 in yahoo for the money keywords we targetted. |
|
er, isnt that gaming Yahoo? Funny, they keep saying they are banning sites for it. Heart warming stuff for those who think they have clean sites but are banned for life. Im not knocking you, you do what needs to be done but for Tim to defend lifetime bans for petty asthetic reasons on other sites against the tide of spam that is Yahoo is hard to swallow.
|
caveman
msg:847295 | 3:05 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
DaveN I'm sure that it wasn't luck. However, we have also have "good backlinks from sites which are heavily indexed already in Y!". That's why I wondered what your *secret* was for getting indexed and appearing in the SERP's *quickly*. ;-) As always, we could be wrong, but it seems to us a basic matter of not having been included in their index yet. Also, in some of these categories we've noticed no significant movement in the SERP's for weeks now, which seems to support our suspicions. Related: Many pages from some of our sites that *do* have well-performing pages in Y! are also still not showing up anywhere. Seems to go back to Tim's comments about Y! needing to "find" pages ... as if that were a hard thing to do. I continue to be most curious to see what happens on the 15th. So far, I'm not optimistic.
|
allanp73
msg:847296 | 3:56 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
I mentioned this in other threads and will mention again now. Yahoo seems to add stuff to the serps based on when it was first indexed. I had sites launched in November and December that before the middle of March were only found for their URL now they dominate for they targeted keywords. The same thing seems to happening with the new sites that I launched in January. Yahoo even shows sites linking to these sites. I am amazed that someone was able to get indexed and appear in the serps so quickly. Was there anything special you did?
|
DaveN
msg:847297 | 4:04 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
Nah.. requesting links isn't gaming Y! it's all the other stuff people do ;)
|
helenp
msg:847298 | 4:14 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
I didnīt know about linkmomkey, just went there to submit, but they ask this: Remember to include a link back to LinkMonkey from your site so I canīt submit, a link back to them could seem irrelevant...... to editors?
they way things are.......
|
steveb
msg:847299 | 10:25 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
I doubt we will see an update before they fix the redirect and related issues, which at this point is a very serious problem. We certainly will see some changes on the 15th, and if they have fixed the redirect thing they may be waiting for that, but I think we are mostly just stuck here until they fix their problem.
|
helenp
msg:847300 | 10:31 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
>>>>>I doubt we will see an update before they fix the redirect and related issues>>>>>>>>
I agree 100%.........
|
jady
msg:847301 | 11:09 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
DaveN - same here. New site, aggressive keywords, good clean SEO and great links now is #1 for search term targeted. Same site on Google - no where to be found.
|
helenp
msg:847302 | 11:27 pm on Apr 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
>>>>>>>DaveN - same here. New site, aggressive keywords, good clean SEO and great links now is #1 for search term targeted.
Same site on Google - no where to be found.
>>>>>>>> Please, whatīs the reason of that? 1st. yahoo spiders often some sites, only some sites, depending on ....? 2nd. other sites donīt have good links and are not clean SEO. 3rd, google isnīt spidering and indexing new sites? 4th, the good SEO is filtered out by google as overoptimized? Admit, itīs strange some sites, only some FEW sites says they indexed quickly and often, so these sites do not need PFI, what for, they indexed every other day.......... This is very strange.
|
Kirby
msg:847303 | 1:51 am on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0) |
steveb, Assumig the redirect issue is not fixed, other than sites dropping out on the 15th, what changes do you forsee?
|
steveb
msg:847304 | 2:40 am on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0) |
I jus meant the dropped sites. It seems safe to assume that will occur as announced previously. It may not be much change but there will have to be some.
|
DaveN
msg:847305 | 11:49 am on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0) |
helenp .... lolol link monkey is an guy that works for me in the office his job is to get links .... sorry if i mislead anyone DaveN
|
hazardtomyself
msg:847306 | 3:48 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0) |
>> Yahoo has much to do to improve my attitude towards them >> For my searching, the big issue is the speed of the GBot. I'll search Yahoo! the majority of the time but if I need info that I think is going to be relatively new, I feel like I have to search Google. If Slurp can index pages even remotely close to the GoogleBot, I'll be able to use Yahoo! much more. In my mind the speed of Yahoo! indexing is a major issue keeping Yahoo! from dominating the search.
|
caveman
msg:847307 | 5:02 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0) |
I think there's a web site out there that's wondering why it had so much traffic yesterday. :-)
|
jrs_66
msg:847308 | 5:47 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0) |
'link monkey'? You sound like one hell of a boss...
|
Justinnerd
msg:847309 | 6:55 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0) |
lol, where can I hire one of these 'link monkeys'? do they work for bananas only?
|
steve40
msg:847310 | 7:03 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0) |
If he comes to work for me he will bananas and when he gets PR 7 links and above bonus his very own call girl monkey for the night what more could a link monkey ask for
steve
|
Buddha
msg:847311 | 9:19 pm on Apr 14, 2004 (gmt 0) |
DaveN How many link monkeys do you have?
|
DaveN
msg:847312 | 7:59 am on Apr 15, 2004 (gmt 0) |
1 link monkeys
1 content ****
2 sales muppets
2 script junkie
1 BOSS DaveN
|
caveman
msg:847313 | 11:53 am on Apr 15, 2004 (gmt 0) |
DaveN, which one are you? :-)
|
Leosghost
msg:847314 | 12:26 pm on Apr 15, 2004 (gmt 0) |
<<1 link monkeys>>
<<2 script junkie>> 0 Spell checker :))
|
| This 49 message thread spans 2 pages: 49 ( [1] 2 ) > > |
|
|
