homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.227.25.58
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Subscribe to WebmasterWorld

Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Yahoo / Yahoo Search Engine and Directory
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: martinibuster

Yahoo Search Engine and Directory Forum

This 37 message thread spans 2 pages: 37 ( [1] 2 > >     
How can webmasters fight back?
The new Yahoo webmaster massacre
Crow187




msg:836422
 5:34 am on Apr 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

How can us webmasters fight back against Yahoo's new program?

Am I the only one finding such a program outrageous or is it just me who can't afford paying for every page + $0.15 a click?

Now that my Yahoo traffic is gone (even though I can still see my old listings here in Canada) what can I do?

The way I see it the only thing we can do is using word of mouth to tell friends not to use Yahoo anymore, that their search is biased.

But what else can we do except **** and moan? Surely such a huge community of webmasters can't be so helpless.

 

Tim




msg:836423
 5:54 am on Apr 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

Crow,
I think you do not understand Yahoo Search. 99% of the index is made up of freely crawled pages. If you have good inbound links and a high quality site you should have no problem getting crawled by Yahoo slurp and entering the index for free. There are billions of free pages in the index. We discover new sites for free and add them on a dialy basis. It is really as simple as that. How do you think the search is biased? If the SiteMatch service is too expensive for you that does not make it biased.
Tim

cbpayne




msg:836424
 6:16 am on Apr 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

>Am I the only one finding such a program
>outrageous or is it just me

As Tim says, the vast majority of sites do not need to pay for inclusion into Yahoo. I think you have misuderstood what SiteMatch is about.

Yahoo results are no more or less biased than Google's.

tigger




msg:836425
 6:40 am on Apr 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

so far I'm a happy chappie I've not paid for a single page but most of my top keywords are in & my clients too, so thanks Yahoo

Please send the cheque to the usual address :)

DaveN




msg:836426
 11:37 am on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

another happy bunny here, all the new stuff getting indexed and ranked.... in fact quicker than Google :P

DaveN

edit_g




msg:836427
 11:41 am on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

so far I'm a happy chappie I've not paid for a single page but most of my top keywords are in & my clients too, so thanks Yahoo

Don't want to do a 'me too' post, but, me too.

It strikes me that all the time I've spent trying with various degrees of success to skew Google has produced pages loved by Yahoo - what a cool coincidence... I wouldn't pay them a dime even if my sites didn't do well though - I'd just try to do the same thing I've done with Google: test, test, test and test (implement), test, test, test (implement), test (you get the idea).

soapystar




msg:836428
 1:01 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

how is sitematch biased?

48 hour crawls. If that didnt give an advantage then sitematch wouldnt sell itself on that point.

If 99% of crawls are done for free whats the point of sitematch? Everyone could simply use the free add url. If sitematch was there just for quicker indexing or hard to crawl sites then it wouldnt ride on the back of ppc, just pfi.

DaveN




msg:836429
 1:28 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

I see sitematch 48hr crawl the same as Inktomi's was it gives you time to tweak and test your site to gain places in Yahoo, the only difference is that Yahoo want a share of the profits. and why not if you are a bad seo you will get no traffic a good seo will build the cost of the PPC model into the site.

DaveN

makemetop




msg:836430
 1:35 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Well said, DaveN.

I've been using SiteMatch with some success for the last few weeks and have no complaints at all (apart from the review process being a little slow).

Provided costs are incorporated into client billing (and they aren't going to continue to pay unless the ROI holds up) where is the problem?

soapystar




msg:836431
 3:31 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

where is the problem?

nothing in the product itself. But they claim there is no advantage to serps in using it. The sitematch sites should be marked as such and marketing of the Yahoo search as a bascially free crawled index without a sitematch bias dropped. Of course non-profit sites that may well have information users want will not be able to afford ppc and be buried under sitematch advantaged sites. But yes, as a SEO pro with clients with nice budgets and margins you are laughing.

cgrantski




msg:836432
 5:27 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Without SiteMatch, how often does a site get crawled? (on average or whatever) --- I'm sure it's a lot longer than 48 hours, but how much longer? A year? A month? Ballpark would be fine if anybody has an idea.

If a page gets crawled today, will it get into the index and listings faster if the page is in the SiteMatch program?

If a page gets indexed and listed today, will it be likely to have a higher rank if it is in the SiteMatch program?

upstater




msg:836433
 8:40 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

We, too, have been struggling to figure why we've been dropped by Yahoo. Since Yahoo doesn't answer emails, it's difficult to get to the bottom of the problem.

I've posted previously about a concern that using Google AdSense means that you'll disappear from Yahoo. Or perhaps we are banned because of suspected spamming (?) We include email contact links on all our pages. Altho we have never spammed anyone, malicious spammers pick up our domain name to send out emails.

So this could be a reason we've been dropped altogether by Yahoo. The problem is, that Yahoo is unresponsive, and innocent sites suffer for it. So do users, who don't get complete search results.

soapystar




msg:836434
 9:00 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Altho we have never spammed anyone, malicious spammers pick up our domain name to send out emails.

interesting....
snap!

upstater




msg:836435
 9:08 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

snap? any suggestions?

we don't want to stop soliciting feedback, which is really helpful in correcting and expanding the info on our site.

mfishy




msg:836436
 9:54 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

<< in fact quicker than Google>>

Months quicker than Google these days!

Yahoo_Mike




msg:836437
 10:08 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

cgrantski

>>>>
Without SiteMatch, how often does a site get crawled? (on average or whatever) --- I'm sure it's a lot longer than 48 hours, but how much longer? A year? A month? If a page gets crawled today, will it get into the index and listings faster if the page is in the SiteMatch program? If a page gets indexed and listed today, will it be likely to have a higher rank if it is in the SiteMatch program?
>>>>

For sites that are found by the crawler, it can take several days to a few weeks for a site to be found or recrawled. If you use Site Match, your site will be recrawled within 48 hours (whether you were already found by the organic crawler or not). Any pages submitted to Site Match will *not* receive a higher rank than if the page was found by the crawler.

Yahoo_Mike




msg:836438
 10:10 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

upstater

>>>>
I've posted previously about a concern that using Google AdSense means that you'll disappear from Yahoo.
>>>>

whether or not you participate in AdSense has no effect on whether your site is crawled or the ranking of your site.

upstater




msg:836439
 10:18 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

That's what Yahoo maintains. But when we've done some test searches, we find that Google Adsense sites are frequently absent from Yahoo results.

Another poster suggested that the real problem is that Google hypes the sites that run Google Adsense ads. Yet we enjoyed high Google ratings long before we began participating in AdSense.

Jon_King




msg:836440
 10:28 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

I have not seen changes in the serps for numerous natural ranking sites I monitor. Most of which were Ink PFI sites with AdSense. No major shake up from here at all.

cbpayne




msg:836441
 10:38 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

All my sites with Adsense rank really well in Yahoo.

Candleman




msg:836442
 10:45 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Sometimes the harder you try the worse things get. I beleive this to be true with the NEW YAHOO. I think it stinks, The way long existing sites are made to vanish. My site has been in the Yahoo serps for as long as I can remember. NOW, it has been banished from money making search terms. I hope Yahoo get their act together and realizes that the Internet is full of sites that need to be found and indexed. Not just the ones they pick and choose.

If they don't index all sites that are truly helpful to the people that do a search, then how could they possibly compete against anyone and call themselves a search engine. They say they want the best results. How can that be when they won't include the best sites.

Excessive greed leads to ruination and I beleive Yahoo as a search engine will see bad days ahead unless they
let go of this holier than thou attitude.

Google is a ground breaker, Yahoo only breaks ba_ls.

I can't wait for Google to decide that they will be an Internet access provider. Imagine what that would do!

Just my thoughts ;)

Jon_King




msg:836443
 10:57 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Candleman, I am glad I'm not seeing what you are. I again just checked 30 or so terms and cannot find anything negative to say at all, not just because my sites are where I would expect but mostly because the general quality of the first page serps are relavant and seem fine to me, IMHO... wishing you future success.

upstater




msg:836444
 11:27 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

It's interesting that we fight these battles anecdotally. One person sees no bias with the new Yahoo; another experiences crushing bias.

I guess that proves the point. Yahoo in its current format crushes some sites and boosts others, without regard to merit. And that can't be good for the web.

Jon_King




msg:836445
 11:37 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

No boost, the same.

cbpayne




msg:836446
 11:50 pm on Apr 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

>I guess that proves the point. Yahoo in its
>current format crushes some sites and boosts
>others, without regard to merit.

Yahoo has a different business model and ranking algorithm to other SE's (eg Google) - that will mean sites will be ranked differently based on different criteria.

>And that can't be good for the web.

I thinks thats good for the web. Consumers (ie searchers) have a choice.

rfgdxm1




msg:836447
 12:01 am on Apr 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

>I thinks thats good for the web. Consumers (ie searchers) have a choice.

I agree. I consider the greater problem the decreasing number of SEs. Before, other SEs would turn up gems that were very hard to find on Google because of the peculiarities of Google's algo.

IITian




msg:836448
 12:55 am on Apr 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

>I thinks thats good for the web. Consumers (ie searchers) have a choice.

I am in favor of more SEs to reduce sole dependence of one or two. However, for models like Yahoo (or current MSN) where commercial searches tend to bring up sponsored listings first, virtually burying the free listing, and consumers have a tendency of not going beyond the first fold, consumers might have less of a choice compared to in past.

buckworks




msg:836449
 1:01 am on Apr 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

Consumers (ie searchers) have a choice.

It's hard for a Yahoo searcher to choose sites that Yahoo refuses to list.

upstater




msg:836450
 2:18 am on Apr 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

>> It's hard for a Yahoo searcher to choose sites that Yahoo refuses to list.

Exactly right. An algorithm that doesn't return pertinent results is a business model pretending to be a search engine.

idoc




msg:836451
 2:31 am on Apr 20, 2004 (gmt 0)

For me anyway, Yahoo has really stepped up the crawls with Slurp and has been a "rainmaker" after what G did to a couple of my sites that I did *nothing* extra to rank very honestly with Yahoo. Yahoo gives better converting traffic as well. I think alot of folks use G to research and the impetuous folk go to Yahoo or MSN to buy... just my opinion based on what I have seen.

This 37 message thread spans 2 pages: 37 ( [1] 2 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Yahoo / Yahoo Search Engine and Directory
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved