| 3:59 am on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Hurah! Our targets keywords are finally No1! A great update for me. :)
| 4:35 am on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Our listings went down a bit, but to mostly spammy sites. It feels like the only way to be competitive in Y! is to use spammy techniques nowadays.
This update is yet another disappointment.
What a joke Y! has become.
| 6:08 am on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
All mine went to number 1, and at the same time all went to number 1 for MSN too! What is up with MSN and Yahoo tracking like that?
| 6:13 am on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Yeah something is definitely going on. Went from 150 page views yesterday to over 1400 today.
| 8:10 am on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Looks like our site had been re-included! Disappeared in June - looks like it's back today! Phew...
Hope I'm not speaking too early...
| 9:22 am on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I have had a couple sites move up and a couple slip off the rankings. The top 10 results for most of my categories have fewer spammy sites. I would say this update was an improvement rather than a setback.
Yahoo did a small update a few weeks ago, then rolled back to original serps with 96 hours. I hope they stay with this one for at least 30 days before updating again. Too much instability makes Yahoo look like they are unsure of themselves and their serps.
Let all the lab rats know the results are getting better Tim.
| 10:53 am on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
These results are looking very good indeed :-)
In fact unless I am wrong they have sorted the 301 redirect issues?
| 1:50 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
This update hit my site so badly, I'm now raring for the beta MSN Search to be released.
And that's bad.
Edit: interesting to note, my results are hugely different using Yahoo UK (way better).
[edited by: flobaby at 2:43 pm (utc) on Dec. 16, 2004]
| 2:19 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|In fact unless I am wrong they have sorted the 301 redirect issues? |
Yes, it seems they have.
| 2:57 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Still seeing waaaaay to many keyword/spammy domains and domains with keyword dashes. This is still playing to important of a role in their algo.
Generally speaking its still the same ole same ole. (crap) :-)
| 3:05 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I went from #7 to #16 on my keywords. Mostly spamy sites infront of me. I hope they will do something about this. Damn.
| 3:20 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I moved up over 150 places on a very competive term that I am sanboxed for in Google. YAY Yahoo!
| 3:28 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Yes there is a Yahoo update in progress.
| 3:55 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
yes, and the cache date of my main page in the SERP is of just yesterday. Fresh, that is.
| 4:38 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
It is more helpful and productive if we post information and observations about the update itself, instead of stating our personal rankings.
When an update happens think about these things:
Is the update still in flux or is it stable enough for reverse enginering?
Did the number of backlinks change, up or down?
Do the top ranking sites share anything in common?(similar title tags, kwd, h1, h2, bold, italics, inbound links, outbound links, etc.)
| 4:51 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Great results for me, sites that were already doing fairly well now #1 or top 3.
Sites that were ,mysteriously being ignored now straight in again top 3.
The results look, at least in my area, very similar to Google's about a year or so ago.
Ignoring self interest the results are a huge improvement in terms of relevancy, frankly before they were very poor in my sector.
With this and MSN beta there could well be life outside Google!
| 5:04 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
General improvements for me. Always in top 25. The 301 redirects that I put up ages ago finally appear in Y serps. Nice!
| 5:16 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Reverse engineering Y! is quite simple:
Spam more than your competitor.
Link farms and spammy interlinking are still king from what I'm seeing.
| 7:23 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Unique visitors up 6x.
Only one inbound link.
Ranking on page one that cost .60 in ppc
| 7:31 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Yep. Lots of really spammy linkfests. I will not stoop to that. I will however hope that Yahoo catches up to a way to flush that junk. (#3 is comfortable for me, but not when #1 and #2 are spamfests.)
Yahoo's algo needs to learn that not all links are created equal. Source is easily as important as text. And when they DO catch up with that, watch the griping begin.
It is starting to appear to me that they pull in all the links, then start flushing them out. Saw it happen last month with a different competitor using the same tactics, who is now gone completely.
[edited by: bigjohnt at 7:36 pm (utc) on Dec. 16, 2004]
| 7:34 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Worst day for Yahoo's search engine so far. Fixing a problem for many people seems to have led to ten or twenty times as many straight redirects getting into the serps.
Yahoo has been improving steadily, but this is a very bad day.
"Yahoo's algo needs to learn that not all links are created equal."
| 7:43 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
We are still seeing at least 2 new sets of very different results - one set is less than one day old and the other set is less than 2 days old. In one category they are pretty poor, in another they are the same quality they were a week or so ago, just reshuffled. In the poor category, a term with about 2.5MM results, the #3 SERP is not even vaguely related to the search term. And I mean not even vaguely related, but it uses one of the two words in the search term in big letters. Nice.
One other comment - we follow Yahoo closely and this is the fifth set of results we have seen in the past week. Nothing has stuck for more than 36 hours so far.
| 10:59 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
steveb do you actually like any search engine? :-)
| 11:43 pm on Dec 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
LOL, I'm the search engine cheerleader! Google, Yahoo and MSN too all do some things great, but clearly both Google and Yahoo are currently at low ebbs. (With Yahoo they were improving so the past day or so hopefully is just a mistep.)
| 1:02 am on Dec 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
LOL - so currently MSN Beta is the winner?
| 1:39 am on Dec 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I agree with petehall, I always see steveb complaining about different search engines. Seems like his cup is half empty instead of half full.
| 1:48 am on Dec 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
To make things better one needs to begin with analysing the problem - no?
I don't think 'cup half full' cliché relates to Steveb's attitude...
| 3:08 am on Dec 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
>I don't think 'cup half full' cliché relates to Steveb's attitude...
Nah. Steve's got it right.
Yahoo fixed one problem and one of my sites has returned with a vigor. On the other hand, Y! has another one of my domains sitting pretty in the top 5 and there is nothing uploaded yet. The snippet reads:
|If you are the owner of this web site you have not uploaded (or incorrectly uploaded) your web site. For information on uploading your web site using FTP client software or web design software, click here for FTP Upload Information. |
| 3:14 am on Dec 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I just found another gaffe - this on an important "money term" with about 3MM results. The #8 result snippet reads "This account has been suspended" and sure enough - it is gone. Nice.
I actually liked the results they were showing a few days ago - which were new. We took a couple of little hits, but overall they were objectively better. Some of the things we have seen today are just embarassing. But based on the events of the past week these results could be gone tomorrow too.
| This 120 message thread spans 4 pages: 120 (  2 3 4 ) > > |