| 6:39 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Ridiculously laughable results.
| 6:52 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
There must be something fundamentally wrong with their code. They need to go back to the drawing board and start all over with something brand new and completely different. There is only so many repairs that you can do before you realize the engine can not sustain in it's current condition.
| 7:34 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Some of the results I am seeing are just mental.
We're still in the middle of the flux going by Tim's comments so I'm sure there are changes to come.
| 7:59 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I don`t see any changes, could it be that my sites rankings did not change at all during this update?
| 8:16 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Wow, lots of snips going on here. Please read the TOS people.
Anyways, Yahoo! does hold enough traffic to worry about, for US sites at least. Yahoo gives me about the same amount of traffic as Google.
I wouldn't exactly call the Yahoo! results poor, just different. Just because Google ranks a certain site #1 and it isn't in the first two or three pages in Yahoo doesn't mean it's a great site. It just means the Algs are different and the engines hone themselves for different types of searchers.
I have to say that over the past year I have been searching more and more on Yahoo to find what I need. (I always try Google first, but it fails maybe 1/3 of the time).
To those saying there aren't 'authoritative sites', then how come Wiki and About are always in the top 10? That is authoritative. They are great sites with great information, so why shouldn't they be in the top 10? Because of webmasters? Please. Search engines are made for searchers, not for webmasters.
| 8:34 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I was doing a search for a keyword phrase we use and in the description there was a ...listing service, after part of the description, I checked our page and that is no where on the page. Are sites being designated as to what type of sites they are in a category, such as the topic "real estate"?
| 8:43 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Better than MSN, but now much further behind Google. When something isn't particularly competitive, the results can be okay. But the results for very competitive terms usually are pathetic, barely better than MSN.
As usual, virtually zero niche authority in the results.
And once again Google stock set to go up because their competitors fumble the ball.
| 9:26 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
After some private discussion with textex, We have came to the conclusion that the update isn't over yet and is only showing in some DCs.
The results he sees on several keywords are totally different from what I see and are far more spammy. Hopefully the ones I see are the true results because everything seems good.
| 9:32 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo has dropped the ball on PPC and Search. It's amazing how terrible they are at these extremely important segments of their business. By all accounts they should have 10x the revenue of Google, yet they actually make less.
| 9:55 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I see this too with Yahoo. I mentioned an unscientific test based on my second grader's homework in another thread, where Ask.com won based on a natural language query.
It's funny (maybe not), but Google and Yahoo tried to send me to Wikipedia, but the result was way off based (had to do with the largest lake in the US - and yes, I knew the answer before I did the search).
Iv'e seen some not-to-white-hat stuff with About.com. Could be they just don't use a spell checker over there, because they seem to have some pretty common typos in some of their articles.
| 9:58 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Stick me of you want some really bad SERPS.
| 10:48 pm on Dec 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
A little paranoid banter....
The only page on one site that didn't drop is the one I am testing 'Ads by Yahoo' on. In my niche I may be seeing a drop in the rankings of sites with adsense on them (not necessarily MFAs).
| 1:47 am on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|To those saying there aren't 'authoritative sites', then how come Wiki and About are always in the top 10? That is authoritative. They are great sites with great information, so why shouldn't they be in the top 10? Because of webmasters? Please. Search engines are made for searchers, not for webmasters. |
I get the impression some people think any site without a shopping cart should not be in the serps.
| 1:57 am on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Should I sign up for the Yahoo Directory to help with ranking in the Y? I noticed as many as 7 out of 10 Y Directory listings popping up for some of my keywords.
| 4:08 am on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|In my niche I may be seeing a drop in the rankings of sites with adsense on them (not necessarily MFAs). |
I've been knocked out of top on three keywords for three different sites, all by MFA splogs. 2 are in house for lead gen, one is AS driven.
| 4:21 am on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
What is a MFA splog?
| 8:49 am on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Made For Adsense Spam Blog ;oP
| 10:18 am on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I hate about.com with a passion although I accept they have a lot of content. And to the guy who said bbc was a site "with limited content"....really? did you really mean to say that?
| 10:45 am on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
well, basically travel SERPs are fine for me.
the only problem is that nasty trick with affiliateID at the end of real company's URL works in Yahoo!, too.
It should be stopped.
| 4:31 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm 12th for my main keyword and there are two listings above me that are for for Dynamic DNS:
Get a static domain name for your dynamic IP address – dynamic dns.
That's something 180 degrees from my niche. I mean it isn't even close.
Two listings in a row for it. I don't have any idea how that could possibly come up as a relevant result.
It's pretty obvious that something needs to be tweaked.
| 4:44 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I have to say i think the results are very good.
Some of the sites we work on rank and some dont but overall i think this is a good update.
Its possible the directory has something to do with it? im not sure, perhaps because at some point the Yahoo editor knows a site is not spam and relevent to the search term if its in the Yahoo directory, hence it ranks better?
What ever they have done it has eliminated loads of spam sites and you dont see any trace of doorways or cloaking issues that we had in the past.
All in all, this is a major step forward
| 4:48 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"I am not one for looking at Serps (especially Yahoos) and saying this site does not belong here, this one is a cloaked page, this one is a redirect etc."
Isn't this the single most important thing one should be looking at when analyzing serps in any engine? Goes to quality.
I am also STILL seeing complete spam sub domains ranking very well. Yahoo can't seem to get rid of even elementary spam.
[edited by: marketingmagic at 4:51 pm (utc) on Dec. 16, 2005]
| 4:49 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm finding the results on Yahoo are better than those on Google for some searches (although this probably has more to do with the Google results getting worse than the Yahoo results getting better). I've started using Yahoo a lot more this year after about three years of using Google exclusively.
At least these updates show that Yahoo are attempting to improve their core search product.
| 4:59 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo Results need a lot of work, this trend will continue <SNIP> and its a very costly trend.
Serve up junk and computer users will know it, and leave and never come back. They have been serving up garbage for 6 months and this is the result, millions of dollars in market share Gone!
[edited by: martinibuster at 6:01 pm (utc) on Dec. 16, 2005]
[edit reason] Removed URL. [/edit]
| 5:16 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"I have to say i think the results are very good."
I can't belive anyone could call the results good now, unless of course they are at the top. I search for the term <SNIP> and get this :
Has nothing to do with my search term. I'm finding this all over. What is this crap!
[edited by: martinibuster at 5:48 pm (utc) on Dec. 16, 2005]
[edit reason] Please, no specifics. [/edit]
| 5:28 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Please read post #38
| 5:28 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Which is exactly what the about.com subdomains represent in my niche. One about.com page is sufficient, although they still don't really have anything for my location. They keep returning several about.com pages on the front page that are from the large cities near my location. There is plenty of local talent.
|I am also STILL seeing complete spam sub domains ranking very well. Yahoo can't seem to get rid of even elementary spam. |
When someone searches for my location skiing, they don't want an about.com page telling you we have great resorts and as soon as we get snow it will all be good. They want a page that knows we've been open for over a month and has info on the best places as they are now.
About.com is the 'US News and World Report' of the web.
| 5:30 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|I'm 12th for my main keyword and there are two listings above me that are for for Dynamic DNS |
I've noticed this same listing for a number of keywords I typed in out of the blue. Keep trying, keep finding. Nice.
Update - after a very slight bit of digging, my theory is that the updated algorithm is susceptible to the same (or a similar) redirect issue that was giving G problems a while back...
| 6:48 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
One amazing phenom...
Site ranking well in top 10 for a very competetive one word phrase is a domain with nothing on it except 'this domain is for sale'.
Site has thousands of guest book links to it.
| 8:52 pm on Dec 16, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I was testing implementing Google adwords on my site on one page, and had it up for a day. This was two days ago, at which point I had appx 990 pages indexed in Yahoo. Two days ago, the number of pages indexes drops to 86!
Anyone have any similar problems with the recent update? Do you think the dropped pages had anything to do with adwords?
| 12:10 am on Dec 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
do you mean adsense, not adwords? I think google and yahoo are tracking the adsense code 100%. I have some new sites that have no adsense code on them at all and they are all doing well, my sites with adsense on them are slowly dropping off.
| This 102 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 102 ( 1  3 4 ) > > |