| 7:00 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"Sites well optimized, but lacking quality are definitely having a good go of it."
That's exactly what I see in my niche.
| 7:07 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Our site which is ranking well in google and msn still only has the index page in Yahoo, in fact in our own country even that has vanished.
Has anyone else previously with just the index page in the results now got more pages listed. I'd be interested to know.
| 7:12 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Anybody having issues getting the redirect that Yahoo uses for its serp results to work for any of their sites? I have a site that is seriously kicking arse after this update, but the 'rds.yahoo.com' redirect link is broken.
Anyone else at all?
| 7:32 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
My traffic is up about 15% so far, hope it keeps up.
After the MSN update few weeks back I noticed a 25% increase, hope to see the same with Yahoo.
Now I wonder why I am STILL sandboxed by Google?
| 7:52 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Finally, 301 issues have been resolved. Has anyone else seen this to be the case?
| 8:20 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>>>Seeing nothing but "oops" here in the last ten queries.
Are you Googlebot? - He he.
| 8:28 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Another sad day in the search engine world, as Yahoo races headlong in the direction of being a peer with MSN as the worst search engine possible.
A blind chimpanzee seems like it could pick better results than Google these days, but they are so far ahead of Yahoo and MSN now that that the second two really shouldn't even be in the conversation.
I can't find a single instance of a "signal of quality" that yahoo appears to be using.
And why on earth can't they fully index any domain? A stake should have been put through the heart of Slurp two years ago, but it has to be clear to everyone there now that they have a bot that simply can't do the job of indexing the Internet.
(As usual, the results are decent in any area people don't care to spam, but in areas where people try to manupulate rankings with the most simplistic techniques and no quality content, they can easily.)
And my goodness the redirects! Some top ten results are nothing but redirects. Sheesh.
| 8:36 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
One of my websites gets all of its traffic from Yahoo and today not a single visitor. I hope it doesnt stay this way.
| 8:42 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I hate to say it folks but in my sector I am still number one for my keyword phrases. The only difference I notice was I no longer have a ranking subpage. Only my index page. Neither does anyone else in these serps. It seems they stripped all sub page returns and are only concentrating on the main page for the summary of what is in the site. All the top 50 I look at are good returns. Now this particular category is commercial with the returns showing dealers and manufacturers.
The only changes I have noticed is I am moving up in less specific searches. I have added keyword rich content on my main page over the last couple of months trying to attain returns on a less specific search. My links aren't really growing right now. I am NOT being spammy in my content but probably close.
| 8:44 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Wow, one of my sites has dropped the indexed count by about 1000 pages (dynamic obviously) and another has jumped by about 3500 pages...
I hope this thing settles in soon so I know whether to throw a party or a wake.
| 8:46 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Shocking. I suppose I should have been grateful that the index page was listed because now it's none out of about 300 pages. Hundreds of pages listed in Google and even MSN now. What's going on at Yahoo, they do seem to be falling behind by way of trying to catch up.
| 8:53 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Noticed that people having back pages listed.. Slowly but they having pages reindexed..
| 9:03 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Since april I have had only one page indexed on Yahoo. Today jumped to 1,400. Checked a minute later and now at 1,410. If their is a god, let my pages stay. Take note google, your turn next.
| 9:13 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
One of my site's pages is listed with a heading that is nowhere on the page (not title, meta-keyword, h1, h2 etc) and the description is taken from another page on the site!
Very confusing (or confused)
| 9:20 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
All the sites i have been working on for months are now finanlly ranking.
| 9:30 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
My site got wiped out - for a while - and then came back as strong as ever. Guess they had some problems to iron out with the new SERPs.
Well done and YAHOO!
| 9:31 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Glad to hear the success stories.
Earlier in the day I posted an increase in pages indexed (from around 450 to 600). I just check to see if there are any changes - now I'm down to only 88 pages. Not good for me so far.
I have to admit that after the June update I had been all but removed from Yahoo SERPs - at last count 32 visitors for the month. Can't get much worse than this - or could it? Nah
| 9:43 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
1st web: 22k to 62k pages indexed
2nd web: 1 to 4k pages indexed
Simply awsome. Go Yahoo!
| 9:48 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
As of today, one of my (unfairly) banned sites is back in the index. Yay. However I'm not sure if this is a result of starting paid inclusion a few weeks ago or the new index.
| 9:50 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Always nearly soil myself when seeing these index update threads - been an interesting year so far!
In my sector (main results I look for are single keyword, 45M results and 2 keywords, 19M results) I have not shifted and moved to #1 from about #8 accordingly. Other sites around me have bumped around but nothing hugely different.
All in all, rather good.... so far.
iblaine - did you fill in the form for a Yahoo review after your apparent banning or did it just come back? I have a couple of sites with 1 indexed page and wondered if I just need to tweak them to get them back in the index...
| 9:58 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Anybody have an idea what was changed with this update? Anybody see more emphasis on link analysis or is it strictly on page?
It's important to articulate why you think a site went up or down.
The update thread can be more useful if we throw in a little analysis with the observations. ;)
For my sites that went up, one common aspect is that they have strong on page work. I also do a fair amount of outbound links to authority type sites, on all of these pages.
| 11:04 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Just BIG THANKS to Yahoo!
My sector has been dominated by site-scrapers for almost an year, and I believe this is what happened - Yahoo kicked most of them dooooown...
Of course there will be a whole bunch of unhappy people - those who lost ranking, but it's like that every time. This has to be the best update Yahoo made in an year or so. From 40,000,000 results the other day, now my keyword is down to almost the half - makes sence to me.
I dont know how good you rank on Google, but in my industry Google is 95% spam in the top 20 results...So is MSN...I am not complaining, just observing as I rank more than well accross all the SEs.
I am giving the KUDOS to Yahoo for gettng rid of the site-scrapers!
| 11:14 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
martinibuster, I have moderate to strong onpage work and nearly zero outbound authority links and not that many inbound but the inbound links are from authority sites.
I had very strong upward movement with this update but the update is not over as I understand it so that could change.
Here's what I noticed with my 100 keywords:
- up 1500 positions on 100 key phrases
- 60% of the 100 key phrases rank in the top 10
prior to the update only 30% were ranking in the top 10
| 11:32 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Definately the worst response to an update I have seen since google hit us with florida. They people saying yay are generally people with personal ups. Very few people are giving unbaised kudos to Y!.
Things are still flucuating quickly, but I'd say:
it looks like they have filtered out many scaper sites. (good)
Crappy affiliate sites have begun to dominate (bad)
Made for adsense sites are rampant (kinda bad - great for google!)
High Volume terms (50k+ searches a month) seem to be fine but three + and obscure terms a riddled with spam.
Legit merchant/commerce sites seemed to of been striped UNLESS it is a yahoo store in which case they continue to do well.
File naming conventions (http://keyword.domain.com/keyword/keyword.html) are getting plenty o love from Yahoo.
Dynamic pages with many URL paramaters seem to of fallen out a favour.
Cloaking STILL works! Shocking...
I have heard that 301 hijacks are fixed but not actually seen any evidence one way or the other myself.
Those are my analysis/obsevations.
On a personal note they seem to of kicked my arse to the curb. My sites are mostly big eCommerce sites with (mostly) whitehat SEO and pretty big numbers. Either the search team read what I have been writing about them in my blog or Yahoo is *trying* to move away from commercial and towards informational organic SERPs (pushing commerce into Y!SM - wait isn't that the same tinfiol hat we we wearing during florida?).
| 11:48 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
File naming conventions matter, but the main thing is 100,000+ blog links is even more solidly Yahoo's key algo element. Nothing else matters when there are pages with the combination of those two things in play.
The redirect problem is basically epidemic now. Pretty soon there might not even be a "site" among the Yahoo results as they all redirect to some other domain, with an affiliate link attached.
Earlier today Yahoo only showed four pages of a five page site indexed, but now it shows five. Likewise it went from 88 of 92 to now 90 of 92, so perhaps the indexing will be more complete in a day or so.
| 11:49 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
patc - I filled out the forms months ago however the ban was just recently removed. The reinclusion has to be due to a recent paid inclusion campaign that influenced an editorial review, or be a result of this latest index. My guess is the PI did it by triggering a review.
| 11:52 pm on Jul 20, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It seems to me they have added more weight to on-page factors and maybe adding the age as a factor now, which isn't much of a surprise.
|Anybody have an idea what was changed with this update? Anybody see more emphasis on link analysis or is it strictly on page? |
| 12:08 am on Jul 21, 2005 (gmt 0)|
theres somehting going on i checked 14 hours ago and i had one page page now im up to 17 hehe yahoo has been the only one i havent been good in which is all changing now, i know 17 pages isnt much but i just set up 3 weeks ago so not to bad i got 184 in msn
| 12:15 am on Jul 21, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo are Following msn with more weight being given to domain names with the keyword in.
sub-area-domains win hands down.
Dynamic pages are out
Static pages with keyword in the string are in big style
The results are just plain awfull in my sector spam sites with multi sub-domains are taking up blocks of results again.
Looks like a junk yard to me
| 12:59 am on Jul 21, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Current stats - pages in index:
This site had as many as 700 pages in Yahoo's index at one time - about 3 months ago, during the April update.
The site is completely white hat, around 950 pages of unique content, follows Brett's 26 steps. Outbound to authority site (including about 50 differnt ones to Yahoo, which I should probably remove.)
The site is about 15 months old and used to get over 300 referals a day from Yahoo. Now it doesn't even rank for it's own name - not since the June update. Something that Yahoo was able to do for 14 of 15 months the site has existed.
| 1:01 am on Jul 21, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Whoa...... Not good Yahoo.
After some close checking I agree with the following comments (some made by others, few of my own):
- Crappy affiliate sites have begun to dominate. (bad)
- Made for adsense sites are rampant (bad, great for google!)
- lonnnnggggg file names with keywords in them win (no mater the quality of the site). Heck Yahoo the name alone should tell you NOT to rank it high! (bad)
- home pages are being blown away by interior pages (bad, and definitely not a good thing to do)
Google kinda drove me to using Yahoo more in my searches, but if these results stay, I'll be looking elsewhere to do my work -- right now that would be Teoma.